Been banned the last few weeks, ironically for referencing Dark Souls in OT in a way that I guess the mods didn't get/appreciate.
Been wanting to elucidate my feelings on DS as I finally had a chance to play through it, especially because I've been annoyed by the prevalence of people dismissing DS2 and From Software every time it comes up.
I played Dark 2 (and Demon's) before this one and I can see where people prefer Dark 1. The first half of this game, in particular, is pure brilliance. The level design, the boss variety, the places to explore and the secrets to find. Everything is purpose-built and feels like it has a reason for being there.
However the severe drop in quality as you get toward the second half is worse than anything in Dark 2. It becomes less fun and the bosses don't have the same fair challenge to them. All of the Lord Souls are straightforward fights that aren't really mentally challenging, but force you to just die and learn (Bed of Chaos), or are just easy roll-and-punish affairs.
And the difficulty is highly overstated. Ornstein and Smough is a well-designed, fun encounter but it isn't as hard as Sentinel bros or Belfry Gargs to me. I loved the O&S fight but I beat it on my second try on my first play through and my first try on my second (did it in reverse order the second time). I wouldn't say it's anywhere near the "it'll turn you into a man!" difficulty level that's always assumed in discussions about this game. That said its true that DS2 simply doesn't have any boss fights that are as fun and engaging as O&S.
I think I felt the difficulty in DS was largely not very challenging for the same reason people felt that way about DS2. The first one you play will always be the more difficult, since you have to learn the systems, the tells, how to provoke enemies, what sides to roll to and when to roll back, etc. To me, Smelter Demon, Darklurker, Belfry Gargs and Sentinel Bros are all harder than anything I encountered in DS. However if I had cut my teeth on O&S, Gwyn, etc. maybe I'd think it was DS2 that was too easy.
That's also not even mentioning the design of the bosses themselves, which is awesome in DS1. There is variety and atmosphere at a level DS2 can't match. This is where DS pulls ahead quite a bitthe designs overall, and the NPCs in particular really add to the world, where in DS2 everyone feels like they're lost and floating with no real connection or reason for being, outside of the Emerald Warden.
All in all:
DS
+ level design and exploration. Illusory walls that make sense. I found all but two on my first go
+ atmosphere and NPCs (where is DS2's Yurt?)
+ better stat allocation
+ great enemy designs and a few awesome bosses, neat NPC invasions like Mildred, Kirk and the exiled King guy
+ proper amount of playful humor sprinkled here and there
+ Gwynevere's giant boobs
- severe drop in quality of levels and exploration once you get Lordvessel
- that people can spend hundreds of thousands of souls on upgrading their gear and use non-scaling weapons to stay at very low SL and invade you on your NG play through actually had me missing Soul Memory. SM isn't perfect but getting my day ruined multiple times by people who were stacked with lightning +10 weapons at SL25ish was annoying
- lots and lots of connection errors trying to co-op. I played through entirely solo the first two runs but it seems like I wouldn't be able to summon anyone anyway if I tried. 9/10 attempts just end in error.
DS2
+ longer game with more places to go and more bosses to kill
+ runs at 60fps on PC, has very little (if any) connection errors with multiplayer
+ better lore. I know this won't be a popular opinion but I thought Drangleic's story, with Vendrick, Aldia, Nashandra etc. was more intricate and interesting than Lordran's
+ consistent quality throughout the game, even improving in the second half
+ I like the bonfire ascetic system
+ covenants are more meaningful
- putting agility on it's own dedicated stat was a poor choice.
- a few too many "dude with a weapon" bosses
- enemies just a bit less fun overall. No real quirky encounters like the squid guys in Duke's Archives who go crazy when the alarm is played
- the actual window for execution after a parry is weird. I like DS's instant execution better.
All in all, I do agree with the masses that DS1 is the better of the two, but the disparity between them isn't anywhere near what people claim. DS2 is a very good game. My opinion is echoed here in the Eurogamer review:
Been wanting to elucidate my feelings on DS as I finally had a chance to play through it, especially because I've been annoyed by the prevalence of people dismissing DS2 and From Software every time it comes up.
I played Dark 2 (and Demon's) before this one and I can see where people prefer Dark 1. The first half of this game, in particular, is pure brilliance. The level design, the boss variety, the places to explore and the secrets to find. Everything is purpose-built and feels like it has a reason for being there.
However the severe drop in quality as you get toward the second half is worse than anything in Dark 2. It becomes less fun and the bosses don't have the same fair challenge to them. All of the Lord Souls are straightforward fights that aren't really mentally challenging, but force you to just die and learn (Bed of Chaos), or are just easy roll-and-punish affairs.
And the difficulty is highly overstated. Ornstein and Smough is a well-designed, fun encounter but it isn't as hard as Sentinel bros or Belfry Gargs to me. I loved the O&S fight but I beat it on my second try on my first play through and my first try on my second (did it in reverse order the second time). I wouldn't say it's anywhere near the "it'll turn you into a man!" difficulty level that's always assumed in discussions about this game. That said its true that DS2 simply doesn't have any boss fights that are as fun and engaging as O&S.
I think I felt the difficulty in DS was largely not very challenging for the same reason people felt that way about DS2. The first one you play will always be the more difficult, since you have to learn the systems, the tells, how to provoke enemies, what sides to roll to and when to roll back, etc. To me, Smelter Demon, Darklurker, Belfry Gargs and Sentinel Bros are all harder than anything I encountered in DS. However if I had cut my teeth on O&S, Gwyn, etc. maybe I'd think it was DS2 that was too easy.
That's also not even mentioning the design of the bosses themselves, which is awesome in DS1. There is variety and atmosphere at a level DS2 can't match. This is where DS pulls ahead quite a bitthe designs overall, and the NPCs in particular really add to the world, where in DS2 everyone feels like they're lost and floating with no real connection or reason for being, outside of the Emerald Warden.
All in all:
DS
+ level design and exploration. Illusory walls that make sense. I found all but two on my first go
+ atmosphere and NPCs (where is DS2's Yurt?)
+ better stat allocation
+ great enemy designs and a few awesome bosses, neat NPC invasions like Mildred, Kirk and the exiled King guy
+ proper amount of playful humor sprinkled here and there
+ Gwynevere's giant boobs
- severe drop in quality of levels and exploration once you get Lordvessel
- that people can spend hundreds of thousands of souls on upgrading their gear and use non-scaling weapons to stay at very low SL and invade you on your NG play through actually had me missing Soul Memory. SM isn't perfect but getting my day ruined multiple times by people who were stacked with lightning +10 weapons at SL25ish was annoying
- lots and lots of connection errors trying to co-op. I played through entirely solo the first two runs but it seems like I wouldn't be able to summon anyone anyway if I tried. 9/10 attempts just end in error.
DS2
+ longer game with more places to go and more bosses to kill
+ runs at 60fps on PC, has very little (if any) connection errors with multiplayer
+ better lore. I know this won't be a popular opinion but I thought Drangleic's story, with Vendrick, Aldia, Nashandra etc. was more intricate and interesting than Lordran's
+ consistent quality throughout the game, even improving in the second half
+ I like the bonfire ascetic system
+ covenants are more meaningful
- putting agility on it's own dedicated stat was a poor choice.
- a few too many "dude with a weapon" bosses
- enemies just a bit less fun overall. No real quirky encounters like the squid guys in Duke's Archives who go crazy when the alarm is played
- the actual window for execution after a parry is weird. I like DS's instant execution better.
All in all, I do agree with the masses that DS1 is the better of the two, but the disparity between them isn't anywhere near what people claim. DS2 is a very good game. My opinion is echoed here in the Eurogamer review:
. Took my time and made a second character, got to the cathedral of blue, went in the arenas and nothing. Uninstalled the game afterwards and decided to focus on 1 instead.
