Post number #327556, ID: 77799f
|
Can we argue about it? It's really fun to play, there's so much different items and viable pvp strategies, graphics are best of all series I just don't see how you can hate it, even if bosses suck
Post number #327579, ID: f7be15
|
How does it feel having an opinion so wrong that everyone disagrees with you?
Post number #327595, ID: 8bd875
|
>>327579 it's kinda bad cause Tanimura will never do another DS game :(
Post number #327673, ID: cd94a5
|
>>327595 Thank god he'll never do another, because DS2 is utter shit and the worst souls game by far.
Post number #329265, ID: 77a080
|
Dark Souls 2, the game that tells in the first dialogue that your ass will bleed because it's so hard and difficult. That's point number 1. Point number 2: Everything's a cycle. Reincarnation! Point number 3: It feels more like a fan-game than an actual sequel. Discount-Ornstein for example. Point number 4: The worldspace makes no fucking sense. No-Man's Wharf should be completely flooded. Or the transition from Earthern Peek to the Iron Castle. Shall I continue?
Post number #329562, ID: b6f2b7
|
It had the best hand-to-hand weapon: the Bone Fist. I miss it dearly. All thanks to the person who handled the DLC.
Post number #329752, ID: cbf0b3
|
>>329265 World design sucks yes (perhaps they had no time?) but gameplay is very good. I like new ideas (bonfire ascetic for example) , ng+, pvp and that there's a lot of items graphics are the best in the series. Also DS3 is a fanfic of first one lol, it had nothing new and what's new sucked dick (rings, magic, poise etc.)
Post number #330573, ID: 77a080
|
>>329752 I think the world design in DS2 sucks is because they wanted cool looking areas and then had trouble connecting them and probably because they changed directors during the development. DS2 could have been so much worse. I just don't remember if Tanimura was the first or second director during development but I think Tanimura was the latter.
And DS3 was more a Best Of Dark Souls. Dark Souls 3: Prepare to remember Dark Souls 1 Edition.
Post number #330950, ID: 4f8b67
|
>>329265 Points 2: That's the whole premise of the entire series though. It's not a DS2-specific thing.
Post number #330952, ID: 4f8b67
|
I get what you mean by fan-game, but I feel like it's more of a spin-off than a fan-game, definitely not a sequel.
Post number #330991, ID: 77a080
|
>>330950 Here's the thing. At the end of DS1 you had a choice: begin the Age of Dark or continue the Age of Fire aka burn the last soul that could be considered a Lord Soul. You're not repeating the Age of Fire, you're keeping it alive. And possibly for a short er period of time because your soul is just stronger than the weakened soul of Gwyn. That guy's almost a Hollow when you fight him. The birth of the Chaos demons? His first attempt to do that. There was no cycle.
Post number #331007, ID: 77a080
|
The cycle became a thing with DS2 and then they sort of had to run with it because it's there now. Suddenly every burnt soul came back. Nothing matters. The Age of Dark flew out of the window. It's a flimsy explanation to habe sequels, just like explanation for multiplayer in DS1.
Post number #332287, ID: 1aa487
|
I liked it. First one had better locations. But second one is easier. I couldn't beat it though cause the last boss didn't come out and I hated the idea of looking for some shitty ass tree or whatever to progress.
Total number of posts: 13,
last modified on:
Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1529854105
| Can we argue about it? It's really fun to play, there's so much different items and viable pvp strategies, graphics are best of all series I just don't see how you can hate it, even if bosses suck