I already played all the other souls games and decided to get this one to see what all the controversy was all about

I already played all the other souls games and decided to get this one to see what all the controversy was all about...

Did I like it?

Scholar is great

You tell me

>Did I like it?

Hard to say, let's see.

We'll define you as X and your like as Y

So DaS2 + X = Y

Since we don't know X or Y we can't complete the equation, so we'll need to go another route. We'll add in Z which represents a common constant we all are familiar with, which is your mothers vagina

So, we'll replace X with Z and we get DaS2 + your mothers vagina = Y

The answer is that you kill yourself because your mother didn't love you and DaS2 was a fine game

decent game, doesn't have the replayability of the first one. Hard to pinpoint what was wrong with it apart from the 'swivelling'.

SotFS is the best in the series.

Anyone who says otherwise is entitled to their own objectively interior opinion.

>Did I like it?
You did, although you found it was the weakest in the series it was still a very enjoyable game. Every time you saw DS2 threads on Cred Forums you were surprised by the amount of hate and tried to give your 2 cents only to be called a "cuck" a "shill" and a "retard". Eventually, after many months you started to believe that you infact hated DS2 and began shitposting in everythread calling people drones and cucks for saying they liked it.

It's not as good as the other games in the sereis, but it still is a much better thame than, like 95% of all games released in the last 5 years.

Bought it on 360 for 5 bucks a few days ago because it was on sale and I'd never played it before.

So far, feels like money well spent.

still mad

thanks consoles

kek

I loved DS2 and SoTFS. I had the most fun with it. It was really a blast and felt like an adventure.

3 characters of pure enjoyment. I might play it again soon. I am not forcing anyone to play it, just play whatever you like. As for me, I really loved DS2. Maybe 3 might pick up what 1 and 2 had, but I cant even force myself to finish it.

nowhere near as unique or "brilliant" as DaS1 was, but still one of the best rpg's

...

All right OP, personal musings on the game I saved and edited from previous threads on the game:

DS2 feels all over the place to me. A bit schizophrenic. Like the team didn't know whether it wanted to do DS2, a new King's Field, or something altogether new built on those two's legacies. Level design of individual zones can be hit or miss and they never really manage to coalesce into a cohesive working whole - from both a pure game design and narrative standpoint.

As far as that latest is concerned, one of the things I love about Dark Souls that both sequels, and especially Das2, didn't really manage to reiterate (probably because the original did it partly by accident, by sheer virtue of tapping into such powerful, deep-rooted, raw mythic imagery) is how it straddles a thin line between the allegoric and the literal, between the symbolic and the figurative, without ever picking a side, by conjoining those narrative elements with gameplay elements.

DaS2 tries - and does some really interesting things, there's a strong thematic cohesion to some of its mechanical aspects, if only the central theme of exhaustion, relinquishment, self-consumption and the refusal to let go - but in the end just goes overboard there's too much stuff at once, and the units don't mesh - they even go at cross purpose at times. It's too bad, because from the few levels in which it works (the Gutter being the obvious big one), I so much like both the theme and gameplay of bringing light to the dark places. There's something very powerful there that the game clearly intended to capitalize on yet never really managed to in the end.

The problem is thar the overabundance means things that works end up built built on foundations, and along other conflicting mechanics that do no gracefully welcome them. The Company of Champions on its own invalidates by itself so much of what the rest of the game is trying to build. And you understand *why* it's there - it certainly fits a purpose for pve, but then it doesn't thematically mesh at all with what seems to be the aimed central focus of the game. It goes at cross purpose.

At the same time, some of the things DS2 tried - if only difficulty management by the player - where really interesting and worth digging/reiterating, even if I do believe they'd fit better for other games. And as an experiment, even if a failed one, I do find DS2 makes for something altogether more compelling than DS3. But then compelling doesn't mean good, or fun. Quite obviously.

All that being said, from a level design standpoint, I do think DaS2 has some of the best individual zones. DaS1 is a better album than 3, and 2 feels like a weird collection of singles and B-sides so to speak.

worst Soulsborne game

just use some shitty ENB mods

Good game but not so good 'souls' game

Worst Souls-related game I've played, I really fucking dislike it from the areas to the enemies to the combat in general.

Also I played Bloodborne for the first time the other day and was surprised the game went from looking better than 3 to looking like a PS2 game, often just within a few frames.

This