LTTP: Darksiders 2 aka Vigil tried their hardest to kill Darksiders

O

Omega

Banned
So I've had the game from launch but finally got around to playing it. I've put a few hours into it but I don't see me playing it anymore. It changed the series from a Zelda meets God of War game into some other monstrosity. The combat is pretty bad so far but I can accept that, it's still fairly early so maybe it gets better later. What I can't accept is no proper block/parry system. My only option is to roll away? Really? This just screams BUTTON MASH! oh and occasionally roll away to avoid attacks. If you want you can just stand there though because there are potions everywhere. I have 9 and I'm not even looking for them. Even the boss fights follow this pattern. DS1 there was some variety. While it was a simple, cliché "attack the weakpoint" it's better than mash square/X and occasionally R1/RB

Which brings me to another issue I have. They seemingly removed exploration by showing everything on the map. At least in DS1 you had to explore to find the map with all treasure locations. This along with other pointless bulletpoint features like looting (oh cool, a Hammer! I could definetly use a 15th one) an XP system or something minor like showing how much damage my attacks deal. This shitty dialogue wheel and its poor attempt at being a AAA action-RPG have me seriously thinking that Vigil did not want Darksiders to succeed, as dumb as that may sound.

This game feels nothing like DS1 and I know sequels are supposed to be different but it's not even the same genre. One of the few games I actually bought full price and I get this focus group tested garbage

Does it get better or should I save myself 10-15 hours of my life?
 
I don't think this game really gets better as it progresses. So if you don't like it now, I doubt you will like it any more by the time you are finished. Personally I didn't enjoy it, I wanted more Darksiders 1, which this game isn't.
 
Honestly, I didn't even bother with this one because the first one just became pretty much unbearable by the end. Can't say I'm at all bothered the franchise is pretty much dead.
 
The first game felt like the gaming equivalent of a Swiss Army Knife. It was a jack of all trades but master of none but was still a really cool thing. The second game felt like The Homer.
 
Stopped myself for almost exactly the same reasons. To me the game seemed much less inspired than the first. Just could not get into it. Need to sell it one day.
 
I'll say that DS2 is a better game than DS1, but if you're already annoyed with it you might as well just stop now. Halfway through the game (Act 2) the flaws really start to show.
 
first ten hours are good, then pacing becomes rotten and horrible repetitiveness shows up all of a sudden while saying "Hello Dave"
 
The only good thing about the last 2 worlds is that you can do them both in a couple of hours total whereas the first 2 bad worlds stretch on for 10+ if you try to do everything. This game made me not care at all about the series basically dying with THQ, especially with the rumored plans of the next game being 4 player co-op, or a shooter.
 
Clint Beastwood said:
So I've had the game from launch but finally got around to playing it. I've put a few hours into it but I don't see me playing it anymore. It changed the series from a Zelda meets God of War game into some other monstrosity. The combat is pretty bad so far but I can accept that, it's still fairly early so maybe it gets better later. What I can't accept is no proper block/parry system. My only option is to roll away? Really? This just screams BUTTON MASH! oh and occasionally roll away to avoid attacks. If you want you can just stand there though because there are potions everywhere. I have 9 and I'm not even looking for them. Even the boss fights follow this pattern. DS1 there was some variety. While it was a simple, cliché "attack the weakpoint" it's better than mash square/X and occasionally R1/RB

Which brings me to another issue I have. They seemingly removed exploration by showing everything on the map. At least in DS1 you had to explore to find the map with all treasure locations. This along with other pointless bulletpoint features like looting (oh cool, a Hammer! I could definetly use a 15th one) an XP system or something minor like showing how much damage my attacks deal. This shitty dialogue wheel and its poor attempt at being a AAA action-RPG have me seriously thinking that Vigil did not want Darksiders to succeed, as dumb as that may sound.

This game feels nothing like DS1 and I know sequels aren't supposed to be different but it's not even the same genre. One of the few games I actually bought full price and I get this focus group tested garbage

Does it get better or should I save myself 10-15 hours of my life?
Click to expand...

Of all things about this game, you're going to knock down the combat? The combat in this game is GOD TIER. I'd put it on the same tier as DMC3/Bayonetta/Ninja Gaiden.

Look at this goddamn combo video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b0sBoQoT4I0
 
Coming from someone who thought the game actually had a really strong start, I can tell you that it takes a nosedive in the last 2 worlds. If you didn't even like the first half you'll hate the second.
 
There's no block or parry in 2? I wonder if they removed it because it was so damn overpowered in the first game. You could just parry your way through almost every single fight in the first one.
 
2&2 said:
Uh oh, what have you done?
Click to expand...

Watch the combo video, then tell me why I'm wrong.

Here it is again:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b0sBoQoT4I0

This game was a gem for me. The end gets really boring IF you play it like a Zelda game. Just like DMC would be incredibly boring if you tried to play it like a Zelda game. For Stylish play though, it gets much better because you have all these tools to mess around with.

And if you needed another hint that this game was meant to be a combo game, it has the equivalent of bloody palace (which is what you see in the video). Very underrated.

The level design/pacing/etc got awful towards the end but my god the combat is godlike.
 
I actually liked the change of direction in general, with the game going from a Zelda/God of War lite hybrid to a frenetic third-person action-adventure romp -- the combat in particular I found to be rather enjoyable. My key issues, however, are that the loot system was clearly designed around the possessed weapon concept, rendering most of it useless (not unlike Blizzard designing Diablo 3's loot system around the RMAH), and the game is simply too big for its own good: while the first two worlds are generously sized, the quests are utterly uninspired and repetitive, requiring copious backtracking, and the latter two worlds are comparatively tiny. The campaign ought to have been limited to two larger worlds in an effort to flesh them out more, and another six months in the oven at the least wouldn't have gone astray. Also, most of the skills on offer are useless; there's one in particular that claims to lure enemies to attack your summoned ghouls rather than you... but it's of no importance as this is the default enemy AI behaviour. Oh, and there are bugs aplenty, some of them game-breaking and virtually none of them patched; the last update was three weeks after release.

The chiefly dull loot combined with the poorly-conceived skill tree means that even if you're enjoying what the game has to offer, you never feel as though you're improving your character in any meaningful way -- again, not unlike Diablo 3.
 
Yeah, the first half of the game is the best, so if you are not liking it do not continue.

It's a shame really, because if the quality of the first 'world' had been carried to the others the game would have been stellar.

Instead it has a great beggining and gets worse and worse, until it turns into gears of war and ruins your life with that ending.

Shame.
 
Worlds 3/4 are really bad. Then there is the shootbang level and oh my goodness is it terrible.

The combat tho is awesome and it's a shame it's tied to this halfbaked sequel.
 
I've explained my reasons too many times to go in to detail but I still think DS2 is vastly superior to DS1 in almost every way. It is definitely flawed and runs out of steam towards the end but I had a LOT more fun with it than the first and I played them literally back to back. Too each their own.
 
This game was like a never ending, not very special dungeon from Zelda with hardly any variety.
I liked the TPS section just because it was kind of refreshing for once.
 
sixghost said:
There's no block or parry in 2? I wonder if they removed it because it was so damn overpowered in the first game. You could just parry your way through almost every single fight in the first one.
Click to expand...

I think it was more of Vigil trying to differentiate Death and War in the combat department. Death is more nimble, fighting with agility and evasion, where War is more capable of fighting toe-to-toe and overwhelming foes with pure brute strength.
 
Guess I'm one of the few people that really enjoyed the 2nd one. I loved the possessed weapon system and custom armor stuff. I thought the combat was great and also the look of the world. I also really liked the first game however, and I know it has its followers but wasn't necessarily universally praised. I can't really comment on the story much as I usually don't follow the stories in games too much outside of a few exceptions.

I didn't miss the block because the dodge was a fairly important component and those special boss fights were still fairly difficult, of course that could be because I kept going after them when I was really underpowered. I think I beat gorewood when I was like lvl 2 or something, almost any attack of his was a 1 shot so I had to be johnny on the spot with the dodge.
 
I finished Darksiders 2 recently but I think I was just pretending to myself that I was still enjoying it by the end. I loved the first so yeah, fairly disappointing.
 
I will quote myself from an earlier thread:

Darksiders 2 is clearly worse than Darksiders 1. The additions to character progression with randomized loot and skill points are implemented with a degree of competence. The big issue with the sequel is the watered down experience in every aspect: more dungeons, but rarely unique ones with a new item/skill that defines the dungeon, more characters, but less in-depth interactions with nothing to match the fantastic arcs with Samael and Vulgrim (including the awesome ending in DS1), more locations with seemingly more color, but a notable lack of cohesion and an increasing sense of experiencing something generic as you play through the game. The game at least has a great soundtrack.
Click to expand...
 
There's a skill you get where the Reaper apparition attacks and does a ton of damage if you dodge at the last second. But Death isn't supposed to play like War. Why does a game need a block and parry system?

You can't have 9 potions, the capacity is 5, unless you mean Wrath and Health potions. Health potions can be pretty common or annoyingly rare, I don't know if there's something controlling it.

I was more concerned about the technical issues. Not very well-optimized and constant stuttering.
 
O_O
Holy shit that combo video is awesome. I just got DS2 in the mail, and I loved the first. High hopes, sad the IP is dead.
 
I actually just beat this last night after getting it from the holiday steam sale. I actually really enjoyed most of it, especially the first 1/3 or so. I definitely don't see the combat complaints – there seems to be plenty of options available pretty early on, but I suppose it's as mashy as you want to make it.
 
ezekielpacman said:
Woah there. In no way is it same tier as those games. The video proves nothing, there are impressive combo videos for anything. God of War 3 for example.
Click to expand...

This game is way more technical than GoW3. Clearly you haven't played it. It has just frames, it has canceling, it has weapon-specific guards, it has summons, teleports, time-cancels, etc. They crammed just about everything they could into this game.
 
I hated it. DS1 was a decent attempt at a Zelda-clone, but 2 felt like a soulless sequel. Sequels are supposed to fix problems, not add to them. I stopped playing after about 15 hours due to sheer boredom. The dungeons lack any kind of variety and often rely on the same puzzles, the game feels very unpolished and the loot system was worthless. One of the biggst disappointments of last year for me, I really wanted it to outdo DS1 in every way (it should have).
 
ultim8p00 said:
Watch the combo video, then tell me why I'm wrong.

Here it is again:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b0sBoQoT4I0

This game was a gem for me. The end gets really boring IF you play it like a Zelda game. Just like DMC would be incredibly boring if you tried to play it like a Zelda game. For Stylish play though, it gets much better because you have all these tools to mess around with.

And if you needed another hint that this game was meant to be a combo game, it has the equivalent of bloody palace (which is what you see in the video). Very underrated.

The level design/pacing/etc got awful towards the end but my god the combat is godlike.
Click to expand...

I'm not arguing, I just know people get really worked up about their DMC/NG/Bayonetta combat. Brace yourself ;)
 
Snacks the sober sea lion said:
There's a skill you get where the Reaper apparition attacks and does a ton of damage if you dodge at the last second. But Death isn't supposed to play like War. Why does a game need a block and parry system?

You can't have 9 potions, the capacity is 5, unless you mean Wrath and Health potions. Health potions can be pretty common or annoyingly rare, I don't know if there's something controlling it.

I was more concerned about the technical issues. Not very well-optimized and constant stuttering.
Click to expand...
Parry system isn't necessary but blocking should be in a game like this. I understand why the parry was removed because it made the game so much easier and the window of opportunity to parry was huge but that doesn't mean blocking needs to go with it
 
I do find that they filled the game to the brim with content, but not a lot of it was interesting content. It's really a shame, because I thought DS1 was a blast from start to finish. A lot of the new elements in DS2 (like the loot mechanic) didn't really fit the gameplay conventions already in place, which diminished a lot of the fun I would have otherwise had. Doing a jumping puzzle to get to a chest, only to find out it's full of useless greens is irritating, and I'm not sure why they did that.

This could have been remedied by, instead of randomizing gear, hand crafting a bunch of different gear, and reducing the number of chests to compensate. There's something very gratifying about completing a challenge and collecting something at the end that looks like it's meant to be there, and that someone put it there by hand.

DS2 definitely has DS1 beat on quantity, but I felt like that quantity sacrificed moment to moment quality.

I commend them for trying something wildly different, but what everyone expected was an improvement on the Zelda formula. It's sad that they effectively had no interest in doing that at all.
 
ultim8p00 said:
This game is way more technical than GoW3. Clearly you haven't played it. It has just frames, it has canceling, it has weapon-specific guards, it has summons, teleports, time-cancels, etc. They crammed just about everything they could into this game.
Click to expand...

I played it, I finished it. I'm not saying there aren't systems in place, more that they have no place. Enemy design and AI is kinda shoddy and gives no reason to use anything fancy.
 
ultim8p00 said:
This game is way more technical than GoW3. Clearly you haven't played it. It has just frames, it has canceling, it has weapon-specific guards, it has summons, teleports, time-cancels, etc. They crammed just about everything they could into this game.
Click to expand...

I've played it and I've got to say the combat was one of the weakest aspects of the game. I actually enjoyed the previous one as it was a lot more focused. Playing around with Thane shows how it's more on flash and less of depth. It's basically GOW (with a weird mix of Zelda-style combat) and a lot more powers. Playing DMC on the other hand forces me to reconsider what is needed for both long range (guns), when cancelling is of priority and how many "tactical" slashes needed before moving to the next enemy. In this game, you basically bait 1 enemy to your side (as long as the arena is big enough), you can use all your spin attack chain combos and then work your way up there, rinse-and-repeat.

Some enemies, like that big one at the earth level is so unbelievably cheap at Apacalyptic mode you wonder how lucky you could've dodged since this creature is capable of recovering his attacks regardless how well you timed your moveset causing many unnecessary deaths. Even worse, this takes place in an underground area with no room for maneuvering. The lack of flexibility in combat is just apparent hardly any focus testing was done.

Judging by the rest of the games aspects, had there been more time, money and refinement worked on this game, I would have no doubt in my mind this would've been a very different game. Heck, just looking at both endings is like day and night. I was disappointed considering Death is far more likable than War, pre-ordered it and it felt like the game couldn't keep it together.
 
GuitarAtomik said:
I've explained my reasons too many times to go in to detail but I still think DS2 is vastly superior to DS1 in almost every way. It is definitely flawed and runs out of steam towards the end but I had a LOT more fun with it than the first and I played them literally back to back. Too each their own.
Click to expand...
Same here. Flaws be damned, I had a MUCH better time with DS2 than I did with DS1.
 
Loved the first one and I seriously hoped for the sequel to improve over its flaws.
Turned out they did the opposite and destroyed a lot of what worked just fine.

Not a horrible game overall, but such a letdown for me as an appreciator of the first Darksiders.
 
Y2Kev said:
Game is such a disaster. That earth level...god...
Click to expand...

That was such a shitty part in the game. Unbelievable. I had high hopes for this game after thoroughly enjoying the original but they changed it all for the worst. The whole game felt soulless and was dull. There was little to do in the overworld, even though they were huge, which just made it worse. My disappointment of the year. Honestly don't care for the franchise now anyways, even if it was possible someone made a third.
 
How does the lack of a block button scream button mash? If anything it discourages mindlessly mashing because your position is far more important when you can't just tank hits. You get lots of potions, but there is limit to how many you can hold. I played it on Hard and they run out pretty quick if you're just trying to potion spam through damage.

The game has serious fundamental problems along with lack of polish overall but if you don't like the combat, especially compared to Darksiders 1, I don't know what to tell you.
 
ezekielpacman said:
I played it, I finished it. I'm not saying there aren't systems in place, more that they have no place. Enemy design and AI is kinda shoddy and gives no reason to use anything fancy.
Click to expand...

You mean...like the DMC series? The only difference is this game doesn't reward you for styling, so you don't have much of an incentive to be stylish.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Darksiders 2 is a masterpiece
2
82
5K
Chuck Berry replied
Darksiders 2 Deathinitive Edition’s Gen9 PC update makes the game worse
2
62
5K
keefged4 replied
New Darksiders Announced
News Trailer  2 3
144
9K
Grizzled Ghost replied
LTTP: Gears of War 2 (2008) via Series X BC
31
1K
EverydayBeast replied
LTTP: Tomb Raider (2013)
16
384
Gamerguy84 replied
Top Bottom