I'd agree with this. I'd say I still vastly like DS3 over DS2, but it does feel like it forgot a few of the better things from DS2 and BB which in part affects build viability
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
RTTP: The game that shouldn't have been named Dark Souls II
- Thread starter Nev
- Start date
I'd agree with this. I'd say I still vastly like DS3 over DS2, but it does feel like it forgot a few of the better things from DS2 and BB which in part affects build viability
Killer Queen
Banned
It wasn't the putting Dark Souls 2 over Dark Souls 3 that made me think it was bait, but putting Bloodborne dead last, which will upset a certain group of people if you call it anything less than the second coming of jesus.
I don't do PvP so covanents never really bothered or affected me, but IMO Dark Souls 3 is the strongest entry in terms of level design, melee combat and lore. For me personally, I think people mistake revisiting and expanding on something to be fan service. Dark Souls 1 left a lot unanswered, and Dark Souls 3 is more just a direct sequel to 1 so it's not unreasonable to expand on what was built before it. I feel like Dark Souls 2 fucked up the continuity and the only reason people feel like its fanservice is because Dark Souls 2 is so far removed from everything else, which was one of my biggest dissapointments with the game. It didn't really build upon anything outside of humanity and it threw most things out of the window. It may not have been predictable, but to me it was entirely unremarkable. Wheras Dark Souls 3 is about the lasting effects of their predecessors and how legends and the world changes over time, which I think is something really important that people look over.
test_account
XP-39C²
Dark Souls 2 is my most played Souls game. I played it for nearly 400 hours and got to NG+7 or something. I dont know what it was about the game, but i just found it fun to play for a long time. I didnt play the Scholar of the First Sin part of the game (i was done with the game when that came out), but i did play both DLCs. Definitelly worthy of the Souls name, in my opinion, it has all the stuff that a Souls game should have. Lore wise, i personally never really felt a big connection between the 3 games. The stories are quite different, same are the world/areas. But i never really went too deep into the "hidden" messages and such. Dark Souls 1 is my least played Souls game. I beat it, but didnt bother beating NG+, nor going for the platinum trophy. Still a great game though, but it didnt catch my attention as much as Dark Souls 2.
DoubleTake
Member
Thank you! Just because Dark Souls 2 chose to ignore/bypass most of what Dark Souls 1 set up does not mean that Ds3 is completely fanservice(there are some spots though). Dark Souls 3 is just doing what you expect a sequel to do, actually expand on what the first started.
I really liked the game but this guy was a huge pain in the ass. It's the secret boss by those caves with the spitting statues right?
Sgt. Kabukiman
Banned
I get you. I think we were just looking for different things. You don't care much about covenants and I don't care much about the lore... Which is partly why I liked DS2 so much. DS2 and 3 are sequels that serve two different audiences and that's probably why they are so polarizing.
Regarding Bloodborne... Man, fuck guns. Give me my shield back!
I'm almost done with it.
I too have found the DLC better than the base game, outside of really liking the iron keep. Going to try to do it all, outside of the blizzard area in the 3rd dlc. Tried it a few times and decided I had enough of that bullshit and just went to the Sunken DLC to finish the game.
Ashamed I'm not good enough to get the Alone Sudoku ending
I too have found the DLC better than the base game, outside of really liking the iron keep. Going to try to do it all, outside of the blizzard area in the 3rd dlc. Tried it a few times and decided I had enough of that bullshit and just went to the Sunken DLC to finish the game.
Ashamed I'm not good enough to get the Alone Sudoku ending
Just like DS. Honestly, I don't have a very high opinion of Sakuraba's work on the series. I barely remember any track from either game.
DS III is by far the best. Yuka Kitamura is so good.
I still like DS2 quite a bit, but I agree it has by far the weakest level and enemy design in the series. I think you're being generous saying the Lost Bastille and Forest of the Giants are on par with the rest of the Souls games.
To me the most glaring comparison is Sen's Fortress versus Earthen Peak. The latter is obviously supposed to fill that slot in DS2: a mid-game trial by fire filled with devious traps and cool new enemies. It just falls completely flat because the level design is terrible and the enemy placements are nonsensical. Why are the grave wardens there, exactly? It makes no sense thematically and makes even less sense to see them alongside green poison men, weirdly redesigned manikins, and sexy desert sorceresses. From even ruined what could have been one of the more memorable bosses in the game (Mytha) with a poorly balanced healing gimmick that you have to negate via the least obvious environmental puzzle in the history of video games.
The less said about the giant mace knights in the dragon shrine, the better. Infinite stamina enemies are not fun in Souls games.
To me the most glaring comparison is Sen's Fortress versus Earthen Peak. The latter is obviously supposed to fill that slot in DS2: a mid-game trial by fire filled with devious traps and cool new enemies. It just falls completely flat because the level design is terrible and the enemy placements are nonsensical. Why are the grave wardens there, exactly? It makes no sense thematically and makes even less sense to see them alongside green poison men, weirdly redesigned manikins, and sexy desert sorceresses. From even ruined what could have been one of the more memorable bosses in the game (Mytha) with a poorly balanced healing gimmick that you have to negate via the least obvious environmental puzzle in the history of video games.
The less said about the giant mace knights in the dragon shrine, the better. Infinite stamina enemies are not fun in Souls games.
Adam_Vania
Banned
Killer Queen
Banned
I feel ya, and I can totally understand why PvPers would prefer 2 and while I like it, 1 and 3 cater to me more but I don't hate any game in the series.
As for Bloodborne, I never really liked using the guns either, I always use the two handed weapons, but I always play Dark Souls the same way. Sword and board or just full on sword. Didn't mind not having a shield too much though since it put me out of my comfort zone which was fun.
FWIW: I was very unhappy with the way UGS were handled in Dark Souls III, though it seems like they fixed them from what I've heard, so I'm looking forward to my next playthrough.
O&S
Iron golem
Gwyn
Capra demon (but I can see why some people wouldnt like it)
artorias and sif have nice themes too..
all these are better than dark souls 2 base game trash...
SoulUnison
Banned
I like how you start your long rant with a complete misunderstanding of what an area is even supposed to be.
Doors of Pharros is a Covenant PvP area. Opening up the weird little cubbyholes and passages isn't to benefit the player, but to disadvantage your drawn-in opponents.
And then the rest of your post reads mostly as "it's different so it sucks" and/or "I heard this is unpopular, so I need to justify my place on the bandwagon."
Doors of Pharros is a Covenant PvP area. Opening up the weird little cubbyholes and passages isn't to benefit the player, but to disadvantage your drawn-in opponents.
And then the rest of your post reads mostly as "it's different so it sucks" and/or "I heard this is unpopular, so I need to justify my place on the bandwagon."
It's kind of funny how almost every song is DS2+DLC is trash, then Alonne just walks in like "sup bitch, heard you like choirs"
Actually now that I think of it Aldia may have one of my favorite themes in the series. It's this sad, plodding melancholic piano+violin piece that's just kind of off in a way that's hard to describe.
Ivory kings theme is great too
Actually now that I think of it Aldia may have one of my favorite themes in the series. It's this sad, plodding melancholic piano+violin piece that's just kind of off in a way that's hard to describe.
DoubleTake
Member
DS3 DLC Spoilers ---> Lemme just say..there a reason we find
Earthen Peak in the Dreg Heap.
There's a clunkiness to the entire game that always feels off to me that isn't present in any other game in the series. OP articulated it really well.
It was also the point where i stopped caring about the lore in souls games. I like hearing the odd bit of it here and there but it all started to get a bit stupid. Ditto for 3.
It was also the point where i stopped caring about the lore in souls games. I like hearing the odd bit of it here and there but it all started to get a bit stupid. Ditto for 3.
Your underselling DS3 here a lot. First up, Sorcery isn't shitty. It's (as always) stupid good in PvE and decent in PvP as well. I won most of my fights when I used my sorcery build and that was an unoptimized one (started from STR class and respecced cause I don't have time/dedication to make a new character). You just gotta condition your opponent like a zoner in a fighting game.
I've seen quite a few people use Pyromancy quite efficiently, never used it myself though.
Miracles aren't great I'll give you that.
Ultra weapons just got buffed.
There are a lot of dex weapons though? Basically all the Katanas, curved swords not to mention all the quality weapons that favor dex.
I've seen my fair share of different playstyles. Seen quite a few successful tanks, sorcerers, and obviously also the fast katana guys so I don't really get what you're talking about here. It's not as varied as DS2 (no other Souls title is) but also not as restricted as BB.
Also Bloodborne build problem totally stays. What good are all those weapons requiring specific builds when the game has no option to respec? Once you settle on your build a lot of the games weapons become inefficient. Not everybody has time or dedication to play through the game multiple times.
InsaneFandom
Member
I don't really understand the sentiment that Dark Souls 2 isn't a 'proper' Dark Souls game.
Overall level design might be weaker & the world isn't as inter-connected but it certainly didn't feel that different from the first game to me.
I do think people were overly critical of it. The first game also had areas that seemed poorly thought out (Demon Ruins & Lost Izalith) and personally I preferred Drangleic Castle to Anor Londo.
I also guess I didn't appreciate the interconnectedness of DS1 as much as some people did, sure there were times where you can see where you've been/where you're headed and think 'oh that's cool', but there were also times where I was a bit 'err what?' like Blighttown->great hollow->ash lake. Most of the time I didn't care much either way though
Overall, I'd put DS2 on par with DS1 - maybe slightly below.
Demon's is definitely still my favourite though (not played DS3 yet)
Overall level design might be weaker & the world isn't as inter-connected but it certainly didn't feel that different from the first game to me.
I do think people were overly critical of it. The first game also had areas that seemed poorly thought out (Demon Ruins & Lost Izalith) and personally I preferred Drangleic Castle to Anor Londo.
I also guess I didn't appreciate the interconnectedness of DS1 as much as some people did, sure there were times where you can see where you've been/where you're headed and think 'oh that's cool', but there were also times where I was a bit 'err what?' like Blighttown->great hollow->ash lake. Most of the time I didn't care much either way though
Overall, I'd put DS2 on par with DS1 - maybe slightly below.
Demon's is definitely still my favourite though (not played DS3 yet)
Greatest Ever
Member
Damn. I love Dark Souls 2 as it was my first entry in the series I beat, but that was a good write up TC. Good job.
Killer Queen
Banned
It's because the game is quite the departure from the first and the third game, not just in gameplay but just about everything which makes it the black sheep of the series. You'll probably understand more after you play Dark Souls 3. And while Demon Ruins/Lost Izalith may be the weak parts of Dark Souls 1, pretty much all of the levels in the base game are no better outside of maybe Iron Keep (The DLC does have some good ones though). It's not just about interconnectedness, but how many ways you can approach and run through a level that make it feel more real and alive which I think is one thing Dark Souls 3 does incredibly well, and to a lesser extent Bloodborne. Whereas Dark Souls 2 often feels like you're being shuffled through a series of hallways, to a room before back to more hallways with the occasional open area. When you're playing a game that's exploration based, the number of ways you can explore said area is kind of a big deal. That's just my two cents though.
Drillary Clinton
Banned
Dark Souls 2 gets a lot of hate it doesn't really deserve. Is it the worst Souls game? Absolutely. The bosses and level design pale in comparison to the first game. But you know what? I think it had a lot of necessary QoL changes that bled into the subsequent games, the best PvP systems of the series, and the most variety in viable builds. It's still a good ass game at the end of the day and the DLCs were all pretty good.
ThatChairMan
Member
It certainly had issues, but it is still my most played Souls game. The build variety is just insane given all the choices, on top of the ability to powerstance almost every combination.
Man, do I miss powerstancing whips and their non-butchered moveset.
Man, do I miss powerstancing whips and their non-butchered moveset.
Benzychenz
Member
Yep, DS2 is far and away the worst game in the series.
You can preach all day about how great the build variety and PvP systems are, but if the moment to moment gameplay is so much worse than the others that's entirely irrelevant to me.
The core gameplay systems are way too sluggish, attacking, rolling, healing, it all feels so much worse than it's brethren. Even with level ups you're forced to put points into adaptability just to make the game feel better to play.
Then there's the weirdly balanced healing. They limited your estus (especially early on), but then added in a farmable healing item anyway which didn't make a whole lot of sense.
Level design is trash. Empty rooms, empty corridors, packs of enemies, it all feels like levels rather than parts of a world (your example of Anor Londo vs Drangleic Castle is spot on). I do appreciate the variety in areas and visuals, but it's a hollow victory with the above issues.
Then the boss fights. My lord. You have way too many big knights, you have a big rat that moves eerily similar to Sif, and a literal pack of trash mob rats. The few inspired designs (like the frog thing) are so underwhelming as well that the initial awe disappears in about 10 seconds.
Those three aspects are the bread and butter to me, and the reason I loved DS3 so much. Playing that really highlighted DS2's missteps even more. The core gameplay was silky smooth, dodging felt great, attacking felt great (I used a katana + pyro build), healing felt great.
The levels were great, large areas, multiple paths, cohesive world.
But the boss fights, lawwwd. So many fantastic designs with great moves to match them.
Aldrich is one of the most stunning designs in the series, with a cool battle to match it. The humanoid battles are great. Abyss Watchers, Pontiff, Dancer, Dragonslayer Armor, just fantastic all around.
You can preach all day about how great the build variety and PvP systems are, but if the moment to moment gameplay is so much worse than the others that's entirely irrelevant to me.
The core gameplay systems are way too sluggish, attacking, rolling, healing, it all feels so much worse than it's brethren. Even with level ups you're forced to put points into adaptability just to make the game feel better to play.
Then there's the weirdly balanced healing. They limited your estus (especially early on), but then added in a farmable healing item anyway which didn't make a whole lot of sense.
Level design is trash. Empty rooms, empty corridors, packs of enemies, it all feels like levels rather than parts of a world (your example of Anor Londo vs Drangleic Castle is spot on). I do appreciate the variety in areas and visuals, but it's a hollow victory with the above issues.
Then the boss fights. My lord. You have way too many big knights, you have a big rat that moves eerily similar to Sif, and a literal pack of trash mob rats. The few inspired designs (like the frog thing) are so underwhelming as well that the initial awe disappears in about 10 seconds.
Those three aspects are the bread and butter to me, and the reason I loved DS3 so much. Playing that really highlighted DS2's missteps even more. The core gameplay was silky smooth, dodging felt great, attacking felt great (I used a katana + pyro build), healing felt great.
The levels were great, large areas, multiple paths, cohesive world.
But the boss fights, lawwwd. So many fantastic designs with great moves to match them.
Aldrich is one of the most stunning designs in the series, with a cool battle to match it. The humanoid battles are great. Abyss Watchers, Pontiff, Dancer, Dragonslayer Armor, just fantastic all around.
cyber_ninja
Member
I'm playing through it at the moment and enjoying it despite all the flaws. On another hand i cannot finish it and play DS3.
I love Dark Souls 2. It's not as great as Dark Souls 1, Demons Souls or Bloodborne. But it's far better than whatever Dark Souls 3 attempted and failed at trying to be.
It had flaws, but a memorable world/levels, soundtrack, enemies, and pvp. I really enjoyed it.
It had flaws, but a memorable world/levels, soundtrack, enemies, and pvp. I really enjoyed it.
Greatest Ever
Member
It's not a DS2 hate thread.
LegendofLex
Member
I feel like anyone saying Dark Souls II isn't a good Dark Souls game didn't actually play most of the back half of the first game...or the back half of the second.
I wouldn't call it a masterpiece or anything, but it's not a trainwreck, either. And I wouldn't say it's any less worthy of being a numbered sequel than Zelda II, Final Fantasy II, Super Mario Bros. 2, Super Mario Galaxy 2, Metroid Prime 2, or really any other numbered sequels in history.
I wouldn't call it a masterpiece or anything, but it's not a trainwreck, either. And I wouldn't say it's any less worthy of being a numbered sequel than Zelda II, Final Fantasy II, Super Mario Bros. 2, Super Mario Galaxy 2, Metroid Prime 2, or really any other numbered sequels in history.
ShemhazaiX
Member
It's my favourite Souls game. Only one better than it is Bloodborne in my opinion. The build variety and sheer amount of options puts it far ahead of the other two in the trilogy. Was so disappointed in Dark Souls 3 when they removed the power stance dual wielding and pyromancy / dark magic scaling with both faith and int which allowed for more interesting builds.
I agree it was a little more clunky, but it was just more fun for me.
I agree it was a little more clunky, but it was just more fun for me.
It's more like it's a good game in it's own right but a bad game when compared to a Miyazaki game.Coming off from Demon and Dark Souls you can feel something is not right. Miyazaki pays extra attention to details ,atmosphere and design which is why he is able to create Bloodborne which always get love and praise among gaffers. DS2 is lacking that which is why you get nonsense like tying your iframes to ADP stat, incoherant transition from one area to a other like the elevator from earthen peak to a place filled with lava.etc
Playing DS3 the first make me feel right back at home with DS1 and DeS.
Nocturnowl
Member
I still like DS2 a lot but it's hard to disagree with most of the OP, had to chuckle at the term clown cars for the iron keep gauntlet, bloody hell I have no idea whose idea aggro samurai stream was, took Iron Keep from one of my favourites to a lower category.
Fortunately the old iron king DLC was damn good so that made up for my scholar run.
Never noted how Gamey Drangelic Castle was until you pointed it out, I think by that point I'd given up on expecting a more consistent world and just embraced the obstacle course stylings of DS2.
I am gonna say though, Sir Alonne's grab has one of the most ridiculous hitboxes I've ever been caught by in Souls, sometimes I go into my captured videos on the PS4 just to marvel at one baffling clip I saved of said move, with that in mind I can never dig that fight as much as most seem to, plus the run back is tedious.
Fortunately the old iron king DLC was damn good so that made up for my scholar run.
Never noted how Gamey Drangelic Castle was until you pointed it out, I think by that point I'd given up on expecting a more consistent world and just embraced the obstacle course stylings of DS2.
I am gonna say though, Sir Alonne's grab has one of the most ridiculous hitboxes I've ever been caught by in Souls, sometimes I go into my captured videos on the PS4 just to marvel at one baffling clip I saved of said move, with that in mind I can never dig that fight as much as most seem to, plus the run back is tedious.
JudgmentJay
Member
Dark Souls 2 is my most played Souls game at something like 700 hours. Its build variety, multiplayer, and NG+ changes are its saving grace. It's still the worst Souls game because while those things are fun and add replayability, they're not what make a good Souls game to me.
Also, I like every zone in the second half of Dark Souls 1 more than most of Dark Souls 2's zones. Shaded Woods, Harvest Valley, Earthen Peak, Brightstone Cove, and the multiplayer areas from the DLCs are the worst areas in the series. They all make Lost Izalith look like a masterpiece.
GIANKRATOS
Member
Seriously. As someone that always play with a melee character, it was a nightmare. Ridicolous damage and artificial difficulty by adding another identic copy of the boss (not even a single unique moveset to make it more intresting), the path to the boss was a pain in the ass and even required a human effigy (i have farmed so many human effigies in Majula that those skeletons could probably destroy drangleic with a fart) every time. I can't believe i finally beat it today for the first time ever on my second try after not touching the game for a looong time lol. The only boss in the entire series (including demon's and bb) that really gave me problems. What a frustrating boss.
Wesley-Sigma
Member
I found it to be enjoyable -- but I get why people dislike it.
Killer Queen
Banned
And how Is that exactly.
Iva Demilcol
Member
I feel that recently there have been a good amount of people that have recognized the merits of DSII and have tried to fight against the notion it "doesn't deserve to be called Dark Souls II".
This is the most recent defense of DSII I've seen:
https://youtu.be/8_ePR99A4yk
This is the most recent defense of DSII I've seen:
https://youtu.be/8_ePR99A4yk
Has tons of flaws, but isnt the rehashed borefest that Dark Souls III was. It was different, and a lot of it worse than the original, but at least didnt felt like fanfiction. "Oh look, Anor Londo. Again." Talk about cheap emotional thrill.
Edit: I never was a PS4 player until recently, when I finally had the opportunity to play Bloodborne, wich to all intents and purposes, is my Dark Souls III. That game is fucking amazing. So cratively bankrupt was the team when they were making 3, that even one of the most interesting ideas, the dark firelink shrine, was straight up stolen from Bloodborne. Just sad.
Edit: I never was a PS4 player until recently, when I finally had the opportunity to play Bloodborne, wich to all intents and purposes, is my Dark Souls III. That game is fucking amazing. So cratively bankrupt was the team when they were making 3, that even one of the most interesting ideas, the dark firelink shrine, was straight up stolen from Bloodborne. Just sad.
Killer Queen
Banned
Opposed to the notion that nothing you do in Dark Souls 2 matters because everything is a cycle and every major character in the main game is really just a reincarnation of some other character in the original game despite this making little sense and never being explained fully and having really no significance to the plot whatsoever but purely existing as actual fan service.
Like having Ornstien exist in Dark Souls 2, hundreds of years later, corrupted in some random area, for no reason and with the exact same moveset.
I mean, talk about lazy and rehashed am I right?
That kind of cheap emotional thrill?
It's like some of you have never heard of the word. I don't see why it's bad that the most one of the most important areas in the series was revisited to continue the story and show its decay post Dark Souls 1, along with do something new with the area and show more of it (Irithyll). Calling the game a rehash (especially when defending Dark Souls 2) comes off as lazy and overly defensive.
Surely you jest.
Chaos2Frozen
Member
I've never really felt the difference between DS2 and DS3 to supposedly make one better than the other. Other than the knowledge that's Miyazaki had a hand in one of them.
If anyone watches Super Best Friends, it's like that moment in I think DS3 playthrough where Pat goes "Isn't that great?! Don't you see how much better it is than in DS2?!"
The others were like "....No I don't get it, its kinda the same thing..."
If anyone watches Super Best Friends, it's like that moment in I think DS3 playthrough where Pat goes "Isn't that great?! Don't you see how much better it is than in DS2?!"
The others were like "....No I don't get it, its kinda the same thing..."
The Xtortionist
Member
DS3 is fuckin' great. The game has the most buttery smooth difficulty curve of the series, great level design with sprawling, complex environments such as Undead Settlement and Cathedral of the Deep, some fantastic bosses, and the quality remains pretty steady throughout the game (Smouldering Lake is a low point, though it's completely optional and easy enough to quickly run through if you just want the loot). Also the best Souls soundtrack imo.
And Mound-makers. Can't forget Mound-makers.
Not sure I'd rank DS3 at the top of individual category for the series (bosses, level design, etc), but it executes all its elements at a very high level, and with great consistency. Not my absolute favorite Soulsborne, but probably number 2 or 3 after Bloodborne and (or tied with) Demon's.
V1LÆM
Gold Member
I think it's a bit unfair to say it does't deserve to be called Dark Souls. It's a sequel so what you want them to do? Keep it the same? They at least tried changing things about and I respect them for that. I really enjoyed DS2 and infact it's the soulsborne game that I spent most time on for a single playthrough. Only bloodborne beats it over multiple playthroughs.
I loved how much there was to do. The areas were interesting. A lot more variety. I thought the graphics were fine. Bosses are probably the weakest in the entire series. I only can think of 2 that gave me bother. Combat felt awkward and clunky. I got used to it mostly but even at the end of the game it just wasn't as enjoyable as DS1. The changes to health, humanity, and estus took a bit to get used to but wouldn't say it was bad.
I'll definitely be replaying it at some point. Very enjoyable game despite the flaws it has. Fully deserving to be called a Dark Souls game.
I loved how much there was to do. The areas were interesting. A lot more variety. I thought the graphics were fine. Bosses are probably the weakest in the entire series. I only can think of 2 that gave me bother. Combat felt awkward and clunky. I got used to it mostly but even at the end of the game it just wasn't as enjoyable as DS1. The changes to health, humanity, and estus took a bit to get used to but wouldn't say it was bad.
I'll definitely be replaying it at some point. Very enjoyable game despite the flaws it has. Fully deserving to be called a Dark Souls game.
old manatee
Banned
Dark Souls 2 was a step back in some ways, but a step forward in others. I like it more than Dark Souls 3 at least.
I seriously don't understand anyone who says DS2 plays better than DS3 or 1
Play DS2 for 10 mins, then switch right away and play DS3.
In DS2 what you experience is basically: shitty rolls, getting hit midroll ( unless you invest 403829 levels in ADP), sluggish attacks, crappy estus that recovers too slowly, healing gems ( ??? I guess they realized during developpement how crappy estus was so they decided to add these too? dunno), gank squads everywhere, boring and cheap level design ( I sure loved the path to the smelter demon in iron keep...), the whole ''enemies dont respawn if you kill them too much'' mechanic.... And last but not least, the most garbage bosses of the trilogy
Meanwhile, DS3 feels tight as fuck to play, rolls are satisfying and smooth, the estus system is good and works well, the level design is consistent and good except for like 1 area, music is way better
I mean, just open DS2 and roll once, then open DS3 and roll once... the difference is like night and day
Play DS2 for 10 mins, then switch right away and play DS3.
In DS2 what you experience is basically: shitty rolls, getting hit midroll ( unless you invest 403829 levels in ADP), sluggish attacks, crappy estus that recovers too slowly, healing gems ( ??? I guess they realized during developpement how crappy estus was so they decided to add these too? dunno), gank squads everywhere, boring and cheap level design ( I sure loved the path to the smelter demon in iron keep...), the whole ''enemies dont respawn if you kill them too much'' mechanic.... And last but not least, the most garbage bosses of the trilogy
Meanwhile, DS3 feels tight as fuck to play, rolls are satisfying and smooth, the estus system is good and works well, the level design is consistent and good except for like 1 area, music is way better
I mean, just open DS2 and roll once, then open DS3 and roll once... the difference is like night and day