Worth playing through the original after Scholar?

[Bilderberg]

I've already played through scholar of the first sin multiple times on ps4. Are the changes large enough, besides graphics, to warrant re-purchasing the original on sale?

[BluGnu]

Nope.

Edit: I feel like my answer is lacking but here's my opinion. The SotFS version is better in every aspect (besides graphics) - bigger playerbase, more challenging, enemy and item placement that makes sense ... etc.

For example: Spoilers! In vanilla, the Dull Ember is found all the way in Iron Keep, The Bastille Key is after Belfry Gargoyles, The Staff of Wisdom is all the way in Dragon Shrine, just to name a few.

The only reason I got this version is because I can't play SotFS on my current system and I didn't want to wait until I upgrade to enjoy the game, if you already played SotFS, I don't think this version is worth it tbh.

[Nihilistic Mystic]

I mean you can, just to mix it up. Though I find vanilla a lot easier than SotFS in terms of enemy placement. I've heard the general consensus is otherwise though? I guess I'm doing it wrong XD

Scholar basically put me off DS2 because Forest of Fallen Giants is fully of so much ganky mob placement. I struggled with that zone so much and eventually just said scew it. After playing much DS3 I decided to fire up DS2 vanilla on steam (I have Scholar on PS4) and was ... kind of amazed at how easily I got on. I'd never really played the vanilla version and didn't realize so much was changed between the two.

I haven't gone back to Scholar yet as I figure maybe I just got a little less ♥♥♥♥ at Dark Souls but I might try it sometime soon just to check it out and see if it's still firmly focused on busting my balls at every turn.

[Bilderberg]

This person ranks Scholar as dead last in the series for him without going into why.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wBdhwLrct8Q&feature=youtu.be&t=16m41s

Obviously none of you can speak for him, but why would someone who enjoyed the base Dark Souls 2 hate Scholar so much?

[Nihilistic Mystic]

It was just the enemy placements for me. I did manage to get to Lost Bastile in Scholar and the courtyard area of that only proves the point all the more. There are archers everywhere over the first courtyard and I think something like three times as many dogs on the ground? They just slapped more mobs into certain areas and made them really not all that enjoyable to play through. I think most people will agree that DS combat does not shine when you're getting overrun by 3+ mobs who easily get right in your face. Some other things might have been changed/balanced to make the game better but... eeeeh?

Being completely honest, vanilla DS2 IS one of the easier of the series for me for the most part but just going and adding more mobs doesn't necesarily make it "harder" it just makes it taxing and somewhat cheap, in my opinion.

[Bilderberg]

Originally posted by Nihilistic Mystic:

It was just the enemy placements for me. I did manage to get to Lost Bastile in Scholar and the courtyard area of that only proves the point all the more. There are archers everywhere over the first courtyard and I think something like three times as many dogs on the ground? They just slapped more mobs into certain areas and made them really not all that enjoyable to play through. I think most people will agree that DS combat does not shine when you're getting overrun by 3+ mobs who easily get right in your face. Some other things might have been changed/balanced to make the game better but... eeeeh?

Being completely honest, vanilla DS2 IS one of the easier of the series for me for the most part but just going and adding more mobs doesn't necesarily make it "harder" it just makes it taxing and somewhat cheap, in my opinion.

Ya, I had a similar experience on my first playthrough of Scholar. It was without a doubt the most challenging game I've ever played. I kind of hated it. I watched joeseph anderson's video basically saying "don't use the lock on 100% of the time", and on my second play through I probably died no more than five times.

[Nihilistic Mystic]

So I started a new playthrough and have more or less breezed through the first couple of areas up to the Bastille. I guess it's not all that much worse? Though I'm much better at DS in general than I was when I first played Scholar aaaand I remembered all the tricks up to that point so nothing came as a surprise. The new shortcut in No Man's Warf IS nice and made that zone much easier to speedrun so, eh. I dunno? I'll keep forging on with it and see how bad it gets, I was wanting to try a dex build in DS2 anyhow so I'll take a break from my vanilla game and play Scholar till it pisses me off. :D

I will say that overall I'm finding a lot of things to like about DS2, though I can understand why some still rate it pretty low compared to the rest of the series.

[King Robert Baratheon]

Originally posted by BluGnu:

Nope.

Edit: I feel like my answer is lacking but here's my opinion. The SotFS version is better in every aspect (besides graphics) - bigger playerbase, more challenging, enemy and item placement that makes sense ... etc.

For example: Spoilers! In vanilla, the Dull Ember is found all the way in Iron Keep, The Bastille Key is after Belfry Gargoyles, The Staff of Wisdom is all the way in Dragon Shrine, just to name a few.

The only reason I got this version is because I can't play SotFS on my current system and I didn't want to wait until I upgrade to enjoy the game, if you already played SotFS, I don't think this version is worth it tbh.

I actually agree with this. While some people think SOTFS made some bad decisions SOTFS has those quality of life changes make the game much more fun and makes you much more efficient. You can do fight Lost Sinner with the room lit up earlier which gives you access to quite a few useful things faster. Also with the Bastille Key you can get a fire seed for a pyro build and in SOTFS in that same cell where you get the fire seed there's a Heide Knight that has a guaranteed drop of a Heide Knight weapon (the spear iirc). Also of course having access to infusions early on is a big deal. In the original Dark Souls 2 it sucks to not have elemental infusions early on because some builds don't feel complete unless you have your weapon(s), staff, shield or chime infused.

[Nihilistic Mystic]

I mean I beat the Sinner in the dark without much problem. As far as infusions go I guess it really depends on your build? I dunno. Both versions probably have their pros and cons. As far as "new player experience" I think SotFS can be an especially daunting and frustrating one.

[King Robert Baratheon]

Originally posted by Nihilistic Mystic:

I mean I beat the Sinner in the dark without much problem. As far as infusions go I guess it really depends on your build? I dunno. Both versions probably have their pros and cons. As far as "new player experience" I think SotFS can be an especially daunting and frustrating one.

I can beat the Lost Sinner in the dark fine as well but with some builds it's frustrating when you can always see her but you can't lock on. Like as a caster (pyro, sorcerer, cleric) it can be annoying if your spells are more powerful than your melee and you can't really use them against the Lost Sinner while it's dark in her room. Like as a hexer you want to get 30 int & faith asap but that usually means your melee stats are just enough to use a simple weapon like a longsword or rapier because of everything else you need to level up as well. That's when infusions would help casters a lot. Now you can fight a boss like the Lost Sinner but still do decent damage since your weapon now scales with int or faith (or both).

[Kwama57]

I only have played Sotfs but really, this game is built around this odd feature to make enemies disapear after killing them a dozen times to help progress... As a new player i could only move on one enemy at a time in that tower of heide, and it was really not a fun design...
Anyways; this game brilliance is in build variety and the dual wielding more than world design. DLC is great in that, though.

[Nihilistic Mystic]

Built around it? I wouldn't say that. SotFS definitely ups the mob counts in certain areas but they're still managable. Vanilla DS2 despawned enemies as well. It's not a core mechanic, I think it's just there to help people who might be struggling to beat a boss from having to kill all the mobs every run. It makes farming stuff kind of irritating though.

SotFS is definitely NOT where I would recomend a Souls newbie start off, even though the bosses in DS2 are pretty easy for the most part. Some levels are downright brutal in how/how many enemies get thrown at you.

[76561198006416723]

pve-wise, i think i like vanilla better than scholar. i've got both installed, and i usually end up playing vanilla over scholar. if you find vanilla for cheap, i guess it's worth a try.

[Nihilistic Mystic]

I've honestly gotten to where I'm of two minds on the matter. They both seem to have some good, some bad as far as mob placements. SotFS definitely adds a lot of ganks but they're manageable if you don't panic (or are just expecting them) whereas there are a few spots in vanilla which like to bog you down with heavier enemies. So it's kind of a toss up.

The thing which has been swaying my own opinion more lately, playing between my two games on either version, is that SotFS seems to have way better hit detection. I was playing vanilla this evening after spending the past few days playing Scholar and catching up on areas I'd past in the other game. I kept feeling as if I was getting nicked and smacked when I shouldn't have been. All the more curious since my character in vanilla has a bit higher of an Agility stat so should have LESS instances of getting caught on the edge of a hitbox during a roll, not more.

Overall, despite my initial loathing of SotFS for the ganks and general "ha ha, what you gonna do now" enemy placements, I think I'm actually coming to like it better. It DOES tangibly feel more polished than the vanilla game in a lot of ways. It looks better, the controls feel better and... yeah.

So maybe vanilla is worth playing simply because the broken-ass hitboxes provide more of a challenge? Or maybe I'm imagining the whole thing on that count.