From Software Dark Souls II poll

[nomask7]

I mainly just want a quick idea of the codex consensus regarding the game. And about who votes what.



I know it has disappointed many fans, but that's a common thing when very specific expectations are involved.

Bonus question:

Does it have bigger or smaller or same size areas as Dark Souls? Like, do you run into a boss every ten minutes (unless you die a lot)?

 

[Hobo Elf]

It's more of the same. World and boss design was hit and miss just like it was in previous games. Lot of people lost their shit over the fact that some areas don't loop around illogically like they did in DaS1, but I wasn't bothered by that. Wasn't disappointed with the game at all.

 

[Makabb]

More of the same, which is high quality action game.

 

[Damned Registrations]

No option between 'the same' and 'very different'? Eh.

A lot of shit is different. The world is less open and connected, the lore is a lot more haphhazard and less coherent, and a lot less subtle. It's also a lot more forgiving, with more frequent and easily found bonfires, and easier ways to restore/maintain your max health, and it has cheap healing consumables like Demon's Souls had. Not to mention being able to reallocate your core stats. It also has a lot more really obscure/rare weapons and armour that can only be acqured through tons of grinding. The torch thing is dumb; in order to make them relevant in anywhere besides the gutter, you'd need to turn the lighting down so much you'd miss out on 95% of the scenery and it'd make searching places incredibly tedious because the light radius is so small.

It made a lot of improvements too though. The stats are much more balanced now, spells have more variety, pyromancy is no longer incredibly imbalanced, dual wielding is actually a thing. Most of the bosses are of a hgher quality in general, and a lot of the areas are better designed on an individual basis, with shortcuts and alternate routes and such. Weapons have a lot more variety, and the boss weapons aren't all total shit like they were in Dark Souls. The covenants are handled much better as well. The NG+ system is a major improvement as well. I think they did a better job with the characters as well, and it was definitely one area where I appreciate the lack of subtlety. Having to go through insanely convoluted motions to get to the end of the story arcs for pretty much anyone in Dark Souls 1 was retarded. I like that now they just reveal a bit more every time you find them in a new place, instead of needing a very specific order of events.

As for area size... I guess that depends on how you define 'area'. You do run into a boss about every 10 minutes, but that is because there are a lot more bosses (and ~10 minutes between bosses was probably about right for the first game too, if you're not dying or trying to scour every inch). The overall game is significantly larger, and broken into a bunch of different linear paths radiating out from the hub town. I'd have vastly preferred a more open, connected world, but that would have been a lot of work for a map this large.

 

[CyberP]

Overall gameplay: ...possibly DS2.

Difficulty: DS1 is probably better in that regard.

Level Design: possibly DS1, though both were pretty good.

Atmosphere: DS1, though 2 had its moments.

Music: both are so lacking in this regard and that is a big shame I think. It was likely intentional of the devs to take a "less is more" approach and I think it works very well, but I'd have liked more areas with music.

Story: I do not care.

 

[CyberP]

I went for "as good but very different", which is the closest I could find for "as good but somewhat different in the little details", details of which are pointed out in Damned Registrations post.

 

[Gozma]

It is often startlingly ugly, much uglier than DS or even DeS (there are tons of places with literal square rooms with the same tiled texture on at least the sidewalls, sometimes all six). Having to loading screen back to Majula constantly to with no payoff was also terrible.

The Bonfire Acetic thing is really cool. It lets you do the fun parts of NG+ without boring you out of your skull linerally replaying shit. I honestly thing that saved the game for me; I had a pretty negative opinion after I'd just played straight through to the end.

Voted, "more of the same" because outside of the tyranny of small differences it is. Caveat is that I did play the DS1 DLC and haven't played DS2 DLC.

 

[Jaedar]

Voted slightly worse.

Ds2 has some cool things compared to dark souls, but its mostly the same while also removing some of my favorite parts of the original. The connected world is gone, the ability to sequence break and kill lategame bosses 30 minutes after start is gone. There's also some others things I really dislike, like the fact that a lot of weapon types only exist after drangleic castle, and the complete linearity after that point.

And the story is not super important, but Dark souls 2 fucks it up so horribly I don't even.

 

[Tehdagah]

(...) the ability to sequence break and kill lategame bosses 30 minutes after start is gone. (...)

That was a glitch.

 

[AngryEddy]

A lot worse for as follows:

1. Levels are poorly designed at best, or even unfinished [try looking up when you first arrive at the Undead Crypt, "OOOPS UNFINISHED CEILING TEXTURES!" fucking rock apes.

2. Difficulty is designed around trash mob spam instead of AI, probably because it's cheaper for the company to spam trash mobs than design coherent and unique AI.

3. Outside of killing shit, the entire game revolves around grinding: want to upgrade your armor, grind for twink titanite, want to get unique armor, grind trash mobs for it.

4. Soundtrack is awful, there isn't a single piece of music that I would listen to recreationally.

5. The fact that every weapon and armor set are unviable save for a few OP fast strike swords and spears, and Jesters set.

6. Again, the game being so poorly unoptimized they might as well not even have magic in the game.

7. A majority of the bosses being rehashes of previous Souls bosses, or actually being direct 1:1 copies. Fucking EMBARRASSING.

If I come up with any more, I'll be sure to post my thoughts.

 

[meanwhileInPoland]

It did not have that "wow " factor when you play your first Souls game but overall second game with 3dlc and latest patches is my favourite. Lots of small gameplay/ui/ etc. improvements makes it almost imposible for me to play previous games. I noticed i get realy frustrated at DeS /DaS lately

 

[CyberP]

A lot worse for as follows:

1. Levels are poorly designed at best, or even unfinished [try looking up when you first arrive at the Undead Crypt, "OOOPS UNFINISHED CEILING TEXTURES!" fucking rock apes.

I wouldn't say poorly designed. Unfinished from an art direction standpoint, yes. From a gameplay standpoint they are mostly solid. It also may not be an
interconnected world (to the extent of DS1 anyway) but each individual area is fun to explore and keeps you on your toes. Iron Keep, the place with the poison Snake Lady/Medusa, that castle you got to and then end up up top with the dragons. Fun adventures. By today's standards this is 10/10 level design anyway, probably why I am making excuses.

 

[Phage]

The objectively correct answer is "somewhat worse" and if you disagree then you are empirically incorrect, no room for discussion.

 

[dr. one]

Voted better than the original.
In its vanilla state I´ve found the game slightly worse than DS1, because the various improvements it brought to the table were not quite enough to make up for its relative lack of coherency and the linear last third, but I consider the current "full package" (with Lost Crowns + patches) to be overall more varied, better balanced and mechanically superior game to its predecessor and it´s quite a bit bigger to boot.
Basically, higher amount of good quality content + better minute-to-minute gameplay = win.

 

[DragoFireheart]

Non-DLC

More of the same.

Some areas were interesting and well done, such as Forest of Giants and Bastille. Others were underwhelming, such as Aldia's Keep and Dragon Aerie. Bosses were hit or miss. Copies from previous souls games were meh.

Weapon progression is horribly imbalanced: you get stuff like Drangleic Sword but can't fully upgrade it until you're nearly done with the game.

DLC

Best Souls areas, both in design and execution.

 

[StaticSpine]

my opinion
*
as good but very different

the atmosphere is worse, but the fun gameplay is still there

 

[Jaedar]

(...) the ability to sequence break and kill lategame bosses 30 minutes after start is gone. (...)

That was a glitch.

I don't think I mean what you think I mean.

Both Sif and Pinwheel are intended to be killable early. As are the 4 kings, and the two hydras(if you count them as bosses). I don't even know what glitch you are referring too.

 

[Declinator]

DLC

Best Souls areas, both in design and execution.

While I've played only the Crown of the Old Iron King, I have to say that particular DLC featured some of the worst areas in any Souls game thus far. Especially the horrible run to Sir Alonne. Whoever designed that level should be fired.

That said, the two original bosses were very delicious and some of the best bosses in the entire series.

 

[Blackguard]

Voted as good but very different some parts were better, and others worse. Haven't played the DLC yet and got SotFS pre-ordered so I'll save my final judgement until after I've beaten that. I mean it's only fair considering I'm comparing DS2 to PtDE. I kinda doubt that version will fix the my two major problems which were the atmosphere, and the zones not being connected like in DS1.

Either way DS1 is one of the best games I've ever played so being about the same level is extremely high praise.

 

[oddech_wymarlych_swiatow]

Dunno if it's just me but on my PC DS2 runs incomparably better than DS1.

 

[Gay-Lussac]

To me it just felt different, and I can't put my finger on what was it (maybe it was I who changed?). I finished both Demon's Souls and Dark Souls, neither of which in one straight up addicted playthrough, but rather through some large chunks of playing followed by large breaks, I'm guessing because the difficulty and tension had a tendency to wear me out after a while. But Dark Souls 2 wore me out faster and I didn't really feel the urge to keep coming back to it, and thus I never finished it. May also have something to do with the fact that it was the only one I played with keyboard and mouse, other two were on the PS3. So I voted somewhat worse, but it may just be personal bias.

 

[DragoFireheart]

AngryEddy found a video you might like:

 

[AngryEddy]

AngryEddy found a video you might like:

Watching now, so far up to 5 minutes. I'm liking MatthewMatosis much better, this German shiteater is just giving the audience his opinion instead of showing footage of the failures of the game.

 

[DragoFireheart]

AngryEddy he goes off the deep end a few times.

 

[AngryEddy]

AngryEddy he goes off the deep end a few times.

I sure hope he starts reading Mein Kampf quotes, that's the only thing that would redeem this video. Still watchin though, gonna go all the way.