So now that the dust has settled a bit - Dark Souls 1 or 2, which is better?

Both games are vastly superior compared to Demons. I think DS1 is overall slightly better in level design and bosses. DS2 has better online play but still has issues with latency.

Technically, DS2 is vastly superior especially in PC. Being the lead platform helped a lot.
 
Souls 1 has better level design by a large margin (arguably best LD in a game ever).

Souls 2 made many great improvements to the game systems and the world is bigger.

I though the bosses in 2 were better but that's debatable.

Overall I give the nod to 1 but it's a close call.

Real answer: Play them all (in order).
 
ConcealedBlaze said:
This is crazy! Not in a bad way necessarily, it just blows my mind that people can have such different opinions. I personally find Dark and Demon's to be infinitely better than 2, but that doesn't make me right.
Click to expand...

Well I have a weird history with this series. I bought Demons on gafs praise and never played a game like it before. 4 hours later of feeling lost as fuck and felt like I really was getting nooooo where loosing souls after souls. I was soo pissed I returned it. You can say I definitely didn't give it a chance but to me now it seems like an alpha compared to DS2 or even DS,some really shitty game design in that game,.plus the Art design in DemS makes my eyes bleed its really fucking terrible...

DS was waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay better in everything but I still had this weird uneasy feeling every-time I played the game... Some people like it for that very reason but I didn't. I liked watching the game more than playing it. I only played it for like 40 hours on PC and having to use that mod which was great in the fact it didn't look like shit anymore but it NEVER ran well on my PC also FUCK GFWL, why isn't it steamworks yet...


DS2 I did have that same feeling with DS2 at first and the game didn't fully click with me until The Iron Keep which I thought before getting there that I would fucking HATE but its my favorite area in the game...

Its really just the """"B team"""" as everyone likes to call them but really I fucking loooove they way the game feels and plays. All I use is sweetFX and it fucking plays like a dream on my PC... I tried that awesome mod but it just makes it run like shit on my PC which sucks because I would love to mod the game... I've played over 128 hours pure vanilla... I just LOOOVE it not sure why... I really hope they make DS 1 steamworks one day...


My love for DS2 will most def make me go back and give the other games a chance, but it will be hard because its just not DS2. I'm one of the few that hopes the "B team" stays the main developer for the series in the future. I cant fucking wait for DS3 next gen :O
 
It's hard to get past the fact that much of the multiplayer is barely functional in DS1. Even if DS2 feel pretty derivative of the earlier titles, at least its features actually work.
 
jay said:
The game was still designed by humans. They could have figured out how to handle it without it seeming like bullshit to players, which is what it currently does seem like. Maybe make the hit connect and hurt but not trigger the animation. Maybe make a hit not connect if it would make the game seem jarring and broken by triggering a teleport-like animation. Saying the hit connected isn't a sufficient explanation for the odd scene I'm looking at.
Click to expand...

Woah I never said it looked good.
Yea it looks dumb that you get sucked into an animation. Dark Souls has always kind of sucked things into animations when a hit lands.
All I was saying was that what that gif is showing is not really a hitbox problem. The enemy swings his sword, it contacts the player mid swing while he is trying to dodge, and then sucks him into the animation. A hit box problem is like the one in that other gif, where the sentinel throws the shield, it clearly never touches the player, but he still takes damage.
 
I keep seeing people saying play them in order, but for someone interested in the series you do not need to do this. I got a lot of enjoyment from the series and I played it in reverse order. I would venture to say that DaS2 is the most friendly to new comers, and is potentially the game that opens the door to the series.
 
This is absolutely not enough time for the dust to have settled. Time has taken the edge off of a ton of Dark Souls 1's problems, like Blighttown, the broken networking, and the significantly worsening level design in the later half. Hell, a ton of the common complaints people have about DS2 are things straight out of DS1, they're just remembered more fondly than they were experienced.

case in point:

jay said:
The game was still designed by humans. They could have figured out how to handle it without it seeming like bullshit to players, which is what it currently does seem like. Maybe make the hit connect and hurt but not trigger the animation. Maybe make a hit not connect if it would make the game seem jarring and broken by triggering a teleport-like animation. Saying the hit connected isn't a sufficient explanation for the odd scene I'm looking at.
Click to expand...

This is how ALL of the grab attacks worked in DS1, they teleport you into the right place for the animation to work as long as the attack clips your hitbox.

That common complaints about how much worse some aspect of DS2 is, when it works identically to DS1, is pretty compelling evidence that the game is too new and emotionally charged for people to give a rational judgement about how the games compare.
 
For hit boxes, this is a better example.

ibiaw74FqlYe3.gif
Click to expand...
 
would be curious to add a second degree to this question and ask in what order you played them in. I have a feeling "first is best" may carry over, as I know people who love Dark but couldn't get into Demon's.

But I'd throw my hat in anyway:
Dark Souls 1 - better world, better story, better "hardiness" throughline
Dark Souls 2 - refined mechanics, reverse scaling, some well implemented bigger ideas, and generally much better online.
Demon's - masterpiece, the ur to the dark.
 
Sakura said:
Woah I never said it looked good.
Yea it looks dumb that you get sucked into an animation. Dark Souls has always kind of sucked things into animations when a hit lands.
All I was saying was that what that gif is showing is not really a hitbox problem. The enemy swings his sword, it contacts the player mid swing while he is trying to dodge, and then sucks him into the animation. A hit box problem is like the one in that other gif, where the sentinel throws the shield, it clearly never touches the player, but he still takes damage.
Click to expand...

Ok, fair enough. I used your post as a launching point to add my opinion on how the did it or didn't hit debate is sort of missing the point, but I didn't mean to call you out specifically as pro-goofy animation.

Vaporak said:
This is how ALL of the grab attacks worked in DS1, they teleport you into the right place for the animation to work as long as the attack clips your hitbox.

That common complaints about how much worse some aspect of DS2 is, when it works identically to DS1, is pretty compelling evidence that the game is too new and emotionally charged for people to give a rational judgement about how the games compare.
Click to expand...

This did happen in DS1 but many people, including me, noticed it less often (and there seem to be more actual misses connecting in DS2). I don't know if that's because it happened less often or if it was because the animations themselves that teleported the player were less grandiose and jarring. Your second paragraph indicates you don't think it happens more in the second game, but I don't think it's fair to assume people are being dishonest about their experience in order to shortchange the newer game.
 
For me, DS2 was more fun than DS. I think the biggest reason is the co-op working so well. Was a series changer for me, so much fun to help kill a boss or pvp for hours. Both games are epic tho, no doubt.

My favorite in the series is Demon's by a long shot.
 
Riposte said:
First off, you should play all the Souls game, ideally in order. Demon's Souls then Dark Souls then Dark Souls II. I would say they've improved to some degree with each game, although much less so between the two Dark Souls.

Dark Souls II boasts a solid improvement to the combat system/stats further aided with more varied equipment/working builds, improved netcode and multiplayer mechanics, and slightly improved enemies, although with less variety in types. Aesthetically, but not necessarily graphically, it is bit of a downgrade and it can be too forgiving within the level design due to poor bonfire placement and enemy depletion, although ultimately a harder game at times.

What Dark Souls has in its favor are better highs in the form of particular harsher segments of level design and a few series-best bosses like Smough/Ornstein (and those from the DLC, which it seems people are treating as if they were always there). The beginning of Dark Souls II is disappointing (and perhaps frustrating due to invincibility frames on dodge being tied to a stat) compared to the predecessor's, but it actually holds up better from the mid-point on and doesn't peak early (and bonfire ascetics means the game is less depended on NG+, which is a good thing).

The biggest issues with Dark Souls II are true for all the Souls games. If anything, they've put some effort, to varying degrees of success, addressing these with II.


EDIT: If the DLC for Dark Souls is being counted against Dark Souls II, then the dust has not settled until all Dark Souls II's DLC has been released, never mind updates and changes to area layouts. Moreover, it doesn't matter if dust is still being made or not, "durrr game x >>>>>>> game y" is always going to be a carelessly made disposable opinion.

EDIT: The issue with DSII's hitboxes is more than little over reported (or should I say, the same gifs posted over and over, becoming a meme, some of which are actually not legitimate examples). If you roll intelligently, then it's very unlikely you'll get hit. However, improving the invincibility frames through agility is necessarily if you want to make it feel like Dark Souls I.
Click to expand...

Perfect post, completely agree with everything said here. I personally find the enhanced mechanics and better controls in Dark Souls 2 such a huge improvement, that I have difficulty going back to the older games.
 
jay said:
Ok, fair enough. I used your post as a launching point to add my opinion on how the did it or didn't hit debate is sort of missing the point, but I didn't mean to call you out specifically as pro-goofy animation.



This did happen in DS1 but many people, including me, noticed it less often (and there seem to be more actual misses connecting in DS2). I don't know if that's because it happened less often or if it was because the animations themselves that teleported the player were less grandiose and jarring. Your second paragraph indicates you don't think it happens more in the second game, but I don't think it's fair to assume people are being dishonest about their experience in order to shortchange the newer game.
Click to expand...

I made no mention of dishonesty, because it's not needed for my point to be true. People routinely incorrectly recall what happened to them, and come to incorrect conclusions from even accurate recollections. There is a fair well known behavioral psychology experiment that is appropriate for the point. People are subjected to two painful ice baths, one for their left hand and one for their right hand. One hand for 60 seconds, and then after some time to warm up, the other at the same temperature and duration, followed by a slight warming of the bath and a further 60 second duration. Any rational assessment of the test will lead you to think that the first ice bath is the less painful, and indeed when they monitor people, both mechanically and by asking them to rate their own pain during the tests that is what we find. And yet for the second part of the experiment, they are given a choice of which ice bath to repeat, can you guess which one is overwhelmingly chose?
a full 80% of people who notice that the icebaths are different chose the longer more painful icebath thinking that it is the less painful one.
 
In terms of design, bosses, etc.

Dark > Demon's > Dark 2

In terms of how much I enjoyed them:

Dark > Dark 2 > Demon's
 
I never did manage to finish Demon's Souls (I'm really bad at these types of games).

I really should try it one more time. Been watching Kay play on youtube and it reminded me how fun it is to explore. Hopefully I have my old save.
 
I'd flip a coin on Demon's Soul and Dark Souls. I enjoyed those worlds much better than what was found in Dark Souls 2. Sprinkle in fatigue with the series and recycled content and it is easy to see why Dark Souls 2 is my least favorite of the series. I still enjoyed it though.
 
The proper order is Demons > Dark 1 > Dark 2

Demon's trumps both of them in level design and atmosphere by a mile. Dark absolutely nails the idea of being a 3D Metroidvania. Dark 2 screams "made by the B-Team".

Bring on Bloodborne
 
Vaporak said:
I made no mention of dishonesty, because it's not needed for my point to be true. People routinely incorrectly recall what happened to them, and come to incorrect conclusions from even accurate recollections. There is a fair well known behavioral psychology experiment that is appropriate for the point. People are subjected to two painful ice baths, one for their left hand and one for their right hand. One hand for 60 seconds, and then after some time to warm up, the other at the same temperature and duration, followed by a slight warming of the bath and a further 60 second duration. Any rational assessment of the test will lead you to think that the first ice bath is the less painful, and indeed when they monitor people, both mechanically and by asking them to rate their own pain during the tests that is what we find. And yet for the second part of the experiment, they are given a choice of which ice bath to repeat, can you guess which one is overwhelmingly chose?
a full 80% of people who notice that the icebaths are different chose the longer more painful icebath thinking that it is the less painful one.
Click to expand...

Sorry if this comes off as rude, but while that is interesting, it isn't in any way proof that DS1 has more goofy animation than DS2. Your point about how people could be wrong without explicitly lying is well taken, though.
 
Yoshichan said:
Dark Souls 2, by a fat fucking margin
Click to expand...
Yoshichan
I've played over 500 hours of DMC2 and consider the game good.
(Today, 11:11 AM)

The best thing about Dark Souls 2 is that pretty much all of the major and minor annoyances from the first game have been fixed. The framerate is much better, online actually works, there's a lot less grinding involved, balance is better, there's no Bed of Chaos equivalent, humanity is less annoying to use, there's a goddamned Flame Weapon spell finally, and so on and so on.

However, the one major, crippling problem with Dark Souls 2 is that it just feels so "gamey". Dark Souls has so many cool fucking moments that I can't even list them all. When I think of the coolest moments from Dark Souls 2, I kind of struggle. By far the best times were emerging to see
Drangleic Castle and the Dragon Aerie
for the first time, reuniting with our old friend
Ornstein
, and finding
what's left of Vendrick
. But for every moment like those, there's a lava castle on top of a windmill that shatters the immersion and undoes it all. It's a shame, really.
 
I have a huge affinity for Demons' Souls, having spent much more time with it. Its difficulty doesn't feel like an affectation, and its hub world system allows the player to learn each level and replay them more skillfully.
 
Dark Souls II tried to jam a lot of enemies into crowded spaces while simultaneously making more areas to explore at the expense of size. It was shocking how fast one could plow through most areas in the game. It was like each area was the size of my apartment.
 
Dark Souls 1 is the better game, but two is no slouch either. Demons Souls is the only one that I just cannot get into for some reason.
 
I preferred Dark Souls 2 over the original. They're both great games but I slightly prefer how DS2 controls and I found the online pvp to be way better (though still with faults like Soul Memory) compared to my experiences with the original Dark Souls pvp. It's also much easier to connect to friends and play with them in DS2.
 
Persona7 said:
Both games are vastly superior compared to Demons. I think DS1 is overall slightly better in level design and bosses. DS2 has better online play but still has issues with latency.

Technically, DS2 is vastly superior especially in PC. Being the lead platform helped a lot.
Click to expand...
Wow, came in here to post something like this.

I recommend all of the games, but if you can only play one, I think Dark Souls 1 is the pinnacle of the series so far.
 
ObbyDent said:
You are fucking high. The hitboxes in Dark Souls II alone make it a much less precise game.

uGY6cqY.gif
Click to expand...

Yoshichan said:
Dark Souls 2, by a fat fucking margin

+ Gameplay is more precise
+ The game is solid from beginning to end
+ 60fps
+ Better graphics
+ PvP (I've played ~500 matches in DkS2 and consider it really good compared to the lag-fest that was DkS1)

- Worse map design (<50% of DkS1 is genius)
- Worse bosses
Click to expand...

Yeah call DS2 anything but its by far the least precise gameplay in the series.

Also DS2 has horrible shitholes in the game such as The Earthenpeak, The Gutter, The Black Gulch,The Cove of Tseldora or whatever its called.

There are some really boring levels in there.DS1's only weak point is lost izalith and peopel somehow equate this with 50% of the game. Its asinine.

DS2 probably has better graphics technically but the art direction is infinitely superior in DS1.

DS2 suffers from annoying forced teleportation to Majula for leveling up.Tying rolling and animation speed to adaptability was a horrible decision as well.

With that said,DS2 is a great game especially when played on PC but it simply doesn't compare to the first game.
 
HeelPower said:
There are some really boring levels in there.DS1's only weak point is lost izalith and peopel somehow equate this with 50% of the game. Its asinine.
Click to expand...

I dunno, personally I felt that DS2 had the better level design. DS1 had the whole interconnected world thing going on, but I don't feel like it genuinely enhanced the gameplay in a meaningful way. I look at it and think "Wow, that's pretty interesting" instead of "Wow, this is great level design".

I had a lot more fun exploring the areas in DS2, especially the new one in the DLC.
 
Yoshichan said:
- Worse map design (<50% of DkS1 is genius)
Click to expand...

The only dud in Dark Souls 1 is Lost Izalith, which is still better than quite a few DS2 levels. Dark Souls does get worse towards the end of the game, but even at its worst the level design is a lot better than DS2's level design.

Ysiadmihi said:
I dunno, personally I felt that DS2 had the better level design. DS1 had the whole interconnected world thing going on, but I don't feel like it genuinely enhanced the gameplay in a meaningful way. I look at it and think "Wow, that's pretty interesting" instead of "Wow, this is great level design".

I had a lot more fun exploring the areas in DS2, especially the new one in the DLC.
Click to expand...

A very large proportion of DS2 levels are totally linear, unchallenging, and choked with bonfires.
 
Lord of the Fallens will be better than Dark Souls II at least. By 2016 its going to look like this

Bloodborne > Demon = Dark Souls > Lord of the Fallen > Dark Souls 2
 
1 has higher highs and lower lows than 2.
2 has no Undead Burg or Anor Londo, but has no Blighttown nor Lost Izalith either.

Overall, i'd say 2 - even considering the MASSIVE dropoff in environment\map design.
 
Imru’ al-Qays;123695021 said:
The only dud in Dark Souls 1 is Lost Izalith, which is still better than quite a few DS2 levels. Dark Souls does get worse towards the end of the game, but even at its worst the level design is a lot better than DS2's level design.
Click to expand...

Demon Ruins? Crystal Cave?
 
ConcealedBlaze said:
This is crazy! Not in a bad way necessarily, it just blows my mind that people can have such different opinions. I personally find Dark and Demon's to be infinitely better than 2, but that doesn't make me right.
Click to expand...

it doesn't make you right

but you're right
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Now the dust has settled, was Nintendo's direct preorder criteria fair?
35
829
nbkicker replied
Is Dark Souls 1 the best game this century? Ever?
2 3 4
195
4K
Soapbox Killer replied
Dark Souls 2 - Return to Drangleic 2025 starts NOW! 28.02-14.03
Event  2
59
3K
SkylineRKR replied
  • Poll
Skyrim vs Dark Souls 1
Opinion Poll Business  2
91
3K
brenobnfm replied
EA Is Shutting Down Origin on April 17, 2025 (Must now use the EA App, which doesn't support a 32-bit OS)
2
55
4K
rodrigolfp replied
Top Bottom