Join VIP to remove all ads and videos
My second favorite game in the series
Hands down the worst of the Souls games. New mechanics are terrible and unecessary (torches, adaptability, health drop). Almost every area is far too dark. Only two or three genuinely beautiful locations in the entire game including the hub Majula. Enemies and bosses are fine, BUT there is terrible pace and scaling. You will find mini-bosses that are harder than the main bosses. There is no sense of progress, no feeling of each area/boss being more challenging than the last. Lore is good, story is just a rehash of Dark Souls 1 but in a new land. Overall, this is the most boring entry in the series and the only FromSoft game I've ever played that I DIDN'T want to start a NG+ run after.
What I don't like about DS2. increasing difficulty but poor rewards I don't like trying to get nothing of proportionate value. silly hitbox errors in The Pursuer and Sir Alonne's thrust when dodged nearby, your character is sucked into their swords. Aldia, Scholar of the First Sin an unnecessary battle, fighting for no reward. The way to the Blue Smelter Demon and Lud and Zallen, the King's Pets really annoyed and annoyed me... Ignore those things, DS2 and DS3 are different and if you want to try your stress test, you should choose DS2.
I like the darkness of DS2 and the music in the majula.
I realize this view will be unpopular, but I find Dark Souls 2 the most artistically significant on these points: Dark Souls 1 feels like an epic. It emphasizes player glory in a gothic, fatalistic setting. More specifically, the game stresses activity, not thematics. The sole theme tied into the action is vanity (in both senses, hence the paradox). Beyond that, there is no elaboration and very few elements into which thought can be sunk. While this frees players to interpret their experience, the players' understanding outweighs the game itself, an artistic approach with which I disagree: meaning is inherent, not invented, especially in the case of virtue. Thus, Dark Souls 1 is more of an entertainment than a learning experience. Dark Souls 2 feel like a fairy tale. The story IS the thematics; you are playing the game's themes as a part of them rather than playing in a setting where themes are merely present. Consequently, the game examines what it actually means and thus is meaningful. Dark Souls 2 presents philosophical concepts and insights alongside symbols into which they are tied. From this, we are given a vantage point with philosophical and even spiritual significance, as well as a premise from which we can agree or not (which is our right as a free-thinking audience). Dark Souls 3 is a tedious rehash of Dark Souls 1. It defeats the "Dark Souls 1 is the most meaningful game" sentiment. By repackaging the themes introduced in 1, it does not expand upon anything. We see the same tropes, the same mysteries, the same resolutions (and where it does expand, it does not explain itself; the universe also shoots into digressions - i.e. Bloodborne and Sekiro- ruled by the same limiting principles. Even with entire other titles, this only delivers more insight into the same facets. It is more a marketing method than philosophical exploration). Thus, with the exception of Dark Souls 2, the Dark Souls mythos is static and much less meaningful than its community credits. On these grounds, I find Miyazaki Hidetaka and his team to be overcredited and worse storywriters than they are regarded. I favor Dark Souls 2 as the series' jewel because unlike the other Souls entries, it actually has a soul.
Old Iron ***** is gay
Can any body help me iam playing PS4 edition and as you no nothing is were it once was, iam try to find the ring of life protection but don't no were to start.... Could somebody please help.?