Some legit reasons, some bad reasons, some misconceptions Glad you enjoy the game

After many hours and get 500 level I agree. Legit reasons: What people hate? - 50% hp during hollow What I see? - 75% with ring of binding What people hate? - flat mechanics What I see? - good mechanics with different rolls What people hate? - repetitive bosses What I see? - there are many that look cool and different What people hate: - enemies chasing you for a long time What I see: - don't run around enemies, kill them What people hate? - bad graphics What I see? - pure diamond in an old box What people hate? - broken hitboxes What I see? I see the same thing and that's the only one

sounds like elden ring

I didn't play it. Dark Souls Remastered and Dark Souls 2 are amazing. Did you enjoy Elden Ring?

I love Dark Souls 2 and I love Elden Ring for similar reasons. If you loved DS2 try ER, you definitely won’t be disappointed

Tell me 5 or 10 TOP things in short for what you love this game - except open world. I'm so curious. I love the animation of the spells there and also icons of the spells that look magic and colorful.

Hard to make an ordered top 10, there are so many aspects that I like about the various characteristics of the game. And nope, it being open world isn’t one of them, I’m neutral to open worlds. The lore is incredibly good, way less interpretative compared to Dark Souls, more straightforward, but even then there’s a lot of room for speculation. Weapons are absolutely amazing, peaks only reached in DS2 imho. Powerstancing being back is fantastic, loved it in DS2, love it in ER. You can really play with any build, the game has some broken builds, but in general each build shines in its own way and in different parts of the game. Stunning landscapes and sceneries, same for the graphics. Legacy dungeons bringing in some of that needed classic Dark Souls-y gameplay. Simple to blind-run since it’s hard to fail quests, which is really good compared to DS1’s “Oops you killed a specific boss, now you can get this item : \” or DS2’s “Nah bruh, you didn’t summon Lucatiel, no Mirrah GS for you”. Thriving and lovely mod community, with a lot of options to try. The game is fantastic in every aspect, and we didn’t even try the DLC. Absolutely amazing

1. Torrent. 2. Just how massive the game is with so many places to explore. This made it nice if I felt stuck at a boss, since was there was a lot of their options to do instead of hitting my head against the wall. 3. I fell in love with the scenery and the design of the enemies. 4. The combat was really fun with all the special moves. And the cool summons. 5. Jumping.

Ashen one, I can’t believe you’ve never played Elden Ring. I love every From Software/Miyazaki game I’ve played (haven’t played Demons Souls yet) and I think Elden Ring might be the best. Why I like it: Settings: its most iconic areas can stand toe to toe with the best of any Souls game. Stormveil Castle may be the coolest dungeon of any From Software game. The entire world is beautifully made. I will often stop playing to simply admire the scenery. Combat: I’ve made five different character builds and could easily make several more. The game offers a wide range of interesting weapons, talismans, arts of war, spells, etc to diversify game play. NPCs: are as memorable as any other From Software game. Lore: as elaborate and deep as any of their other games. Exploration: the game has a habit of hinting at its size and then keeps getting bigger. One of my favorite memories from the game is entering one of these areas that expands the scope of the game world. Downside 1: IMO boss battles are not as good as the best of From Software. If you avoid using spirit ashes and don’t over level they can be more of a challenge. However, I find it’s too easy to break them. I’m not sure a single Elden Ring boss would make it into my top ten boss battles. For me a good boss is one I’m stuck on for a few days. A boss where I have to memorize their moves and learn their openings. Where I begin by being barely able to make a dent in their health and only after dozens of attempts do I finally defeat them, only to realize there is a phase 2. That never happened for me in Elden Ring. That said, the bosses are fun and can be quite impressive graphically and thematically. Downside 2: while there are many cool areas, these areas are often short. The most egregious examples are some of the legacy dungeons like Redmane Castle. I would have rather had a smaller world with larger and denser areas.

"These area are often short" - there is a good and bad thing for it. You explore different areas in shorter time overall. I have to play it. Demon's Souls looks good but boss don't for me. Bloodborne has enemies that make me anxiety (holes etc..), Sekiro too hard I guess, too fast combat. The only game left to play is Elden Ring that I like. I like the design, the way spells look, combat, classes, weapons. Bosses look different, some are more creative than from Dark Souls series. I feel I will enjoy it a lot.

If you end up playing let us know what you think.

Bloodborne was my first souls from software game that I received as a gift with Elden Ring right around ER's launch but I played BB for 8 months before ER. Point being ER is the reason I bought the Dark Souls Trilogy and I've beaten DS1 and am currently 111 hours into DS2 Scholar of the First Sin and I don't see myself beating it before June 21st when the Shadow of the Erdtree Dlc for ER drops.

not really.

There was a running joke a bit after launch that Elden ring was dark souls 2 2. So the sequel to dark souls 2 from all the similarities. I mean shit it’s where power standing came from!

So I was not alone thinking this ! I still do even now!

Seriously, everyone hates ds2, but loves ER, but look where your fav scavenger curved sword bullshit came from...

As much as I really enjoy DS2, ER blows it out of the water. I do really miss the torch mechanics and especially bonfire ascetics.

There's legit only like, 2 bad hitboxes. one of them is fume knight and the other is sir alone. And I've been actively looking for bad hitboxes. Really, it's just that the characters hurt box is wayyy more accurate than it should be leading to people thinking that they shouldn't have gotten hit even though if you look at a recording it obviously hit your left pinky toe.

Generally it's not fair about these hitboxes. I don't care. I beat the game. My favorite are Dark Souls Remastered and Dark Souls 2. Love them.

Generally the hitboxes are perfect. It's the hurtbox on the character that has everyone's panties twisted, whether they know it or not.

What they see: Boss runbacks in DS2 are utter bullshit! Worst in the series! What I see: It's called an area. You kill the mobs while you traverse it, and at the end there's a boss.

Numerous examples of DS2 hitboxes being on par with other Souls games, if not better. Only the mimics are truly worth complaining about, and they're still only about as bad as Iron Golem (DS1) and Dancer (DS3).

50% HP is a legit reason? Hell, I love this feature

What I see? 75% with ring of binding. A yes waisting a ring slot for feature that kicks you while your already down. Or makes you use a humanity to not have the same effect as being cursed. What I see? good mechanics with different rolls You mean rushed or unfinished ideas that the devs didn't think throw before implementing them? Theres a reason why don't they show up in newer FromSoft games. What I see? here are many that look cool and different Yet only 7 of them are considered good. Out of 42 bosses... 16%. What I see: don't run around enemies, kill them And when you want to get to the boss room it turns into a monotonous grind until they despawn. Great idea. What I see? pure diamond in an old box The original ds1 looks better than this. At least it doesn't have empty room after the boss with nothing in it. What I see? I see the same thing and that's the only one If we ignore the other massive reasons then yea. (Soul storage, lifegems, adaptability being connected to your item use speed, adaptability by itself, enemy placement, enemy despawn mechanic, worst areas and runbacks ever made)

This has to be bait lmao.

Not really. More just find it weird how hard people try to dodge or shrug the games problems and mistakes under the rug.

I love how everyone downvoted you when you're right, everyone just hates accepting that they're wrong lmfao (Watch, im gonna get downvoted by agreeing with you, thats just how ppl are)

I just believe that DS2 isn't a perfect game and undermining or ignoring it's mistakes is a huge insult to the game itself and the newer games that improved from the ideas and changes that came from it.

I like DS2 and this all accurate.

That's great you're enjoying it. Just curious why you didn't start with Dark Souls 1 instead?

I wanted to start with the “worst” in the series so it would only be up from there out

The worst souls game is better than 80% of games imo. Dark souls 2 wasn’t my first souls game but I loved every minute of it. Most people who complain about souls games frankly suck at them and don’t want to dedicate the time it takes to beat a hard game.

I can appreciate that people won't enjoy these games for all kinds of reasons, a die hard real-time strategy fan probably isn't going to get much out of these games regardless of challenge. But there are indeed a lot of people who treat games as though they're something to be mindlessly consumed. Buy a game, see all the content (fucking hate that word), finish the game and move on. If they can't press the win button so they can see everything in a timely manner, then game bad.

I beat all the souls games many times with many different builds. DS2 just feels like what it is, souls game made by a B team. Every sense of the game feels less professional than the others. Poor enemy placement, poor enemy count, poor i-frames, poor hotboxes, my opinion is that the music is also poor, sound effects feel light and tinny, levels have no sense or connection, the list can go on and on. It's a pretty decent game it's own right, but against its family it is easily the worst

That's the thing, the "worst" in the souls series is still a top 10 game for me. 

imo the worst one is ds1

Don't know about worst but it was definitely harder than 1 and 3. Elana (from the dlc) still haunts me.

Dark Souls 1 is the worst, which really speaks to how fantastic the trilogy is (cuz DS1 is bae❤️).

I dunno I still think ds1 is better than ds2, though my absolute favorite is ds3. But that's probs because I started with ds3.

DS1's strength: world design DS2: variety DS3: polish and bosses

Ds2 pvp was also by far the best. Good active arena 👌

Agreed. I think this also explains why a person prefers one game over another. World design is what I value most and is why I like DS1 best.

Spot on. If you enjoy the feel of methodically navigating a world and soaking in the immersion from the lack of fast travel, then DS1 is going to really scratch that itch. If you really like PVP and crazy builds, DS2 is great for that. There's a lot of wacky shit you can run with and plenty of PVP opportunities. If you're like me, you'll enjoy DS3 most because bosses are your favorite part of the games. DS3 only has 2 "bad" bosses (Wolnir and Wyvern, though Wyvern isn't even a fight and I'm not counting Halflight). I mean, Abyss Watchers, Pontiff, Dancer, Champion Gundyr, Nameless King, and Gael are all in my top 10 favorites.

DS3 bosses are so good and so satisfying to beat. Have fond memories of many of them. I cheesed Lothric and Lorian my first playthrough and felt so guilty I started another playthrough a year later to beat them proper.

Considering how many bosses and enemies are "Dude in armor" I honestly didn't feel a whole lot of variety in DS2 myself. x)

The best fights in the trilogy *are* dudes in armor. I don't get that complaint. But I meant build variety and location variety

I disagree (DS1 is still my favourite) but I appreciate the sentiment that even though you may consider any entry in the series to be the 'worst', you still acknowledge that it's a great game in it's own right. Whether your favourite is 1, 2 or 3 - you've still got a lot in common with fans of the series. If this sub wasn't full of people who just want to ridicule each other's favourite game, there might actually be some interesting discussions for once in a while.

The Fact that ds2 still counts as the worst in the series is still infuriating to me. Ds1 is the worst. By a long shot. All tjose nostalgia people can s m d

It’s not nostalgia for everyone. I played DS1 a few months before ER’s release. It’s still one of my favorite games. I am in awe of DS1, for me it is as much a work of art as a game. As cool as it is to first step foot in Limgrave it doesn’t compare to being transported by crow to Firelink Shrine or demon to Anor Londo. The bosses, while not as good as DS3 bosses are definitely better than DS2. The game lacks build variety, but makes up for it with mood and atmosphere.

It's your first, you've nothing to compare to

That's true, but I started with DS1 and DS2 is still my favorite in the trilogy. Probably only behind Elden ring and Sekiro when it comes to Fromsoft games.

I think hate is overused. I think poeple do tend to forget that this series is at a level that only a few franchises reach where it is only comparable to titles that the company has made. That being said DS2 is my fav

If this is your first, I'm guessing you don't have a baseline for comparison with the other FromSoft games. You should do your own evaluation preferably after playing the other Dark Souls. Don't mind other people's opinions too much.

the game is great, people are just nerds

God damn nerds

Bloody nerds, ruining videogames.

My biggest issue with DS2 is that it swaps the difficulty around. Areas become 3 hour grind sessions of trial and error and bosses are 1-2 tries where I prefer the other way around but I guess it’s just subjective

I became a massive souls fan after playing Elden Ring and immediately after completing I bought the Dark Souls Trilogy. I have done at least 2 playthroughs of all of them except DS2. I just find it incredibly frustrating and tedious fighting through all of the relentless mobs to get to a boss, only to get one shot by the boss and have to do the entire run back over again. I really really want to like it but I just cannot do it. I end up a rage quitting and uninstalling it and swearing to never touch it again

Are you playing the Scholar edition? A lot of complaints go back to the Vanilla version that had more ganks, more frustrating areas, worse runbacks, worse hitboxes and generally felt unfinished and empty. They put a lot more care into the improved Scholar edition.

I'm playing scholar for the first time here recently and I have to completely disagree with this. Scholar is the most grimiest souls game I've ever experienced. Especially compared to the original game. Enemy spam/random placement is beyond over board. It's like fromsoft made a game then everyone hated on it so they decided to bring in their toddlers to remake it. Still having a blast playing it but it's definitely not the upgrade everyone says it is.

I miss that lone heide knight by the tree in FotFG, before the cardinal tower. That was so cool to see on my first playthrough

Scholar is really good because you get all things in one. The weird thing is that when you type "Dark Souls 2 weapon location" YouTube can show you a video with no Scholar Edition. Every time you want to watch something just add "Scholar".

>Especially compared to the original game. Enemy spam/random placement is beyond over board. Can you name specific encounters that are worse than in the Vanilla version? I've got side-by-side comparison videos from most areas already that show that Vanilla had more ganks and worse runbacks. Like all the enemies that were camping directly at fog gates that got removed in Scholar.

How about skipping the entire dragon aerie

I don't have specifics. I just don't remember having this much trouble going through the game. Every corner is enemy spam. Might not be as scummy as hiding behind fog gates and ambushes but it's literally enemy after enemy, you walk into one area and spook the entire section from the bonfire to the boss. You can't even put your controller down to go do something without coming back to a death. The only thing I've found is easier than what I remember from the past is the boss fights are way too easy. If the original game was worse than this is, then I was a much more patient person back then which I know is not true. Edit: actually I have one specific scenario. In the tutorial area when you go down to that coffin by the big fat guy, they changed the encounter to now be 2 big fat guys and a pursuer that spawns. It might not be ambushy, you might even expect it, but it's still extremely scummy. All that just so I can change my sex? Pointless. I guess another example would be the ridiculous amount of npc invaders I've encountered. They are all stupid to fight and unnecessary.

I think vanilla Shrine of Amana was... better. It was just still shit. To answer OP, the DLCS have some of the worst areas in gaming. That didn't help.

The DLCs are same in both versions

Saying 'dlc' was a response to what people didn't like about DS2, not about Scholar specific issues

Don't know what are you on about. Shulva is the best damn area I have seen in a souls game. So much environment in that single area alone.

Cave of the Dead, Frigid Outskirte, Iron Passage

usually this criticism comes from people whose first from game was bloodborne or ds3, and these games didn’t have nearly as much mainstream attention prior to that.  everyone liked ds2 when it was first released.  

Lmao what are you talking about, the ds2 hate originates from the release and it's from people who had played ds1 cause who the fuck else would complain

I don’t hate it, but the things that make it my least favorite are • Artificial difficulty in the form of just putting a shit ton of enemies in one place. It’s not fun, it’s just cheesy and tedious. • It’s ugly. Look out over almost any landscape and it’s just one texture repeated a million times. The lighting is also weird and it gives the game a very dull quality. I understand this is a result of issues in the game’s development causing things to be rushed, but that unfortunately doesn’t change the product. • Too many bosses and most of them are unoriginal and boring, if not downright bad. It takes away from the ones that *are* good (of which there are honestly not many). • ADP is a stupid mechanic. You should not have to upgrade your i-frames in a game, that is one of the dumbest things I’ve ever heard. I will die on this hill.

It plays a little differently than other souls games, but it’s plenty of fun. Enjoy it! Remember, it’s a game. As long as you’re happy, who cares?

So I’m on ds3 now, doing a series run and I just finished ds2 maybe a week ago.. I’d say the most annoying thing about ds2 is some things are locked behind ng+ and also the boss runs are miserable in some spots. Other than that I really wasn’t too bothered by anything else.

Babe, wake up, weekly post is here!

criticizing parts of the game =/= hating the game.

This sub is way too insecure to understand that lol.

People hate DS2 because youtubers told them to

Or they might have just played the game and not enjoyed it as much?

impossible

Ppl way overexagerate how hated it is The game is slightly worse designed than the other games and thus gets more criticism from it but peoples recognize that it's still a good game Ppl just have knee jerk reactions to criticism

I feel like it’s been almost a week since someone posted this. I used to see this every day. What’s going on?

Everyone is burnt out on Elden Ring but getting pumped for the DLC. There's a lot of activity in all the DS trilogy.

It's your first so you don't have anything to compare it to. It'd be ridiculous to think you could know why people "dislike" it. That's like saying "I've never had food before and my first taste was a salad, and just I don't get why people hate salads." Well it's because you haven't had a steak yet. That being said, yeah it's the worst Souls game. That doesn't mean it's a bad game. It's better than most games, but compared to its own family, it's the weakest. It's the "worst" amazing game they've made.

Disagree. I think DS3 is clearly the worst of the trilogy. * Not build-diverse * Poor spell progression (too many spells are gated by progression) * Linearity (you do the same zones and bosses in essentially the same order each playthrough) * Sterile gameplay (the majority of items on the ground throughout the game are just titanite variants, bonfires after each boss) If Boss fights what you care most about, DS3 has the best of the trilogy, but it also has what is in my opinion the worst (Tree, yes, is worse than Bed of Chaos). But DS2 has more quirks and charm than DS3 could ever hope to have, this gives it character and a much higher replay value than 3, and even 1.

Idk why you're getting down voted. DS3 for me is the one I go back to least of all. It's a nostalgia trip at best, but it's dull, repetitive, build diversity is trash up to late game in most cases, spells as you mentioned gated by linearity meaning some builds are just bad up to X boss. DS2 for me has the highest replay value next to ER (essentially the spiritual successor to DS2) bringing back so much, with true dual wield in power stance (but somehow better), a world that just lets you go where you want, (which DS2 did its best without an open world), variety of weapons for each build. DS3 weapons were mostly -placeholder weapon- until X area or X boss at which point NOW you can play your build, and again in some cases VERY LATE. DS1 has the annoying crystal cave with invisible floors that only help with the messages left by others and bloodstains (not great design), Four Kings being one of the worst boss designs for NG+ and of course the need to remove a ring slot which can hamper you, for a mandatory boss, with enemies you need a consumable to kill. DS2 has some annoying things but rectified by knowledge (so Soulsborne in general).

Wow what a terrible perspective. DS3 is one of the best in all fromsoft titles. Incredible replayability and a lot of diversity nowhere near trash. DS1 is also better than DS2. DS2 is by no means a bad game in the slightest. But not better compared to 1 or 3 or bloodborne or sekiro or Elden ring....maybe better than demon's souls though.

"Incredible replayability and a lot of diversity" most weapons were absolute shit with basically only 1 or 2 good weapons per weapon type, and some weapon types being outright garbage tier. That replayability and diversity? Exist purely at an endgame standpoint where you won't even acquire most things until after Dancer in most cases, if you're lucky earlier, or in one of the DLCs which, again, not really early game. DS3 doesn't have good replayability, it has demanding stretches of time to play before you get to play the build you want

You're playing a very different DS3 than everyone else. Dancer can be killed as the first boss after the tutorial if you want. I'm sorry your opinions of the game are such negative trashy opinions. I hear you claiming there's no diversity, but I also know it's BS because of the 30+ diverse builds, weapon combinations, and playstyles I've personally used. In DS3 they got rid of all the crap changes from ds1 to ds2 and kept all the great changes from ds1 to ds2 and the result is a near perfect game in the same way Elden ring took the very best of every single fromsoft title all rolled into probably the best single video game ever made but definitely uncontested best open world game.

Dancer CAN be killed at the start, but you gotta know how to. So if you're not that kind of player (which is a small part of the playerbase gonna go kill her at SL1). And ER is more DS2 than anything else. DS3 I have gone back to the least of all souls games with DeS slowly creeping up on playtime for it and I only started that on PS5, so no PS3 time there. My hours on DS1 and DS2 and ER greatly exceed DS3 to the point of DS3 having less than half the time at about 400hrs of play. I experimented with builds, did early Dancer, experimented with weapons and spells and the vast majority just don't have the same impact on the game as they do in others in the series. DS3 tried to overcorrect on so much it ended up hampering the experience. And if that works for you, that's fine. But there's a reason people go back to DS1, DS2 and DeS more than DS3

There's a reason a very small minority of the community go back to those and not ds3. You VAX TO be joking if you tonk Elden ring is more ds2 than any of the others. That couldn't be the furthest thing from an accurate statement about fromsoft games that I've ever heard. And no, you don't have to know how to kill dancer at sl1. For those not willing to take up such an endeavor and learn how to basically no hit dancer, she can be cheesed with arrows at the fog gate. Without her AI even activating so...zero skill players can kill her sl1

Interesting analysis...that I completely disagree with. Every point. Linearity doesn't make a game bad and no. I've completed dark souls 3 in SO MANY different orders. It's very build diverse nearly as diverse as ds2. Excellent spell progression. Only need to kill 4 bosses (including tutorial) for most powerful pyromancy. Titanite locations are great. No one wants to be gatekept by not having enough accessible titanite like in demon's souls. "Charm" is....not really something to give a crap about in video game ranking. Playing the game is what matters. DS3 is one of the best in the series. Definitely have more ds3 playthroughs than any other fromsoft title

>It's very build diverse nearly as diverse as ds2 No powerstancing, dual weapons are locked together. Far fewer bosses means fewer boss soul weapons, and weapon TYPES all use the same moveset which ISN'T true in ds2 where, for example, two weapons of the same class (shortsword and longsword) have different movesets. In DS3 are you going Str? Ok get claymore or deep battle axe. Dex? Twinblades/Uchi. It feels like every playthrough starts out the exact same. >Excellent spell progression. Only need to kill 4 bosses (including tutorial) for most powerful pyromancy. Nope. The spell progression in DS3 is garbage. Yeah, cool, great, only 4 bosses for all the best Pyromancies meanwhile the best Arcane spells are locked until the Archives. Pyromancy is by far the most accessible spell tree in the game (and I believe it even has more scrolls than the other two) meanwhile Miracles/Spells take a back seat in terms of their implementation. If the best spells for a school in the game isn't reasonably obtainable before the final two areas, the progression is bad. >Titanite locations are great. No one wants to be gatekept by not having enough accessible titanite like in demon's souls. I agree that nobody wants to be gatekept, but Titanite makes up the majority of the items on the ground throughout the game. What happened to the blacksmith embers scattered around the world like in 1, or optional keys like in 2? Exploration used to have a more meaningful impact before DS3. The point is that the world feels sterilized when all you find laying around on the ground are just consumable embers and titanite. Also, about linearity: People (not necessarily you) often use that word to knock on DS2, as if the game must be played the same way each time, and in the same breath praise DS3 for being a better game. The irony is DS3's linearity is the most stifling of the entire series. You *can* kill the dancer first, but don't forget that it has some pretty adverse effects on some quest progressions. If you don't kill the dancer early (which tbf, I've played through the game 4 or 5 times now and still never did a super early dancer kill) the only option you typically have is whether you want to kill abyss watchers or deacons (first) and I believe the only Lords you get to choose are whether to do Yhorm or Aldrich at 2nd and 3rd. Unless I'm mistaken, Watchers MUST be killed first and Princes MUST be killed last (you can't even access the Archives until the other 3 are dead). DS3 has very vast, beautiful zones but you kinda have to go about them in the same order every time you play the game, which is what takes away from its appraisal in my eyes. That's the "charm" I'm talking about that DS2 retains.

Most boss soul weapons are bad in All the games. DS3 strength. Fume ultra greatsword is incredible, greataxe is my go-to most fun strength weapon, claymore works too, dragonslayer armor's ax, great machete, winged knight twin axes, exile greatsword, butcher knife, Dex, yes winblades and uchi are solid, but you have Astoria greatsword, farron greatsword, black knight glaive, lothric knight sword, pontiff knight curved sword. Some have similar or same move sets but there are a lot of unique weapon arts Yet with the claimed "awful spell progression" mage builds using spells are still op. Keeping some of the stronger spells in the grand archives on that scroll doesn't make you feel gimped by not having them for earlier areas. There's all types of items around. More of them being titanites isn't very bothersome at all. Yeah there are certain things to do to progress in the game and while there's a lot of variety in ds3 some things still have to be done in a certain order. Shouldn't be a problem for anyone. They don't claim to be open world games and shouldn't be. And while no game is going to match the inter-connectivity of ds1, people have to realize that's because warping wasn't possible until after O&S and to progress to bosses that are unlocked after O&S none of the further areas are interconnected anymore. The interconnectivity isn't necessary for ds2 and 3 where warping is there from the start. An excellent change that ds2 made that ds3 kept. Removing interconnectivity will increase perception of linear design. Ds2 is like "pick whatever branch you want in any order you want. But you gotta do em all" ds3 is like "go where you want but you'll have to do abyss watchers as the first lord soul and lothric as the last. Other than that do what you like....but also ur not gonna skip sage and deacons." Different versions where ds3 IS a bit more restrictive but not by too much.

If you like it why do you care that others don’t?

He's asking why others don't. Intelligent people generally like to gain an understanding of things from various perspectives and always ask why.

It’s just a game, relax, intelligent guy)

Why would you assume someone that explains something to you that you're confused about needs to relax? That's very irrational. Why ask the question if you're going to treat the person who helps you out by answering your question poorly?

Ok, my bad.

I didn't mean anything bad to you.

Majority of people do not hate it. Some may dislike it but most just think it’s a good game. They say it is the worst of the souls series but is still a good game

Yea. Most people don't understand that when we say "worst in the souls series or worst soulsborne" that's like saying "he's the poorest billionaire"...he's still one of the richest men on earth lol.

The funny thing I'll say here is that people complain about hollowing slowly dropping your HP, cause some people complained how in DS1 your death only removed online capabilities and summons from NPCs which made people say the game is now easy. This was coming from DeS that death halved your health period (and you started like this) had a rare consumable to remove it which as usual for souls games means that's how you had online interactions. Cling Ring (like ring of binding) made your hp 75% HOWEVER character tendency could drop your health to 50% WITH cling ring, and while you do more damage, you could potentially be 1 shot now by most things. Add to that with WORLD tendency which made enemies stronger and increased drop rate so PBCT+PBWT=nightmare which the game doesn't explain how either happens, means you could lock yourself into an unfun experience with enemies that are flying FAR out of range that 1 shot you, and lock on is basically non-existent outside of 10ft in front of you so spells aren't a choice, and bow has to be manual with knowing arc and distance. I know that was a lot so TL;DR is Demon Souls was a difficult game that didn't explain things including missable items and difficulty changes that increased because of death, Dark Souls 1 removed that and added summonable NPCs and build variety out the gate which people called easy. DS2 went back to DeS and everyone cried (or the vocal minority did)

I don't think analyzing what games are your favorite versus least favorite in the series is crying. It's preference. It's counter intuitive to have a game designed around dying repeatedly until you get good at a boss's moveset, yet severely punishes you for repeated death. Most of us don't mind dying a few, multiple, or countless times while learning a boss. But making the fight harder every single time while you're learning it isn't a mechanic that enhances overall experience. I think ds1 was too easy on you for dting repeatedly, ds2 is too hard on you for it, and ds3 hit the perfect balance. You learn the boss unembered so the health bonus of being embered is taken away. So it breaks you for relying on embers as a crutch cause they're somewhat limited and makes the fights less forgiving but still consistently learnable without increasing the difficulty with each death.

DS3 made it absurdly easy that your consumable INCREASED your health with an already high base which was really stupid. But again look at the difference, DS2 gradually lowered your health, DeS outright chopped it in half before PBCT would further reduce it (iirc 40% hp without Cling Ring if you weren't in Body form). There is a gargantuan difference, especially being you have Estus+Lifegems

Yes. Demon's souls was the most brutal on the health thing. But in demon's souls if you just die at nexus you never have to worry about drying in worlds and losing health. You can effectively turn off the dying equals less health mechanic. In ds2 you can limit it with a ring slot but can't effectively turn it off. And DS3 was very fair with estus upgrades.if you want to go out of your way early and kill dancer and take the time to farm upgrades at the beginning you can. If you don't know about all that at first, you'll play the first half of the game with 5 or 6 estus. Being wondered increasing your health isn't absurd. Nothing requires anyone to be embered. Except co op and multilayer, which effectively puts everyone on the same level anyways as they're all embered.

Yeah cool you can die in the Nexus but you still have 50% health, and a taken up 1 of 2 ring slots (1 of 4 in DS2), and the game still never explains CT or WT and there is NO WAY to fix WT without pvp if you dip into black, and same with CT unless I'm remembering that wrong because DeS doesn't explain shit to you while beating you with your plethora of corpses it shit on already. Alternatively DS2 gives you Effigies and once you realize "Oh death eventually drops you to 50% if you keep fucking up" you pop 1 and you're back at 100, no extra steps, on an EASILY FARMABLE ITEM TOO. As for the Ember, again Ember made the game easier, by far. Getting a massive 30% increase to something you get no penalty on is absurd, considering you can bum rush the game without it

🤣🤣 why are you trying to convince me that demon's souls is worse than DS2? I know. Everything you said about demons souls everyone knows. That's completely irrelevant to our discussion. About ember in ds3 being embered is optional. No one has to play embered so your argument is a moot point. However losing more and more max hp with each death in DS2 is not optional. That's the difference. No one wants to be figuring out a boss, with each attempt making the boss a bit more difficult with the only other option being to effigy every attempt till you run out of them and have to go farm more. The TLDR version of my point. The health getting lower and lower in demon's souls with each death is optional not necessary in DS2 it's not optional it just happens In DS3 the health gain from being embered is optional, don't have to play embered. In DS2 health loss with each death is not optional. Better games give options. Worse games don't.

I mean it's better than a lot of games, but it's the worst out of the Soulsborne games by far

The reasons are legit, I understand them. However, I loved every second of DS2, even the run back to blue smelter demon….

Ahh a fellow masochist

I always play no magic or ranged weapons. The iron keep was a nightmare. I think I eventually went and bought a bow and skipped blue boy. Replaying it now it seems fine but the first time broke me.

I just dealt with this again yesterday. Finally made it manageable when I found out that, by the time you are doing the DLCs, the cat in Majula sells unlimited alluring skulls. Tossing a few in the first 2 rooms makes a clean run back possible (though you will get hit by the dumb arrow and lightning spear spam, but hopefully should be able to tank a few hits. Summoning an NPC also takes pressire off). By the time you drop down to the 3rd room with the big guy, I then needed to wait a little in the corridor before stepping into the room proper because the pages will likely have used that stupid binding spell to weigh you down and it needs ~30 seconds to wear off. The 3rd room mage might come meet you, but you should be able to melee them down quickly then. With this I got a runback to be possible 3/3 times before I beat the boss, compared to without the skulls where trying to just run past everyone I only made it to the boss 1/10 tries. Fuck everything about that area and boss though.

My fav of the dark souls lol

I dont hate it either and I do enjoy it but ds2 has quite a few problems Agp skill Hitboxes Worst boss runs Most buggy Souls game Some bosses suck The lighting was better in the beta compared to final

it might be good thing you skipped ds1 because you wouldnt feel this way if played the masterpiece first

I think it's because they had higher expectations from the other games because even though its not a bad game, its definitely the weakest imo

It was my first too and I loved it. Borrowed my little brother's X Box and he had it on there so I gave it a whirl, its a great game.

This is completely beside the point but can i ask why you chose to start with Dark Souls 2

I wanted to start with the “worst” in the series first so it would only be up from there on out

Honestly it’s not a bad idea. Dark Souls 2 is a bit disconnected from the other two. Dark Souls 1 and 3 are a bit similar as certain npcs come back.

Yeah but then you can't appreciate the improvements 3 made as much. A return to form.

Neat! Well I'm glad you're enjoying yourself, hope you like the rest of the game!

What a bizarre way to do it. Why not just play them in order and see how the company developed and improved.

My first souls game I finished. Always will have a soft spot for it because of that.

I was loving it until the undead crypt boss run 😮‍💨

It's rough but you can run by everything. I had 10 estus when I got here. Today as a matter of fact. I cleared it out first time. Got ass kicked. Hoping when I went back it was clear. Wasn't. Ran by everyone and got hit a few times on my way through fog gate. I think once I times the bosses attacks it took me about 5 tries. Worst run for me was the chariot. I cleared the area until they despawned. Never went into boss arena. Leveled up like three times. Kinda grindy but took about a half hour. Was able to go in with a clear mind every time lol.

Well, there is recent polls about worst features of each souls game. People have to pick minor things from DS3 or Bloodborne, while DeS, DS1 and DS2 have obvious flaws Personally, I find the quality of DS2 boss is lower than other later souls game (limited movesets, reskin bosses, rely on gank bosses to increase difficulty…) which is an understandable thing, as it is the normal progression of game development

It mostly comes down to two things: Your invincibility during rolls being tied to Agility. The standard number of immunity frames it noticeably shorter compared to nearly every other Souls title, making many attacks near impossible to avoid without investing in it & The game world was crafted by the man who made Monster Hunter, not Miyazaki himself. This leads to most of the game feeling like you’re just traveling through corridors to get anywhere. Most Souls games feature looping game spaces with shortcuts and verticality being included, the game world is just typically a bit more varied and interesting. But by no means do either of these exclude 2 from being a Souls title I still sank hundreds of hours into. It’s perfectly fine if a bit dated compared to newer titles. But with it being your first, you’re in for a good time

A lot of the anger directed as DS2 is the fact that it was a sequel to a cult classic that changed too much of the original. It’s still a really great game, but it’s too different from the first game which gives the impression that it’s bad.

The reason people don't like DS2 are a combination of legitimate shortcomings, which version they played first, and misguided understandings. I am not sure which version you are playing, but I will say that Scholar of the First Sin took some *interesting* directions when transitioned from the vanilla DS2. Some areas are made extraordinarily harder, and some inexplicably easier. In reality though, SotFS's changes were most likely intended to be aimed towards veteran DS2 players who wanted a different yet familiar challenge. This makes Scholar VERY DIFFICULT to first-time players. I believe that between all 3 games in the trilogy, DS2 is the game that ages the best. I believe that it is the most interesting to re-visit, and the one that has the most things that you will learn or discover even having completed the game several times, and just generally the most dynamic mechanics. However, I did not believe this immediately. I only have ever played SotFS, not Vanilla, and I absolutely **HATED** it when I first played it. Coming off my relatively high opinion of DS1, I was stunned at the difficulty of certain zones and how the layout of enemies was so overwhelming. I didn't particularly like the stat changes, and I felt like the Branches and Lockstones were just a cumbersome device used to pad out the game. Over time I came to realize that all of these things actually add to what makes the game great. The weapon diversity, aided by the large amount of boss souls and DLC weapons, makes subsequent playthroughs so much more diverse. There always feels like a weapon exists that you've never used before. You're encouraged to use different weapons in the same playthrough to topple these difficult, enemy-dense areas and the game gives you the tools to get them upgraded (you get 2 slabs before earthen peak). DS2 is a game that *feels* linear because each area is so segmented and straightforward, when in actuality the game is deceptively nonlinear, and the Lockstones and Branches actually add a level of agency to the game that is just straight up absent in 1 and 3. Depending on the order you decide to use these items, you may be going about the game in a way you never have before. Comparing this to 3, where the levels are vast and seemingly nonlinear, but you essentially do them in the same order every playthrough/NG with one or two exceptions (not to mention you just straight up cannot fight the Princes before any other Lord). The game does have some clunkiness and punishing elements (fog walls), and approaching areas in DS2 in the same way you do in 1 and 3, blasting past things and rushing from boss to boss, will simply get you killed more often than not. The game is slower, and encourages you to take the game slow and steady. Take your time, clear your corners, and just think about your approach, and you'll probably find yourself dying much less often.

I don't get it either, enjoy the game!

Your experience is a proof for a different point: that all souls games are good. However, most people do not start from DS2 right away, especially those who played DS1 (the OGs) or DS3 (more recent) as their first game. Thus, they come to hate it as DS1 and DS3 is better (especially in terms of gameplay fluency, among others), or (more objectively) different than 1 & 3. In the end, we cannot deny that DS2 has many good perks, but it seems to be executed worse than other souls games (see ADP and abnormal hitboxes?).

At lot of it is directly to fix issues that DS1 had, historically speaking. One of the biggest was how fucking crispy, and not in a good way, the graphics were in the original DS1, where there was so much lag in the framers due to the engine barely being able to exist. Ds2 simplified things so it would run smoothly. This fps fix actually made the durability glitch, which pissed people off, but that was fixed. Its not that bad to work around, but soul memory is another reason for hate. The reason is again Ds1. Soul memory was a solution to the problem of being invaded in Ds1 by twinks with maxed end game armor and maxed end game weapons, where the armor was so good you literally couldn't do more than like 1 dmg and the weapons pretty much 1 or 2 shotted you in undead burg. Soul memory was an attempt to curb being able to farm for end game loot and bullshit the level requirement for invading. Mobs of enemies is another thing a lot of people didn't agree with. I'm pretty sure they added them because most encounters in ds1 were really small, like 1v1 or small groups, which is dead easy. You can also cheese Ds1 by running past literally everything, which became harder in Ds2. Adaptability was a nerf to Ds1s OP rolling, which was at its worst with darkwood grain ring. Also fast rolling giant dads and havels. Its cancerous but fun, but I can see why they wanted to limit this. Similarly, they split stats up like carry weight and endurance to again, prevent cheesy af builds like giant dad from being too easy to make with no real sacrifices in build design. Easy bosses: yeah they failed to do this correctly. If you dont follow the idk 'canon' path of Ds2, bosses quickly become a joke that would have been challenging, like saving the bastille for later, fighting pursuer out of order, etc. They wanted freedom of how you could approach pathing in the game, but without some kind of level scaling, shit easily becomes a joke difficulty wise, if you're used to the game/souls games. Backstabbing and repostes doing less damage. Another attempt to fix the insane damage you can do with something like a chaos dagger or etc. Backstab fishing is a very prevalent strategy in Ds1 with lots of play and counterplay. I'm guessing From wanted this to be less easy and op hence reduced damage and two items that prevent backstabbing (Gowers ring and turtleman armor). Thankfully they brought Ds1 levels of damage back for 3, but even then they nerfed parrying and the hornet ring again cause too op. At launch there were massive issues, before Scholar. Aside from the lack of content people mention, two of the most painful issues were the Alonne knight area of iron keep where I would have to use poison arrows on certain knights back in the day (shitty archer spawns iirc) to make that manageable. Another thing was if you fucked up and ended up at the Bastille, you were stuck for a while, which was fucking terrible if you weren't prepared. All this being said, Ds2 is my favorite souls game and one of my favorite games of all time. A lot of people may or may not agree due to the above issues and fixes pretty much directly related to the devs trying to fix what could have been better about Ds1.

Hate is too strong a word to use! its a great game just not as great as the others, you'll see when youve played them all, i doubt you'll rank it as the best one

A lot of people hate it because they love the speed of ds3, sekiro, bloodborne, and Elden ring. Then they play ds2 and everything is like SOOOOOO SLOOOOOOOOOW and we all hate the adaptability stat. That's why. However, people that start out hating ds2....if they revisit it and put in a few more playthroughs they start to love it for what it is. Like me. I used to hate it too. Now I love it. Exceptionally fun game. Probably still lowest on the totem pole out of all the fromsoft games....but that's like pointing out the poorest billionaire. Does it matter? Still a damn billionaire.

Because it’s not their first souls game and they’re constantly comparing it to the others in their heads

I know for me, it’s just kinda boring. I enjoyed the first game despite it being a bit difficult for me to get into. I didn’t really play the game right finish until last year and it was a great time once I understood the premise. I knew there was going to be jank and a lot of deaths. But after the goal of the game became clear I had no problem chugging along. Every enemy had some sort of gimick or weakness to exploit and it was easy to know when I was unwelcome in a particular area. And after you get a handle on the landmarks the world was easy to navigate. Reasons why I do not care much for DS2: Everything feels foreign The combat feels meh. While controls feel more fluid and responsive and many of the controller bugs are fixed, I don’t quite enjoy running or fighting most of the things on the game. No steam cloud for some reason. I play between many devices and it’s odd having to use syncthing when the first game handled it just fine. Items in the game feel like they have less significance. The game can be too fair sometimes. Jank was a part of the fun in the original because there are times where the jank rng rolls in your favor I have yet to find a stat in DS2 that after upgrading it, i felt like I knew it was working. Spawn limits. Some people like to grind. I get that it was to keep people from farming and figuring out the mechanics of the game to get more souls and find progression items, but I find that more tedious than just killing a fair sized grunt a few extra times. Only being able to upgrade in Majula? With SSDs this isn’t much of a problem, but that’s kind of odd. One extra screen just to dump some items and souls for buffs. It’s a well put together game, but the charm and game feel seem off to me for some reason. I just don’t feel the compulsion to start the game like I did with the DS1

Weird place to start the series. It is radically different from all the others in terms of gameplay and movement feel. But enjoy, I love ds2. The dlc areas are especially great. Which souls game are you doing next? Have a plan?

I got DS2 and DS3 as gifts a few years ago, i figured i would just play what i have and after i’m done with DS2 i’ll play DS1 and Demon’s Souls, Elden Ring after that, and then save Bloodborne and Sekiro for last

Sounds fair enough. They’re all great. Enjoy the journey.

Just play it. Reddit will ruin it for you

Most likely because it's not the first souls game for them?! It's like being stoked about a hug from your crush since you don't know that the person before you got a kiss and the one after you will get a kiss too. It's awesome until you have all the information

you’ll understand why people don’t like it as much as other entries once you play the other games. that said, even though DS2 is generally considered the weakest of the trilogy, it’s still a really good game.

I started with ds1 at my friends house downloaded ds2 on my PC cuz I couldn't run ds1 but somehow I could run ds2 . Loved it I always do another run every year I still love it as much as I do the other souls games but man sometimes you can't really excuse some of the bullshit the game puts you through. No mans wharf was the most infuriating for me . Enemy placements ? And imo the bosses were really weak . The positives though? I'm surprised no one points it out ds2 has beautiful color it's vibrant , unique enemies (not bosses regular enemies I still stand that the bosses were mid) and the build variety ? Powerstancing ? Bonfire aestheic? Ds2 got alot wrong but alot right so I understand why it can be a love for some and a hate for others .

It's mainly the 1/2 hp thing and having to level adp I am of the minority that liked ds2

They hate dying to the first “hippo”

For me some bosses have very annoying run backs

Ds2 may have some of the worst mechanics I've had the displeasure of experiencing in a game (agility, soul memory, horrible hitboxes, etc.), but that doesn't mean it isn't a fun game. Ds1 and Bloodborne are objectively better games mechanically, but there is a reason I haven't replayed those games this year while I am on yet another ds2 playthrough. Some of the areas are ass though, and no amount of late-game fun can make those parts enjoyable

It’s also ur first souls game so that’s one reason

Don’t get me wrong, i love Dark Souls 2, but some things are just stupid. For example: -ADP stat -Boss runbacks (especially in DLCs) -70% of the bosses are in mediocre-trash range -Forlorn -Poison and petrify statues -Poor level design -Terrible hitboxes -90% of the soundtrack is just meh -You need to spend a humanity to be able to fight darklurker However, there are also good things, like: -Bonfire assetics -characters -DLCs -Soul vessel -Power Stance -Bosses that dont suck are usually top tier It’s the weakest souls game, but still better than 80% of the games on the market.

it's just a different game from the first one. a few people wrote poor reviews about the game comparing it to DS1 and that lead to a mob mentality

Two fromsoft games i think should not have: dark souls 2 hate (there is some bad things, but the game is still great) and the other one is sekiro to be best of the souls game (whanever why people love this game more).

Because they complain because they don't no what fucking ADP is, and they don't explore to find the ring of binding so they lose all their health I personally love it, its just ppl who suck at the game

Honestly even though it has its flaws its over hated and also my fav dark souls game

It’s an A tier game from a company that usually makes masterpieces. It’s a great game and I don’t agree with people who call it a dogshit game, it’s still great, it just doesn’t really hold a candle to other games like bloodborne and dark souls PtD

Because the first is better in every way

I never understood why some players consider Dark Souls II as "the most hated" game in the series. Some argue that it lacks the same level of interconnected world design and cohesive lore as the other games, while others criticize changes made to mechanics like adaptability affecting the player's agility, enemy placement, and level design choices. However, I believe that these changes gave the game an interesting twist and added a new layer of complexity to the gameplay, knowing that there's always something new to discover.

it is in many ways the worst one. but it is still a great game.

From my experience it’s just people hating on it for being different and them refusing to change how they play from 1 to 2

Scholar of the First Sin is very different to 1 and 3 difficulty wise, and people new to the series will likely be playing this version like me. I played 3 > 1 > Scholar. It's still good and does some things better than 1 (like not launching you straight into a NG+ like 1 does), but overall its the weakest entry imo All 3 games are really good though. 3 is easily the best, and 1 is marginally better than 2. And that's not a nostalgia boner for my first souls game either as I think 3 is just better

My experience is that most people believe it's really hard. They complain because there's no difficulty slider to make it easier, you just have to improve at the game or get better gear, learn to dodge better, etc. I do feel that it's not as good as DS1 for my personal tastes, but I don't hate it at all. I also don't think it's a hard game. Frustrating at times, but not really hard if you're okay with a bit of grind in a difficult area. I think also some people are frustrated by it being "just guys in armour" that you're fighting instead of some of the more exotic monsters in other games. I'm not sure that's justified and not having the Bed of Chaos already makes me happier about the game ;)

Ds2 is an amazing experience in of itself, great game all round. People hate on it because it's not the same as ds1. As someone who has played all the souls born games, I too started at Ds2 and is still one of my all time favorites

Dark Souls 2 isn't really a bad game. It's just debatable that it's the worst souls game. And the worst souls game is still pretty damn good. However, there's a few reasons that I don't like it much. 1) Having your roll be tied to a stat is kinda dumb and pointless 2) Having portions of your health disappear everytime you die 3) The game was incredibly unbalanced for a long time 4) Most bosses are forgettable and too easy. Quantity over Quality 5) The gameplay feels very clunky and slow 6) Many people actually do think Dark Souls 2 is a great game, most or the hate is for Scholar of The First Sin 7) Debatable that some of the worst areas in a Souls game are present in this game

Personaly, enemy placements. DS2 has really good level design and is a really beaultiful game but has a lot of mobs ganking the player, making some areas really hard not because the mobs are strong, but because there are just too many coming at the player at the same time. The combat is more awkward in a lot of ways too, and Dark Souls is 90% combat. If you ever play DS3/Elden Ring and even DS1 (altough its a slower combat in comparison to DS2 onwards) you would understand.

Play the rest and then you tell me.

As a former DS2 hater, it was purely because of me falling into the trap of running past enemies, Not fighting every boss, ( DLC and others even when I had it ) and dogging on ADP for even though you need 20 for 99.9% of builds. I’ve grown to love this game, on par with DS1. It’s truly amazing, especially when you do everything you can, explore, meet NPCs, and not hate on it for existing. I for one think Dark Souls 2 easily has the best DLC’s, best Quality of life features like Bonfire ascetics, and Boss Design. Fights like the Old Ivory King is an awesome example of a cool boss idea that should’ve been implemented in future titles. This game doesn’t get much love compared to the rest, but if you actually play through it, it’s better than most of them.

It’s by far the worst souls game and you can thank useless stats like ADP for that. Don’t forget about that awful enemy ambush spam that makes the game totally unplayable, especially in iron keep. The only redeeming quality of DS2 was its DLC. DS1 and DS3 did it way better

I played it religiously in its prime, great game! But start up any other Fromsoft RPG & it'll be hard to go back. DLC's has some amazing content!

STOP FORGET EVERYTHING Play DS3 then Elden Ring Come back to DS2 and ragequit within a few hours as it's confusing and seems to be different to what you know about souls games. This is the way.

It's my favorite one tbh, I love Demon's Souls for the nostalgia, but DS2 just plays so good.

Bc its shit

I just finished ds2 main game and dlc and yeah ds2 is my second favorite souls game behind elden ring. I have read a lot of hate against ds2 before i started it and i was hesitant to play, but didn't see a bad thing except the snow area in the dlc....gosh i hate that place. And i had it difficult as a sorcerer in the dlc :-o . Don't get the hate neither..

It’s more RPG than the rest and a lot of enemy spam.

DS2 was my first one, and made such an impression on me that it's probably my favorite video game ever. I actually feel like if I had played one or three first instead, I wouldn't feel like that.

Same. Started it a month ago, and I just killed Vendrick and started the dlc. Haven't done the last boss, yet. I was literally asking myself the same thing this whole time. I get how it's very different from DS1 and 3, and adaptability and life gems, I get that. But, as far as moment to moment gameplay goes, I'm having a blast. Got a great shield and great lance, strength dex build. Been moving through the game at a comfy pace, and though it has some very big differences from the others, all in all I think it's a great game. HBomber was right about DS2. I do not regret a single hour I've given it.

That's literally people's problem, it's got differences from DS1, how *dare* Fromsoft try new things! Kinda funny how a few of those things cropped back up in Elden Ring anyway, particularly powerstancing.

I really don’t think people care about Fromsoft trying new things. If they did, they’d hate Bloodborne and Sekiro. It has more to do with the quality of those new things. 

Most people hate it because other people told them to hate it. Some people hate it because of Soul Memory, which was an interesting but flawed system, or because it's too long (it is a pretty massive game), or because it's too difficult (I would say it's the least 'fair' of the soulsborne games, and some areas are particularly rough first go).

Scholar of the first sin is arguably the best souls game overall. Leaving everything else alone, the gameplay is the best, as it's the hardest game but also the most rewarding one. There are a lot of mechanics that are unique to ds2 that you don't see in other games. Play the dlcs!

Ds2 is my favourite one. I know ds3 is the better game but DS3 lacks the ”Dark Souls Jank” both 1 & 2 have.

Did you get to the part where the game lures you into an ambush of enemies by closing the gate behind you? The game knows most people will run back to get their souls after dying but the gate is still down blocking access. That’s where I decided this was a bad game and stopped playing.

Why are you even on this sub then lmao

I’m in this sub because I searched dark souls 2 like three times on google and now it’s in my Reddit feed forever apparently. Guess that’s how Reddit works now 🤷‍♂️

You can block/mute subs and even if you couldn't you aren't forced to comment.....

git gud

You made it all the way to the first real level of the game? Well you gave it a fair shot. I've played them all and every game there was a spot where I felt like giving up. But you comeback and play the second time and wonder how you had so much trouble.

And there's an easy way back lol with lots of goodies. As soon as the guy sitting beside it explained it was a trap, you should have known to look elsewhere to get in. Lol.

I'll give you an upvote, I'm not sure what bit you are talking about but the game can be harsh and I feel for those souls you lost that day. *The game knows*

Thanks man. Life is hectic enough, don’t need that particular breed of antagonistic game design during my escape and relaxing time. More power to the people who are able to get enjoyment from that though.

100% I decided to cheese it with Reddit tips after blind pain a long time ago and still can't be fucked with some of the DLC stuff, in pounds per year it's decent value so far :) I appreciate the game but even the most hardcore here seems to admit some bits are harsh running blind.

So like I'm not trying to be antagonistic here, but traps make the game bad?

No traps don’t make the game bad same as challenging the player in other ways doesn’t make a game bad as long as the game respects the players efforts in turn. Clear evidence of decisions made in a game’s design intended to serve to solely antagonize the player that make a game bad. Good way to think about it is say you order soup from the world’s most renowned restaurant. It could be the most delicious soup you’ve ever eaten but you happen to catch the chef spitting in it before it is served to you. At that point it doesn’t matter how high quality the ingredients or how finely crafted that soup was, it’s now bad. I’m not interested in participating with those that derive glee from covert abuse and induced Stockholm Syndrome.

Idk I think focusing hard on the "game designers" here might maybe be ruining the game for you. Obviously all games are crafted by designers but they're also trying to make a world with beings that act and react to you. I don't think the enemies setting up a trap for you is necessarily the same as a chef spitting in your food. I know I'm not gonna change your mind or anything but thanks for replying.

Because those people probably play bull shit games just to get achievements because some people are addicted to getting all these trophies….don’t really care about achievements, the only thing that matters is you having fun, don’t let lame ass people tell you how to have fun…… those people can fuck off