I've seen multiple people say that the lore in the DaS2 DLC tries and fails to continue what DaS1 started.
Is this true? In what way?
The DLC of Dark Souls 2 is completely different. It's about a couple of kingdoms getting corrupted and falling to ruin from the undead curse. It has nothing to do with anything in Dark Souls 1.
Overall the DLC are all great. They all have a unique style to them that makes them distinct.
It just plays into the awful sequel baitey concept of cycles that plagued Dark Souls 2 even more. They go full Bioshock Infinite with the "There's always a King. There's always a Manus Shard. There's always Undead" notion so that they can forever rehash the same concept through cycles and make the same game forever.
>When it's not even out
If you think Demon's and Dark Souls were good why wouldn't you be interested in Bloodborne since it's the third game in that series from Miyazaki (The guy responsible for those games being good).
There should be a third ending you get from idling in the throne room long enough where the player character doesn't take the throne or walk away, instead just staying there forever as a silent guardian and killing anyone who tries to sit in the throne
Literally who gives a shit, in what way would that matter at all? Ugh, well the Dragons were never turned immortal, they simply were immortal existing from the beginning. And they were immortal because of their scales so unless your Undead was a lizard then it's unlikely they they're related.
Not as much so, the majority of his videos are actually about playing the games and also other games. He generally discusses game design and creates community challenges, plus by living the weeaboo dream of spending a lot of time over there with his Japanese waifu he often managed to provide some interesting insight from a different perspective and provide info you wouldn't get elsewhere. The lore speculation was similarly pointless to Vaati though, but that was just something ENB did on the side and he generally just stuck to summarising item descriptions, plus he stopped relatively quickly after covering the core stuff and didn't scrape the bottom of the barrel.
The quality of ENBs channel goes up and down but it's usually actually about games and has something worth hearing. Vaati's channel is literally just him writing fanfiction 95% of them time.
Best fucking King.
The DLC's were the only good parts of Dark Souls II
>play the inferior Dark Souls game
No thanks Matt.
When Dark Souls 1 was fresh this was a bit more interesting. The game was great and the core story of the game worked pretty well, the fragments of lore added to the sense that the game world was a living, breathing place and had a history. Even though you knew that intentionally most of the questions didn't have answers it was fun to draw connections where you saw them. But eventually most people had their fun and moved on though, but there was a small group of people that obsessed over it like mad people and started declaring their speculation as fact and getting angry when people didn't care or agree with them. That was where Dark Souls lore speculation just became this pathetic annoying thing built around attention whores pretending their fanfiction is fact and misinforming casual fans. Miyazaki has several times discussed how there aren't really meant to be answers, and whether he wrote answers and cut them out or just never came up with answers to begin with is both unknown and irrelevant.
So Dark Souls lore speculation while initially fun already became trite and pathetic before Dark Souls 2 came out. Throwing Dark Souls 2 into the mix as well with its shit story and lore not even written by Miyazaki just makes it a mess. Caring about it is pointless because there are no answers, trying to make them is fan fiction and the people talking about it have put in 1000 times more effort in than the people writing it. I do get the appeal to an extent, the early days of talking about Demon's and Dark Souls stuff was neat but like with everything obsessive people have just gone too far with it.
You see people spending days obsessing over and getting angry over the description for something like a ring in the game. They're all presenting their views as facts and thinking they've solved the puzzle when in the reality behind it is some Japanese guy going "Eh, that sounds like a cool background for a magic ring I guess. Moving on!" and spending like four minutes on it.
They said I was mad.... well THEY'RE THE MAD ONES!
I wouldn't say amazing. They learned lessons from the main game and the DLC is noticeably better in terms of level design and enemy placement, but there are still plenty of issues with them. It wasn't up to the standards of the better parts of Demon's and Dark Souls, they're average/a little below average by those games standards. Plus they still have all of the issues that Dark Souls 2 has that aren't to do with the level design.
It was nice to see that the B team wasn't totally terrible, but it still wasn't all that great.
Really? Sunken King was easy as shit but goddamn did I love the scenery and level design. I didn't even notice the Imperfects just walking around if you look down from the first bonfire.
I think I like Old Iron King a lot because of Raime and Alonne. Brume Tower was challenging as fuck for me.
>I didn't even notice the Imperfects just walking around if you look down from the first bonfire.
I didn't notice that at all. That's awesome.
Did a different team make the DLCs? Because they have level design like Dark and Demon's, rather than the straight line, disconnected design of Dark 2.
If you play the games and invest think about it for a while you'll understand in no time.
If you don't have the time or motivation to do that go watch MatthewMatosis's video, he goes over a lot of ways the second game doesn't deliver, but the plot is one of them.
This, I liked that Dark Souls was something different after Demon's Souls. We didn't need to see the future of Boletaria and a new setting with a new story is much more interesting. Again Bloodborne is taking the gameplay ideas of the series and applying them to another new setting and new story which is exciting to me.
Dark Souls 2 just rehashing most of the elements of Dark Souls 1 and not being it's own thing was a huge bummer. Like you said it was just riding on the coat tails of that game and wasn't interesting in itself.
This kind of attitude is something I'd like to see more of in games.
>Speaking to IGN, Sakaguchi said he thinks every game should always be a new experience, rather than more of the same.
>“I don’t like sequels. I hate them,” he said.
>“That’s why every single Final Fantasy had a new cast of characters, a brand new story, [and] a different system.”
The DLC's had far more intricate level design than the main game. Every area in Dark 2 was sprawled along a straight line, the DLCs were all interwoven and complex, like you were actually exploring a frozen city or a temple.
The DLCs were like Dark design. They stand out in contrast to the rest of Dark 2.
How? He's totally right. The DLCs are much like Demon's and Dark Souls in that there's lot of exploration to be done, you feel like you're delving through dungeons and you find many side areas, alternate routes and shortcuts back. The only area in Dark Souls 2 like that was the Lost Bastille, everywhere else just had simple boring linear level design with one path through.
>Entering Shulva and seeing the Dragon Sanctum in the distane
>Entering Brume Tower and seeing the massive chain that leads to the main tower
>Entering the gates of Eleum Loyce and seeing the massive blizzard and the faded Grand Cathedral in the back.
>Dark Souls 2 just rehashing most of the elements of Dark Souls 1 and not being it's own thing was a huge bummer.
It should've done more to differentiate itself, but I'd argue that most of its design is inspired by Demon's Souls more than Dark Souls.
The only decent parts of Dark Souls II was FoFG and the Bastille. Aerie and Shrine looked cool but the rest was literally shit.
DLC's brought Dark Souls II from mediocre to above average
I think Dark 2 had a few interesting areas, such as Shrine of Amana and No Man's Warf. Most of it was shit, though. I couldn't stand Huntsman's Copse/Harvest Valley. It was like a WoW zone.
Their solution to the bosses being too easy is to introduce bosses that are like some of the average bosses in Dark Souls 1, but hit really really hard. So you have a lot of slow but not really exciting boss fights.
The Dragon Rider is the saddest excuse for a boss fight I have ever seen. I remember reading a vidya magazine where a dude said he got his shit wrecked a bunch of times against him. It was the stupidest shit ever.
The Alonne Knights have the crest of drangleic. Vendrick was the king of the whole continent while OIK was just king of Iron Keep, Venn, and a few other places.
Reviewers are beyond retarded. The IGN interview of Dark Souls said Gaping Dragon was a mid-game boss and its vomit attack could permanently destroy your equipment.
>but I'd argue that most of its design is inspired by Demon's Souls more than Dark Souls.
People repeat this a lot but it's not really all that true. There are three things you can point to to make that argument:
>1. Lifegems being sorta like a return of grass from Demon's Souls.
This is half true, but regardless grass was something in Demon's Souls most people agree was bad. Whether it was PvP or PvE you could waltz around with 99 virtually instant full heal grasses and also an assortment of other grasses each stacked upto 99 which was casual as fuck, Dark Souls implementing the Estus system was a massive improvement to the series that largely fixed that problem. Introducing Lifegems while not instantaneous like grass was a huge step backwards and re-fucked up the health system.
>2. Being able to warp anywhere.
Again half true, but that's not exactly how Demon's Souls worked. The way levels were built and Archstones were placed was fundamentally different, Dark Souls 2 still has the structure of Dark Souls with Bonfires everywhere and not every area being strictly a large zone with a boss at the end. Archstones only existed at the start of extremely large areas unlike the frequent Bonfires in Dark Souls 2 and Dark Souls 2 often has no boss or multiple bosses in some areas. Sure you can warp everywhere but that's not exactly how Demon's Souls worked, there's more to it than that.
>3. Majula being like the Nexus complete with MIB
This applies fairly well but there still remain many important vendors scattered around the world too, it's again not inaccurate but it's a half and half between Demon's and Dark Souls design.
Dark Souls 2 does sorta re-introduce a few Demon's Souly elements but even when it does they're still closer to Dark Souls in design than Demon's Souls and outside of a small handful of things the game is overwhelmingly more based on Dark Souls(though not as good) than Demon's Souls.
>every enemy that's just an oversized person
All the DLCs were uniquely interesting and challenging.
Sunken King focused on a straightforward approach the boss with enemies that are extremely tough and have a ton of poise.
Old Iron King had the Smelter Wedges that involved searching around and activating the tower to progress.
Burnt Ivory King had backtracking but with a completely new spin on it with the snowstorm and it's disappearance.
Overall the DLCs are fucking great and are a great addition to the game, the only reason problem I had with them is the fact that they are SO different from the vanilla game that they make the vanilla game play like shit. And they are pretty short compared to some areas in the vanilla game. AotA is better than Three Kings DLC, but not by much.
yeah the lore and story are both lackluster compared to the rest of the series.
I agree with matthewmatosis on ds2.
Ds2 is still a pretty alright game though.
Not him, and I'm not "most people" but the grass was inferior to estus because you could just fucking farm that shit all day and abuse full moon and new moon grass like crazy. the estus limited the number of sips you could take so you had to take your health more seriously.
DS2 went way overboard on the consumables imo
Souls franchise discussion across various websites since the franchise started, it's not like people take official polls for that sort of thing but it becomes community consensus. Plus most critical discussions of Dark Souls will point to how big of an improvement the Estus system was.
I mean it's not like it's possible to defend being about to carry around like 500 massive healing items that take effect virtually instantly could possibly be defended as a good design discussion in a game that is allegedly meant to be challenging or at the very least punish mistakes.
Granted, I just came back for a No Bonfire/No Death Run so I won't complain. All that shit added in with Bonfire Ascetics and all the mechanics involved with that sort of explain what they wanted to do but it still fumbles
>tfw I actually like Dark Souls 2's lore and it's less bombastic story and more about hopelessness and chaotic change
Sucks that people can't appreicate anything unless it's literally BAD GUY GOOD GUY, EPIC QUEST, GOALS AND MISSION
>most people call it cheap only because they saw onlyafro do it
Oh please, people were fucking raging about grass in Demon's Souls long before Dark Souls even came out and Onlyafro was even a thing. Just because you're a late comer to the series and first heard that from Onlyafro doesn't mean everyone else did.
If it weren't for the DLC's and Vendrick being added, I wouldn't have given it much thought because it didn't make too much sense.
Like why do we need the Giant's Kinship? How the fuck does the Ashen Mist Heart work and what the hell is it?
Apart from those 3, the world branches from Majula in a very linear manner and the mechanics function more similarly to Demon's Souls as well. The hyper armor poise and the steady loss of HP through hollowing liken it more to Demon's Souls than Dark Souls. It definitely has more in common with DeS than DaS at the very least, with most of the similarities to DaS coming from chunks of the story.
isn't that the meme guy?
I just finished a runthrough of DeS and by 1-3 i had more high level grass than i even knew what to do with.
It made an invasion last forever because it's so fast to use as well.
Replace all the DLC enemies with actual variations (have recoloured "Elite Alonne Knights" in the iron king DLC inplace of the generic soldiers, mini smelter fire demon things and stuff like that)
Put the handclaw gulch fuckers in the sunken dlc as wallmasters everywhere, shit like that
Put heide knights/loyce knights/faram armour guys who are actually allready hostile and patrolling in the ivory king dlc
Those actually have an explanation. They're experiments of Aldia's and since he fucked with basically every inch of the land that's why they're in places like the gutter, lost Bastille and the aerie.
Why are Heide Knights so cool
And looking at the artbook again, I just realized that the Grave Wardens with the sickles are callbacks to the Old Hero
The game had a larger focus on time travel that was cut due to Bamco's deadlines and FROM's incompetence. It hasn't been directly stated but you can assume from some cut content, like loli shanalotte and the aged feather.
I enjoyed the dlc. In fact I feel like I got a lot more out of the story for them. But like souls games are weird. You have to dig and dig to get the full story for anything. Open endedness and shizz
>have recoloured "Elite Alonne Knights" in the iron king DLC inplace of the generic soldiers
I'm like 90% sure those Alonne Knights are recolors. They have polished armor sets.
Gameplay is good and pretty much the same, the ones who say otherwise are super nitpicky.
Atmosphere and enemy/boss designs are very forgettable though. Half the enemies and bosses are just knights. I'm not kidding. It gets so boring really quickly.
I mean even if it wasn't generally accepted as true by most fans of Demon's Souls you still have yet to respond to the actual argument made in addition to that claim.
How could you possibly defend being able to carry around 99 easily farmable massive healing items that take effect virtually instantly as a good design decision? Especially considering that the game is meant to be challenging or at the very least punish mistakes. And that in addition to that first stack of 99 there are also a large number of other healing items too with similar potency each of which can be carried as a stack of 99.
I mean that doesn't make Demon's Souls a bad game, it's a great game and arguably even the best in the series. But it's not perfect and even the most diehard fans of the game can see how the healing system in the game was flawed.
he is terrible.
but he does have a point. I was in a similar situation in the same area of the game. by that time anyone invading or not has a ridiculous amount of high level healing grass so the fight just went way too long
People that played Demon's Souls competitively all agreed to not use grass and grass spamming in general was constantly considered a massive problem by the community. PvP battles tend to take a long ass time when both players are carrying 198 instant full heals each.
They went crazy and got possessed by the Chaos or something. It's also speculated that's what happened with OIK, but from what I've heard the whole "Ichorous Earth" thing is a mistranslation.
I agree with your post. They really tried to explain things from DaS1 that were better off left untold and mysterious and it just really doesn't work.
The bosses are great in the DLC and the experience is probably noteworthy, but they really should've just tried to create a whole new story.