>>323825734 There's a pretty noticeable lack in interest in the game in general across the internet. I mean I'm not gonna pretend to have hard stats on it so feel free to disregard my anecdotal bullshit but from video content to fan art to fan music to discussion in general the volume being produced is noticeably far less. It's hard to do a comparison based on sales because pretty much everyone that was a fan of Dark Souls 1 played 2 since obviously they were hoping it was going to be good, that and Steam don't publish solid sale figures etc. But if you look at the lasting interest in the game based on discussion and fan content being produced Dark Souls 2 dropped off hard fast and has a tiny fandom.
Dark Souls 1 was having major fan works being produced for years after its release, even now when there are major fan works based on Dark Souls it's usually based on/about the first game and not 2. A cursory glance at the internet to me shows that major interest in Dark Souls 2 barely lasted three months after the games release leaving now a tiny irrelevant skeleton crew of a fanbase.
I mean in terms of say YouTube the only content Dark Souls 1 content creators that did a lot for Dark Souls 2 were the ones that were big enough to actually make decent amounts of money from their YouTube account which to me highlights that their interest is more financial than anything. Most content creators that did loads of DS1 stuff did DS2 videos for like 2 months before stopping.
Dark Souls 2 was successful on the basis of people liking Dark Souls 1 and wanting more. Once people realised that the game was actually not very good interest dried up, but they can't un-buy the game.
>>323826837 If they do show up they will likely just be either something along the lines of the Allant/Gwyn/Vendrick figure of the game in which case the fact that they're the Dark Souls 2 protagonist wouldn't really matter or they'll be a Furtive Pygmy type figure manipulating things in the background in which case the fact that they're the Dark Souls 2 protagonist wouldn't really matter.
If they did appear, which I doubt, there would likely be such a gap in time between the entires that it would essentially be a new character and if DS2 never happened and they stuck with handing out their backstory in item descriptions it would be the same.
>>323827029 The amount of bullshit in this post is proportional to its length, holy shit.
Even the part of "created content on youtube" as cancerous as it is by itself, is false, because unfortunately, DS2 kept getting new shitty content on YT for a whole year in the form of pvp videos and lore videos since the game kept getting updates and DLC, so you're already wrong there, unless you're talking about those extremely unfunny cartons where the whole punchline was "ITS SO HARD LOL" then you must have mental problems because of course they wouldn't be as frequent with DS2 since this joke was already tired as fuck.
>>323825948 Japan also hated DeS, DS1 and BB, none of those games sold at all over there, just like any other console game.
>>323828758 Not with the multiple timelines and worlds. You could say DaS3 is a merging point of those and all the old Lords of Cinder ended up in the same world or you travel across multiple hunting them down.
>>323828649 Dark Souls 1 didn't have that retarded, awful, cancerous, hack writing bullshit cycles concept that completely and utterly fucking ruined the entire setting, plot and ending of the first game though.
>>323828751 Dark Souls 1 already made the point that the Chosen Undead isn't all that special because the game reveals that the entire chosen one concept was a bullshit lie the entire time in its story and that of the potentially thousands or more undead that attempted the journey the only thing special about you was that you happened to succeed.
If you stood there and threw half court basket ball shots all day the one that you finally got in the net wasn't destiny, it was just that you tried a fucking ton of times.
>>323829208 I still don't see what the alternate solution is or why one is even necessary.
I mean if the fire stays lit then it's still the age of fire and if the fire goes out then it's then the age of dark. It can't half go out or something, it's either lit or its not. One of those two things must be true. Unless what a third way means that you're going to go link the world to something else and create the Age of Water or some shit or link the world to lightning and create an Age of Electricity where instead of Bonfires there are Generators and the world gets all techno and shit. I just don't see what the fuck a third way could realistically mean.
BUT REGARDLESS why a third way is needed is also beyond me because nobody has ever tried option 2. Every fucking time some dick lights the goddamn fire and things stay shitty every time, if someone decides not to do it then someone else does. Every time the fire keeps getting fucking linked. They've literally never tried Option 2 so why they're looking for Option 3 without even trying out the Dark Age is beyond me.
HEY FAGGOTS WHEN YOU WANT TO NOT LINK THE FIRE INSTEAD OF WALKING OFF AND LETTING SOME OTHER CUNT DO IT JUST FUCKING STAY THERE AND GUARD THE THING UNTIL AND GOES OUT AND DON'T FUCKING LOSE. GODDAMN.
DS2 protag with his never hollowing undead immortality is well positioned to just sit there and grind his tits off and defend the flame until it finally goes completely out never to be linked again and just actually put a stop to this shit. But instead he fucks off too.
>>323830231 >HEY FAGGOTS WHEN YOU WANT TO NOT LINK THE FIRE INSTEAD OF WALKING OFF AND LETTING SOME OTHER CUNT DO IT JUST FUCKING STAY THERE AND GUARD THE THING UNTIL AND GOES OUT AND DON'T FUCKING LOSE. GODDAMN.
Did you not play the game? The Throne Watcher and Throne Defender are guarding it while Vendrick and Aldia researched cures. Vendrick in the end fled after he found out about Nashandra AND realized everything was pointless, someone will relight the flame.
Aldia escaped though, don't you get it?
DSII establishes that no matter what, someone WILL find their way to the first flame and relight it. DSII is about breaking the cycle man c'mon did this all go over your head? Scholar shows us that Aldia indeed escaped the cycles but to what end? He only broke himself free, but he can't do it for the rest of the world. It's a really dark fucking game ultimately.
Dawg fuck that the crowns shit was fucking stupid. How the fuck does gathering all the crowns somehow make you immune to the curse? Fucking Shanalotte said that Vendrick was looking into souls for the cure, not to crowns. Why the fuck didn't we bring back the SOULS of those kings? That shit was stupid.
>>323830643 Well to be frank nobody still has any idea with the Age of Dark actually is. I mean we get hints of how the Abyss affects the Age of Fire at various points but what the actual Age of Dark is and what would happen to humans in it is still pretty much a complete unknown.
Something that stands out to me is that humans such as Manus and the Four Kings who have given full Abyss have thrived within it and become great beings. Sure Age of Fire humans have suffered at their hands but:
1. That's potentially like blaming guns for gun violence rather than criminals, Manus being an angry dick doesn't necessarily make the Abyss bad. Also equating the Abyss with the Age of Dark might not be a strictly accurate thing to do anyway.
2. Humans as they exist in the Age of Fire are a perversion of their true nature, even their very forms are not what they are intended to be in the natural course of things. So the fact that we perceive what happens to humans that encounter the Abyss to be bad is largely irrelevant. What to us seems like corruption by darkness could in reality be the pathetic cursed perverted forms of humans in the Age of Fire being cured and beginning to return to their true natural state.
So what I'm saying is give the Age of Dark a shot!
>>323828947 Dark Souls was very implied to be cyclical as well. Even Demon's had the same concept. DS2 is a non-issue since it is more like a bunch of sidestories than anything before the Crowns arc, but Miyazaki himself used the cycle thing long before DS2.
>>323831535 >Manus being an angry dick doesn't necessarily make the Abyss bad
"Believe it or not... Oolacile has brought the Abyss upon itself. Fooled by that toothy serpent, they upturned the grave of primeval man, and incited his ornery wrath. What could they have been thinking?"
>>323831550 A better look gives away that it is not the same girl nor the same crown, so if it is yet another one of Manus's fragments that lasted long enough to be alive and well for DS3 then that crown would probably be similar to the ones from DS2 as well.
It could be another girl that is completely unrelated to Manus too, we don't fucking know.
>>323831574 >Dark Souls was very implied to be cyclical as well.
While that's kind of true, (linking the fire leaves room for someone else eventually to kill you), Dark Souls' endings are polar opposites to the nth degree and are implied to have a degree of weight to making those decisions. The big thing is everyone felt gypped once they realized neither ending in Dark Souls mattered, amplified by DSII's blatant use of cycles.
>>323831078 >DSII establishes that no matter what, someone WILL find their way to the first flame and relight it. Why. Explain what force causes this. Who is making this happen. What cosmic force is making that occur. Why can nobody stop the Fire Flame being relit.
If the Dark Souls 2 protag at max SL in lore having devoured the souls of Dragons, Giants, the reincarnations of the four Lords Souls and many of the Shards of Manus's Soul, basically being an unstoppably OP being that contains the power of nearly every significant Soul in history, just sat there with the Crowns on never hollowing, never dying, ever vigilant just fucking stood there and killed any challenger. How would it get lit?
Given the Souls he possesses how would anyone even become strong enough to challenge him?
>>323831262 Literally irrelevant to my post. Try reading what you respond to next time.
DSII establishes that as the first flame fades, the dark sign appears and attracts humans to it. This was something that wasn't apparent in Dark Souls, and that DSII added to justify why the player unknowingly ends up in Drangleic/why NPCs are there. It also has to deal with the theme of hollowing, losing memories.
>How would it get lit?
But now we're making assumptions about the protagonist and we'll never come to a conclusion, which was also part of DSII's themes funnily enough of why is your protagonist there.
If you yourself were in Drangleic, and you JUST found out that your whole nature of being is based on cycles? That you've relived this shit again and again, could you find the strength to sit in that room for millennia to prevent other warriors from lighting it? Kings of nations long past couldn't do it anon. Could you? But again we're just making assumptions about our respective protagonists and will get nowhere.
>these people acting like DS2 isn't just a video game that is somewhat worse than DS1 but literally Hitler or Satan I mean, in some ways DS2 is actually even a bit better. The circlejerk amuses me though, so you're free to continue
>>323832342 Yeah but DS2 establishes that for some unexplained magical reason someone WILL without fail always Link the First Flame no matter what. If someone rejects their destiny to relight the flame like Vendrick then destiny chooses another.
The flame literally cannot go out because something forces it to stay lit.
I think that the "Heirs of Flame/Lords of Cinder" concept in DS3 are beings that have the potential to link the fire and the DS3 protagonist has gone "ENOUGH OF THIS SHIT" and is systematically hunting down absolutely anyone that could possibly link the fire to nip the problem in the bud and finally let the world move on.
>>323832813 The brand makes the Undead travel towards the first flame without knowing why, like a moth drawn to the flame. Our protag in DS2 headed for Drangleic in search for his "memories" but in reality he didn't even know what he was looking for, he was just being drawn to the first flame.
As the flame fades, more undead are drawn to it, and one of them will succeed at kindling it, it is inevitable.
>>323832813 >I think that the "Heirs of Flame/Lords of Cinder" concept in DS3 are beings that have the potential to link the fire and the DS3 protagonist has gone "ENOUGH OF THIS SHIT" and is systematically hunting down absolutely anyone that could possibly link the fire to nip the problem in the bud and finally let the world move on.
Oh my god you have no idea how happy I would be if this is the case. Holy shit anon don't play with me.
>>323833075 Okay, so Human and Undead have been Linked to the Fire by Gwyn and feel an inextricable pull towards it. Fine.
But armed with full knowledge of the state of affairs as the DS2 protagonist is can he not simply resist the urge? Is is like super heroin or what? I mean I'm thinking of it like this, if you felt a need to jump off a bridge but knew doing so would kill you rationally I would like to think you would overcome the feeling that you need to do it because rationally it's bad.
I guess now we're getting into the territory of addiction and how hard it is to simply decide to quit a drug habit. But Fire must be some real dank shit if that's he case.
>>323833929 But the topic is that something forces the flame to always be re-lit no matter what. If not the Chosen Undead then some other fucker. If not Vendrick than BotC, if not BotC then some other fucker. Someone WILL do it, they always do. Some force of destiny ensures that the flame never ever goes out and an Age of Dark will never happen.
But the question is why? Seems that the answer I've been given is essentially Fire addiction. But for the sake of argument if the DS2 protag just sat there at max Soul Level with maxed out gear, containing pretty much every Soul of note within himself being essentially unstoppably powerful, immortal, undying, unhollowing with no hope of any kind of reasonable challenge just guarded the Flame until it went out. What would stop that? What could stop that?
>>323834313 Well no, because people choose to not light it. If they can choose to not light then then why can't they then choose to stop anyone else from doing it? Why do they always fuck off?
>>323834040 But the point is why doesn't he just protect it? He's unstoppably OP with no hope of a good challenge and will never hollow or die. If he just stopped anyone else from lighting it then what would stop an Age of Dark? It seems to me that if the issue is that destiny or fire addiction keeps the flame being re-lit in a cycle then the solution for the DS2 protag is pretty obvious. Just guard it.
It's implied that Vendrick and his posse are the first people to realize the cyclical nature of existence. I defer back to my earlier statement anon. If you just found out about the cyclical nature of existence, could you really stand in that room for millennia making sure no one lit the flame? On a purely practical level you'd have to take shits now and again, feel me?
its literally an oven. stop listening to the evil queen bitch's bullshit. The giants had the klin and defended it because they knew what was up, then she told vendrik that its totally some super chair of power. he got it from the giants, realized she was fucking with him, and ran away. In typical serpant cunt fashion, queen bitch role played it up and told everyone the same bullshit she told vendrick to get your dumb ass to wander in it, sit in the little chair, and then she closed the door on you and turns on the gas. The dark lord ending is canon, this implies that further fire lighting wasnt left up to fate or free will, and that instead they were tossing undead into the throne and forcing them to set themselves on fire. in the first game, you dont actually choose to become the pillbarydough boy, Just being NEAR it catches your dried hallowing corpse on fire.
It was all a lie and you are still being tricked by the serpent.
It's not ambiguous at all. Like every other jrpg it's heavily based on traditional myths and legends from mainly western sources. It only seems like TOODEEP4U lore because you've never opened a history book, skimmed through a bible, or skimmed through some pre-modern fairytales.
>>323835517 Okay so the Queen's plan was to trick you into lighting the flame, putting the Age of Dark on hold, by getting herself killed for no reason? Couldn't she just wait out side while you walked in and not died? Your idea is retarded.
>>323834974 >>323834893 Sure, but the protagonists of DS1 and DS2 are depending on the players actions given a pretty full explanation of the situation. Look at Chosen Undead's case.
>Ending 1 - He just lights it himself either because he has been tricked or just thinks it's a cool thing to do.
>Ending 2 - He fucks off and is all "YEAH AGE OF DARKNESS BITCHES!" before some other dick comes and lights it and makes him, Frampt and Kaathe look like big stupid idiots for walking off and leaving it unprotected.
Or BotC. Depending on the player's actions they have a complete understanding of the situation. But for some reason is still unable to achieve the Age of Dark. Dark Souls 2 claims that its simply impossible to do and that the cycle will continue. It's said to be so impossible that instead of going with the never before tried option of just letting the Flame go out he looks for a third different option instead.
Dark Souls 2 suggests that the Flame being re-lit is some kind of destined inevitability without ever really explaining way.
Option 1 - Link the Fire and start the cycle again. Option 2 - Don't link the Fire (NOTE: This is apparently impossible because the Fire will just be lit anyway because cycles).
It's because option 2 apparently being impossible that the protag goes off to find some other third option in the SotFS stuff. Shit doesn't really make sense.
>>323835517 What you wrote there have absolutely nothing to do with Vendrick.
Vendrick never lit the flame, he only managed to use tohe throne to harness the souls to create a golem that helps him build the kingdom.
Also, in vanilla SotfS it was implied that whatever you do next is up to you. You either continue sitting on the throne without lighting the flame and became the dark lord or ignite it to extend the age of fire.
I'm sorry where is this coming from? In fact your post kind of falls apart when you start saying Nashandra WANTED undead to light the flame.
"If you proceed, Nashandra will come after you. Knowing that you will take the throne, and link the fire. She covets the First Flame"
Nashandra wanted you to open the door and kill the Throne Watcher and Defender so she could covet the First Flame herself, much like how the anon in here is saying "why didn't the player character defend the throne?" That's exactly what Nashandra was going to do.
>>323835878 Because Dark Souls 2 is a badly written mess that ruins the lore and story of the first game while adding nothing meaningful of it's own and mostly just rehashes/references the first game's lore in a considerably worse way.
>>323835806 >Dark Souls 2 suggests that the Flame being re-lit is some kind of destined inevitability without ever really explaining way.
Because undead are attracted to it. And will eventually light it. In 100 years, or 1000 years, an undead will find the strength. We don't even know how many years it has been since Vendrick's reign ended.
Again, where do you get off with your supposition that Nashandra wanted you to light the flame? It makes more sense that she wanted you to open the door because she didn't know how to. She lets you kill the Watcher and Defender because fuck doing it herself. Then when you do that, she opts to kill you so she can covet it herself.
>>323836124 But the DS2 protag will never die and will never hollow thanks to the crowns. He additionally has every particularly powerful Soul in the world and is basically unstoppably powerful.
He alone is uniquely in the position where he could just stand there for as many millennia as it takes and stop anyone else from ever doing it again. It's not like anyone could pose a real threat to him.
>>323835767 Giants keep the flame lit by chucking undead into it. Queen is manus, she is the abyss, she wants the throne so people cant chuck undead into it so they can bring back the age of darkness. The king realizes the throne is a nightmare machine that will summon undead, since it contains the first flame, and runs away from it because the fate of all the living is to become undead. When you enter the klin, its the stone giants that open the way for you and shut the door. Queen was preventing you from getting to the throne because she doesnt want anyone using it. Remember what happened when gyn set himself on fire? The entire area got nuked and all his little knights became monsters.
>>323836398 >literally hinted in DkS1 that the monarch's crowns have powers
The crown's power subsiding in Dark Souls 1 should not have been expanded the way it was, anon. The crown shit in DSII is such crap.
>>323836520 >He alone is uniquely in the position where he could just stand there for as many millennia as it takes and stop anyone else from ever doing it again. It's not like anyone could pose a real threat to him.
Dawg we're going in circles. We're getting into the player character's head, which is just full of assumptions. Namely, can he or she ACTUALLY stand there for millennia, not withering, never faulting, and defend the first flame?
>>323836697 >The crown's power subsiding in Dark Souls 1 should not have been expanded the way it was, anon. The crown shit in DSII is such crap.
Oh, pls explain to us how it should of been expanded on in your special little snowflake way.
There is nothing to say how it should or shouldn't be expanded on. You get no more than a sentence with a vague explanation of it in DS1. There is nothing of substance to give any meaning of how it should be expanded on in any way.
Pull your head out of your fucking ass, all this DS2 hate is pathetic. It is nothing but a bunch of DS1 fanboys who can't move on from the first game because of fucking nostalgia.
>you step into an old, ruined throne room, ceiling exposed to the sky through great rifts in the stone. >a figure in armour not scene for millennia lies sat in the chair at the very center, a great blade lodged into the very stone at his feet. >he hears the door, which has lain unopened for as long as he can remember, and his head cranes slightly. >like muscle memory, he pushes himself to his feet with the creaking of old steel, stumbling but catching himself on the arm of his throne >he grasps his blade by the pommel and tears it from the ground, almost effortlessly, before beginning a slow, stumbling march towards you. >as he walks, his walk becomes more stable, more solid, eventually he is completely upright, as if nothing had happened. >You have awakened him. The Chosen Undead.
>>323837971 >This makes no sense what so ever as to why it shouldn't be expanded on.
Okay what the heck man, are you illiterate? It makes more sense to find kings of old's souls than their crowns, and it makes more sense for Vendrick's research into souls to somehow make it so the player can be immune to the curse. That is as simple as I can make it for you.
>You are just shitposting now and coming out with stupid shit.
Where is this coming from holy shit man. I've been nothing but civil with you.
>>323837876 Importing would be pointess. Importing stats or gear would break the game progression/design unless they start you on higher levels of NG+ difficulty based on Soul Level. But even then mechanics, stats and items have changed making that impossible.
Beyond that it's not like there are choices to import. And characters look like shit so who cares about appearance data?
>>323838593 >Real question, what the fuck happened to the serpents? The hack writers that wrote Dark Souls 2 forgot about them.
>I do not understand their motivations why 1 wants age of fire and the other age of darkness. Kaathe is pretty clearly into the abyss but Frampt is more ambiguous. Sure he advocates the Age of Fire but he could be playing the odds or be up to something else, him showing up in the Dark Lord ending calls which side he is really on into question.
>>323839256 Given that they're described as Primordial and seem to date back to the Age of Ancients and couldn't be slain by the Chosen Undead(due to huge health and the sense to just retreat) and are effectively two of the most significant characters in the lore of DS1 in terms of importance to events in that world, it's shitty hack writing to kill them off off-screen between games without explaining how or why they were killed and only reference it vaguely in the art design and not even in the lore.
That's hack fucking writing.
Especially when they were one of the few things from DS1 that should have actually shown up in a sequel since 1. they're incredibly long lived, basically matching dragons and potentially actually being immortal from an age perspective and 2. learning more about their knowledge and intentions would have actually elaborated on the story and world of DS in an interesting way relevant to developing the story.
having played these games since demons was released in japan, dark souls is easily the worst game. its slow, the ai is terrible, enemies lack tracking turning every fight into the same thing unless its just not possible to get behind a monster (bed of chaos), parrying is extremely easy and requires no timing at all, the weapon variety sucks balls, and the online deserves to be cited right up with gay pride parades in the top ten worst things to happen in the last 50 years
it just blows ass, and they nerfed all the fun things in the game, like the claymore and ninja flip rig (which was the only thing that made the game not slow as molasses)
>>323840673 I'm not saying they are for a fact. I'm saying they seem to suggest that they've been around since before the Age of Fire and are extremely long lived, which potentially could suggest immortality(At least in terms of ageing) like Dragons. And it is said that death did not exist before the First Flame, so if they did in-fact predate the First Flame then in theory that means that like Dragons they would be immortal.
Regardless if there is imagery of them having been killed in imagery from Vendrick's Kingdom that suggests that they did not die of old age and also died potentially quite recently.
And even more regardless killing them off without explanation or even a mention in the lore is hack fucking writing given their importance, doubly so when they're one of the few Dark Souls 1 things that should have been in the sequel and Dark Souls 2 already contains so much Dark Souls 1 stuff that should not have been in the sequel.
>>323841330 >That being said, dueling is for faggots and Invasion is best PvP. Effortlessly slaying faceless pvetards in the same gear gets boring after a while, my man. >>323841562 He was probably talking about the lack of full eye orbs and SM, although none of these are really a huge problem since you can get infinite red eye orbs from Aldia's keep and Agape Ring is a thing as well.
Have we seen halberds in DS3 yet? I liked the move set for them in DS2, as well as their ridiculous damage, but the sweetspot shit made them almost unusable. I hope we get a combo of all three Souls title's halberd move sets. Imagine the Mirdan Hammer, Dark Soul's standard halberd and the Mastodon Halberd's move sets all in one game.
>>323841359 As you age your perception of time distorts and you perceive events happening faster than they really are. It's why when you were a child a 5 minute time out in a corner felt like it was forever but now you blink and it's over.
>>323835471 I don't really agree with this at all. A lot of DaS1 lore is just extrapolated and colloquially agreed on. The problem with DaS2's lore is that its similarly presented, but bandwagoning idiots decided instead of talking lore they would leap down everyone's throats and laugh if something wasn't 100% explained in full.
Then they'd reference popular DaS "lore" as an example of how to "do it right".
>>323842853 It's a blessing to be honest my family. It's why old people don't have a problem with sitting around watching game shows and sleeping. If their perception of time was that of a child's they'd be miserable.
I'm not necessarily talking about lore, but theming. DSII doesn't do its themes justice like Dark Souls did, though it helps that Dark Souls' themes are easier to implement in a video game. At the same time though lore has to do with theming, so here we go.
DSII's themes are hollowing, how it affects the world and the player character. It manifests its themes in key places like Vendrick and Aldia's efforts to circumvent the curse, Lucatiel hollowing, the general fact that NPCs don't remember why they came to Drangleic, and the Giants and their memories. The problem is none of these are very interesting when it comes to gameplay.
The Giant memories are a fanfuckingTASTIC contrast to the fact that human memories fade with hollowing; instead of forgetting the Giants have picture-perfect memories. The problem is it comes at the tail-end of the vanilla game is under utilized as all hell.
Aldia and Vendrick's efforts were in vain in the end, and the world is still subject to cycles with or WITHOUT the player's intervention. This does not make for compelling theming to draw in the player, and solely exists to frustrate players who liked the polar opposite endings of Dark Souls 1.
Now Dark Souls 1 was about the end of eras and ages. This is what I mean but it was easier to implement, and thus more compelling, as the player is actively exploring this decadent place and KILLING all of the old gods and monsters of old. We are ending the age ourselves. Not only is this perfectly fine on its own, Artorias of the Abyss subverts the whole fucking thing by calling into question what it is for the dark to take over the land should we want that outcome, as well as calling into question who might be lying to us. Frampt? Kaathe? It's all brilliant stuff, but it took almost nothing to execute.
>>323843748 >The Emerald Herald clearly was supposed to do/tell you more, but they cut it out. http://illusorywall.tumblr.com/post/100174538929/dark-souls-2-unused-dialog-from-japanese-text There was probably even more stuff that got butchered that we will never get to see.
>>323844529 It felt like DSII wanted to go all crowns and shit first, but were forced to put in more shit references like The Rotton, Old Dragon Slayer etc. All of these "powerful souls" were completely useless to the plot other than showing that the 4 lord souls are still hanging around.
I've said it before, I'll keep sayin' it. DSII should've been about Eleum Loyce and the coming chaos contrasting with Dark Souls 1's coming dark. Alsanna would've been the game's Shanalotte, and we would go travel to kingdoms of old to find out what they did to stave off chaos. We'd find Shanalotte, which would serve as the game's Darkstalker Kaathe. She'd tell us that Alsanna is really a fragment of Manus, and that we should kill her. But she has shown us nothing but kindness, which calls into question what her true intentions are etc.
>>323845010 Thing is, I am afraid that all this might have actually affected the progression of the series, since FROM clearly reverted some stuff back to DaS1-style due to all the negative feedback, and it's obviously not always for the better. Just look at the skittering walking animations. It probably wont be all that noticeable in the final product but it still irks me.
>>323845623 Yeah game's riddled with shitty stuff, much like DaS1 or DeS, so what? You don't want things that were legitimately better about DaS2 to be imported to DaS3? Are you implying that DaS1 was better than 2 in every single aspect possible, without any exceptions? >>323846310 Oh, I'm pretty hyped myself, the game looks great. I just don't want DaS3 to turn into a case of "one step forward two steps behind".
>>323847156 lol are you dumb, dark souls was not footsies based, dark souls promoted turtling, with its terrible backstep and awkward movement. if ds3 has the same parry system as ds1 then its over, ds3 is ruined. its going to be spear town all day every day
>>323847156 >Those footsies are just a consequence of the combat and movement being precise and snappy again How are those related to movement animations? Is it impossible to make a game with precise and snappy controls that wouldn't look silly? >It's not the kind of thing you pay attention to when you're actually playing the game. Well, obviously, just as I stated in my initial post. You won't be looking at your legs most of the time anyways, but it's still kinda lazy.
>>323848014 >thata such a disappointment. To be fair, that's probably the worst kind of DaS3 footage I have. Another reason why it looks so bad (in terms of actual combat happeing) is because white's lagging the fuck out.
>>323848079 >Is it impossible to make a game with precise and snappy controls that wouldn't look silly?
DaS2 was slow and sluggish because they were so concerned about the animations looking pretty and flowing into each other. This is why you're forced to sit through the lengthy recovery animation of every single weapon and why the snappiness of the combat was lost. DaS3 will always look "silly" because a real person wouldn't feasibly move at that speed or roll like that, but the difference is they're prioritizing good gameplay over pretty animations.
>>323849682 DS1 defines the canon. If DS2 undermines or makes meaningless what is stated in the opening cinematics of DS1 than it is pure shit that should be ignored. There should NEVER have been a DS2. It should have went DeS, DaS, BB. New universe every time. DS2 is a skid mark that wont go away. I hope it's fans die of AIDS
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.
This is a 4chan archive - all of the shown content originated from that site. This means that 4Archive shows their content, archived. If you need information for a Poster - contact them.
If a post contains personal/copyrighted/illegal content, then use the post's [Report] link! If a post is not removed within 24h contact me at firstname.lastname@example.org with the post's information.