Why dark souls 2 is hated when dark souls 3 is adored ?

[Drunk Herald]

I know this is a touchy subject but I don't care, let me explain myself :

I started to play fromsoftware games with elden ring, which I loved. So I said to myself, I'm going to do the dark souls licenses, starting with dark souls 1. And I REALLY enjoyed dark souls 1, the level design, the pnjs (like frampt), the cryptic lore which explain me to ring the bells, the fire, the bosses like Great Grey Wolf Sif, the connected level design, etc ...

Then I started to play dark souls 2, which was a downgrade of dark souls 1, pnjs are quite ordinary, level design is much more linear, hitbox are quite bugged, bosses are random, etc, but the game has its charm and mechanics: pharos stones etc. And the environnement is quite varied. Okay, not extremely good but it's ok.

Now I am playing dark souls 3 and I am disappointed, I agree that graphics are good and hitbox less bugged, the ost is nice, but pnjs are useless or ordinary like in dark souls 2, level design is extremely linear, we can't upgrade armors, I have tons of titanite which serves to nothing, so I sell them, There is camp fire everywhere. Bosses are quite random too, no attachment. I have clearly troubles enjoying the game. I am going to enter Irithyll, I hope the game will enchant me, but right now, forgetting hitboxes, I don't understand what makes dark souls 3 really better then dark souls 2.

No offenses, this is my thought, as a newbie ^^

[potato]

ds2 is only hated by a vocal minority

i think ds2 is the best one

[urabe mikoto]

Dark Souls 3 is better because literally everything is better

[aws]

literally just because "level adp bro"
ds2 is actually good there just is really goofy hitboxes and i frames.

also, its just a running joke in the community, a lot of people like the game they just dog on it cause its funny. and like the other guy said its just a minority of people anyway

[Deruvia]

The core of the issue is that Dark Souls 2 is the sequel to Dark Souls 1. It added alot of small things, some better (More items, more ring slots, offhanding/power stance, etc), some worse (adaptability, despawns). And all of that gets compared to its predecessor. Dark Souls 2 is so linear! Riposting is different! Areas and bosses are either frustrating or forgettable!

As far as I've seen, several people are disappointed similarly with 3. Linearity, dodge roll heavy, references. But I like it. I have control, even if my shield-using habits are greatly disincentivized. It's the most fun for me to replay, even if 1 is still my favorite, and to be honest, it's hard for me to go back to 1.

Treat each game as its own thing, and they're all relatively fine. Each has its quirks.

[Artek [General]]

Originally posted by whenthe:

ds2 is actually good there just is really goofy hitboxes and i frames

I mean... Those 2 are definetely on the list for sure, like in the top 10 reasons why.

Dark Souls 2 is generally just horrifically unpolished compared to the rest. Like the broken lighting. There is a video somewhere how Giant Woods is supposed to look like and its so much better.
Presumably it fell victim to development hell - at some point the whole project was basically scrapped mid-work and redone from scratch which is probably to blame for a lot of issues that can be observed.

It has the record number of bosses among the 3, but it also literally contains almost all of the worst ones. Some of them don't even deserve the mantle of a "Dark Souls boss" (like covetous demon).

It also relied a LOT more on what is known as the "Spambush" - Spam of Ambushes.
There is so many examples in that game of the player triggering some invisible flag and dozens of enemies rushing around the corner all at once to get you.
Yes - its' siblings sometimes do that too, but not nearly to an extent DS2 overdid it and the others usually try to be inventive about it - like trying to have you deal with a guy while a hidden archer shoots at you, or have another guy throw estus blockers, or maybe the reinforcements are delayed and only become a problem if you take too long with the first guy and so on.
DS2 just straight up sends 10 copypaste enemies onto you and calls it a day. Like that one soldier rush in Bastille when you open a door leading to a jail.

It had some nice ideas, it did some things better than others (PvP in particular seemed to be notably more balanced than 1 and 3 ever managed to do), but overall - it is a notably worse executed product compared to both its predecessor and the successor.

It was my first Dark Souls game, i really liked it, and it was a great introduction to the genre... But i also can't pretend like that game is... uh... Good.
Its okay. It works. You can play it for what it is. But dear lord it could've been so much better.

[David Benioff]

I don't know where you're getting the idea that NPCs in ds2 and ds3 are more useless than they were in ds1. Sure, the questlines are less obtuse and obscure than in ds1, but that's about it.
The NPCs in ds2 are actually incredibly helpful (especially the NPC summons).

Bosses are random in ds3? In what way? The bosses may not have been built up like Ornstein and Smough or Artorias, but those are standouts from ds1. In DS1, you have so many bosses that are random. Bed of Chaos, Demon Firesage, Centipede Demon, Sanctuary Guardian, Guardian Dragon, asylum demon, etc. I could go on. That being said, they're not out of place per se (except maybe firesage), they just weren't built up throughout the level, but that's fine.

in DS3, let's see. You can easily find standouts here too that are built up just like ds1 bosses. For example, Aldrich is at the end of a destroyed Anor Londo, Yhorm is at the end of his ruined city, Twin princes, soul of cinder (just as built up as gwyn), Midir and Gael (and maybe sister friede).

And you don't understand what makes ds3 better than ds2? Maybe go into the individual games without the preconceived notion that one is an upgrade of another and just enjoy it for what it is. I like ds2 a lot, but not really for the bosses (except for the dlc) - i enjoy them a lot but they're not the standout to me. In DS2, i love the atmosphere, traversing the world, speaking to the memorable NPCs and just the sense of adventure.
In DS3, I love the boss fights for the actual gameplay, feel and music - the levels aren't really the highlight and i think most people agree on this. To me, the levels in ds3 are a bit like levels in a 2d platformer (think blasphemous). They're almost just like a painting in the background while the boss fights are why you're here.

For me, ds1 is the worst (that's just for me, others clearly disagree and that's ok). The world is interconnected, but i don't like the combat, i hate pretty much all the bosses except for the DLC bosses and gwyn. I'd take too linear with great boss fights over nonlinear and interconnected with nothing else, which is my interpretation of ds1.


TLDR: treat each DS game like it's a standalone thing and you'll enjoy them all a lot more. Same with Sekiro and every other Fromsoftware game (and every game in general honestly).

[Drunk Herald]

Maybe having done dark souls 1 and 2 in a row make me feel that ds3 is a rehash of the previous ones, my point here was to understand why a lot of people ♥♥♥♥♥ on ds2 while I think ds2 and ds3 are quite equivalent. But as potato said "ds2 is only hated by a vocal minority". I still think that ds3 is a bit disappointing. I was expecting something new.

I just defeated the old demon king right now, so I am at the beginning of the game. Maybe my opinion will change.

Anyway, I don't have the same feelings than for ds1. Every one as his feelings ^^

[David Benioff]

Originally posted by 420BrainNotFound:

Maybe having done dark souls 1 and 2 in a row make me feel that ds3 is a rehash of the previous ones, my point here was to understand why a lot of people ♥♥♥♥♥ on ds2 while I think ds2 and ds3 are quite equivalent. But as potato said "ds2 is only hated by a vocal minority". I still think that ds3 is a bit disappointing. I was expecting something new.

I just defeated the old demon king right now, so I am at the beginning of the game. Maybe my opinion will change.

Anyway, I don't have the same feelings than for ds1. Every one as his feelings ^^

Oh if you're only there, then yeah i'd be underwhelmed too. The game really picks up once you reach a certain great looking area imo (around 1/3 of the game and on imo).

[Lunatix]

All dark souls have their bad bosses but DS2 is superior to me, at least it is not a combo spam party trying to be bloodborne. Also the fact that you are fighting even more "human" like bosses in DS3 than DS2 had just show a lack of inspiration.

[Drunk Herald]

Originally posted by David Benioff:

Originally posted by 420BrainNotFound:

Maybe having done dark souls 1 and 2 in a row make me feel that ds3 is a rehash of the previous ones, my point here was to understand why a lot of people ♥♥♥♥♥ on ds2 while I think ds2 and ds3 are quite equivalent. But as potato said "ds2 is only hated by a vocal minority". I still think that ds3 is a bit disappointing. I was expecting something new.

I just defeated the old demon king right now, so I am at the beginning of the game. Maybe my opinion will change.

Anyway, I don't have the same feelings than for ds1. Every one as his feelings ^^

Oh if you're only there, then yeah i'd be underwhelmed too. The game really picks up once you reach a certain great looking area imo (around 1/3 of the game and on imo).

Ahhh, I hope you are right. But for now, it was a bit boring. I hope this will reach elden ring or ds1 rank, and then I would say, yes, it's better than ds2.

[David Benioff]

Originally posted by Lunatix:

All dark souls have their bad bosses but DS2 is superior to me, at least it is not a combo spam party trying to be bloodborne. Also the fact that you are fighting even more "human" like bosses in DS3 than DS2 had just show a lack of inspiration.

Eh idk I feel like a lot of the humanoids in ds2 have similar movesets, which is why I think it's criticized. Don't get me wrong, it's fun but it's also pretty noticeable imo.

[urabe mikoto]

Ok, first let me explain what made me fall in love with DS1:

1) The game looked amazing. Everything looked mysterious, elegant and ancient. Even if the gameplay was garbage I would keep playing just to see more cool ♥♥♥♥

2) The level design was almost flawless and unlike anything I have ever seen. Excluding ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ areas like crystal cave of course

3) The combat was satisfying and had the right amount of depth. It was not too simple to be mere button mashing but it also wasn't crammed with unecessary stuff

4) The bosses were amazing

5) The game was brutally hard but never cheap

Now let's take a loot at DS2

1) DS2 looks like garbage. If you disagree, you are wrong. The entire game looks like a PSX game with HD textures and models. Everything looks artificial and "videogamish". Even King's Field 4 looked better

2) Level design is garbage. It looks awful (see point 1) and plays even worse. Again, most of the areas look like something straight out of a PSX game

3) Combat was ruined by garbage animations and hitboxes. Animations don't have any weight so you feel like you are fighting people made of air with rubber weapons. Controls are unexplainably stiff. ADP is just a excuse for garbage hitboxes. Even with infinite ADP you will still get hit by thin air every single time

4) Bosses were forgettable at best and absolute garbage at worst. They are terrible to fight (see point 3) and they all look awful. Just compare Najka with Queelag or Ancient Dragon with Kalameet or whatever

5) Difficulty is artificial and cheap. Ganks of trash mobs everywhere. ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ hitboxes ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ you up every time. Stamina regeneration is unnaturally slow for no reason. You need to level up just to be able to drink Estus at a reasonable human-like speed.

All of these DS1 points apply to DS3. In fact, DS3 has no areas with unacceptable level design like Crystal Cave and Lost Izalith, so it can be considered an improvement over DS1

[MegamanEncyclopedia]

Everyone here brought up great stuff but I think a lot of the reasons given are too zoomed in and based on specific mechanics of each game. Why is DS3 more popular than DS2? I think the primary reason is that DS3 is the more polished and streamlined game.

DS3 is far faster paced and the handling is more snappy and arcade-like. This is easier for the majority of people to get used to since its gotten to be the industry standard. DS2's slower pace and heavier character is more foreign to people. But the decisive factor is really that DS2 is visibly less refined; lighting got gutted, characters don't always flinch if they're hit during a roll, and a myriad of similar small things that together make the quality visibly inconsistent.

To me, I can't help but feel that Souls was meant to be slow and methodical and I don't think I'll ever enjoy the fast paced combat of 3 and ER as much as I do the slower games. The sad thing about DS3 absolutely crushing the prior games in sales is that we'll never get a game with the slower style ever again.

[ChainedScythe]

Screw soul memeory, and ADP, and crappy hitboxee, and especially clunky slow old games. For me DS2 and 1 felt like PS2 era games. Charming but only worth a few runs. The bosses in this game are atleast a challenge, and have good design and attacks. Not to mention the DLC's of this game are goated. Oh, and this games PvP has lasted a while, and probably will even longer, not to mention the large chance of a remaster that could bring the community back to life for a while.

[delisol01]

The problems with dark souls 2 stem from the terrible graphics compared to its predecessor,( wasn't graphically impressive on a technical way, but the art direction was great) and that impact was felt even more when it looked NOTHING like what they showed in the reveal trailer, boring boss designs for the majority of the game, and many of them felt like they could have been regular enemies, such as the 3 dungeon guards in the prison keep, and the siamese twin pirate ship boss, and the rat king boss should have never been a boss. Then there was the area designs. Some looked great, but the rest looked real bad or bland and boring, for example the windmill valley, looked terrible, then you enter the tower, which looked bland, and finally to the Iron Keep, which was a very generic castle that had magma as the visual draw.. Dragon's Aerie and majula are highlights of looking great. Then the combat, while mechanically improved over DS1, was a mixed, which was in part due to the ADP stat, which affected your I-frames while dodging and inconsistent hitboxes. Not everything had visible shockwaves, so often times it seems you were hit by nothing even though you dodged the arrow, sword, appendage, or the active damage frames surpassed tje animation of the attack. This wasn't really a problem in PVP, which is where the combat improvements really shined, and where most of the defense of the game lies. To finish off my small rant, DS2 is not a bad game by any means, but it looks and feels unpolished than the games( Demon's Souls is what kicked off the souls franchise) that came before it, and seems like a knock off when it is compared to the game that came after it.