Is it worth getting?

jester set is better

play scholar next. 3 is garbage.

I've played the series since demon's so my taste is absolute

Why is it a spin off? For story or gameplay reasons? Why is it the worst?

>demastered

you should skip the 2nd best souls game and go play the heap of trash that is 3

Game is lot of fun, would reccomend getting DLC though if you can.

I actually got Demons souls too, but I have been putting it off.

If you liked Bloodborne the most and consider Dark Souls 1 to be "almost as good as Bloodborne" the most, then you should avoid Dark Souls 2 and 3.
Dark Souls 2, while basically the same game as 1 and 3 and a fantastic game on its own, feels very different on movement, combat and overall design (being very "videogamey") and has many unique gameplay mechanics that never appeared again on the series and suffers from two problems:
- Looks ugly
- Bosses are easy
3 is way too lineal, has larguely almost all the same gameplay mechanics as 1 and plays like a hybrid of Dark Souls and Bloodborne so its lack of identity may be a turnoff.
I personally love all of them but I am notorious for my shit taste as the screenshot shows.

tl;dr don't bother with either 2 or 3.

Attached: My most played games.jpg (1037x966, 193K)

story reasons, the only thing that 2 has in common with 1 is the general gameplay, some weapons and a broken stone basin that some people argue is the lordvessel

3>2>1 for me

2 is linear, with some dull areas but some great ones

I think The Surge is better than Dark Souls 2, play that instead.

Attached: how-to-unlock-new-game-plus-in-the-surge[1].jpg (1000x563, 104K)

Definitely give it a try, it has its shortcomings but it also has more to offer than any other game in the series including exploration and weapons/armor

shit I forgot to mention that 2 of the bosses are callbacks, one being ornstein and the other being gargoyles but there are like 40 something bosses in 2 so that overlap isn't a huge deal

I meant for story reasons. DS3 feels like a direct sequel to DS1, with plenty of callbacks to it. DS2 has callbacks to DS1 as well, but they feel more like little easter eggs, and I don’t think they’re mandatory to experience, which the ones in DS3 absolutely are. The story in DS2 just doesn’t really have anything to do with the story of DS1, and just feels like it happens to be set in the same universe.
As for why I think it’s the worst of the three, I just don’t particularly care for the areas and bosses when compared to 1 and 3, and I feel like it’s visually inferior as well. I can’t quite explain why, but it just doesn’t feel as fun to play IMO.

Initially I really liked it, even though that was when I found the game the hardest by far and died a lot, then I progressively started to dislike it more and more, because after acquiring a basic grasp on everything I pretty much only died to ganks and random enemy spam, and the only way to mitigate that is by selectively pulling one enemy at a time which is a massive chore that rapidly sucks out any enjoyment out of the game.

dark souls 2 has a problem with the controls, there's no gradual increase in camera turning speed while pushing the analogue stick left/right, there's only 'slow rotation' and 'fast rotation', binary options (for an anologue input device). here's an example; youtube.com/watch?v=-GlsElUEGKk&t=1s

this alone means i'm never touching the game again, it feels like cancer to play. demon's, ds1, ds3, bloodborne, sekiro, all of them have proper camera controls, ds2 for some reason has this janky bullshit camera, almost as if the game was made by a garbage B team while the real devs were making a better game oh wait that's literally what happened

Literally the armor of Reddit

analogue*

lol, whatever you say.

We all know 2 is the worst in the series, but overall still a good game

My biggest concern about DS2 is the adaptability I keep hearing about. I don't want to invest in a stat just to get i-frames.

I never felt like 2 had bad controls or camera. I can jump between all three and Bloodborne without trouble.

Don't play the game then. You can have i-frames without investing on it but you won't be able to dodge everything like you did on 1.

ou get levels easier in 2, so it is not a problem. Adaptabilñity IS aretarded system, but if you just know that you need 100 agility then it becomes a non-issue.

why is it 100 agility? is that just what you have in ds1? is it worth going higher? i'm gonna play a 2handed str build

Well, I appreciate DS1 for different reasons than Bloodborne if that makes a difference. I appreciate DS1 specifically for the world design in the first half of the game. I kinda like the greater build variety in DS1 too compared to bloodborne. I also found the NPC's superior to bloodborne. I liked the idea of boss weapons, but none of them fit with my build. I like Bloodborne the most for being a consistently great experience across the board in terms of level design, weapon variety, bosses, story, lore, faster action, faster healing, FRC Chalice Dungeons, and I liked the hunters dream a lot. That isn't to say I don't like slower combat at all, I actually appreciate the shield and sword combat to a significant degree, but I just prefer Bloodborne's style more. If I am being honest, I really wasn't impressed with the Dark souls story and lore at all. That is one of the parts that left me feeling underwhelmed in addition to locations like lost Izalith.

Hmm, that makes sense, thanks for the input.

Alright, thanks.

I see.
I reaffirm my advice then: avoid 2 and 3. Play Sekiro instead.

dark souls 3 is a better video game than sekiro.

Attached: 1555580138048.png (563x540, 140K)

Should I pirate these games? Or is From Software one of the good guys? I've never played any Souls game.

Absolutely, it's an awesome game with a ton of areas to explore. It's not the best game ever made but it's a fun time.

I have no desire to play these games but I will read threads about them and watch them being played.

is that weird?

yes
3 is garbage

Honestly, don't bother with any of them, not even pirated. They're games based on the template established by Demon's Souls, a ten years old game.
If you didn't play them back then, you aren't going to enjoy them now.

This is probably the most retarded post itt.

no its not
3 is literal garbage

Sekiro is really fucking short though, he'll probably want to play more Souls games after beating all the endings, might as well just try them all desu.

3 feels more like 1, and is connected to it. 2 is its own thing gameplay, atmosphere, and story wise.

Yeah you're a fag

There is literally no reason to play 2

It isn't connected to the rest of the series, fucked roll frames so hard it actively encourages you to hide behind shields, atmosphere doesn't match the other games, it's just shit

It's shit

Shit

bad opinion. the correct order of soulsbornekinofield games is

ds1- the best, legendary video game
bloodborne
dark souls 3
demon's souls
sekiro
dark souls 2
the kings field games (jp 2,3,4, or 1,2,3 in the west)

dark souls 2

I liked how you could see the boss doing shit from down under the level, but it was way too short.

It was a pretty alright game which I enjoyed.
Also there's no point in using any other weapon than the claws.

Why is 3 garbage

t. underage. you don't know what someone else will like, based on a couple paragraphs. you're making a ton of assumptions and it's all coloured by your personal opinion of ds3. the real answer is always 'play it yourself faggot, stop asking Yea Forums for opinions'

3 is the worst souls game ever made

eh I can get behind that

You'll definitely hate alot of the game if you're coming from 1. Visually it's worse and some of the enemy animations are gag inducing. But if you can look past the jankyness and the shitty levels it can be still be fun since it does offer alot of build variety. Also DLCs are worth at least one playthrough.

>fucked roll frames so hard it actively encourages you to hide behind shields
you can easily get more iframes than in 1

idk why i put ds2 twice, i meant to leave it above king's field. i was gonna have it last, but i can't reasonably say it's worse than a ps1 game

its literally bb with blocking and rehashed shit from the first game
it has no identity of its own
it shouldn't even exist

>Likes Bloodborne
>Obviously won't like 3

That makes no fucking sense, 3 is the closest to Bloodborne in the series you ass

Did you even play these games?

DS1, DS3 and Bloodborne are all excellent games.

Yes it does, the Throne Defender set

heide knights are shit

Sure play all of them if you have the time, I'd say it's worth it.

>3 is almost as fast as BB
>but he will loathe it
Huh? And why not just let the man try it on his own instead of forcing your opinion down his throat? He can always drop the game if he doesn't like it, not to mention he already owned 3.

Tying iframes to a stat is fucking retarded and fucks over strength builds

for

Can we talk about the comfiness of Majula?

OP prefers the fast and unorthodox style of Bloodborne so Sekiro is right his alley.
After reading his posts about the things he enjoyed about Bloodborne and Dark Souls, it's pretty clear that he won't enjoy 2 and 3 and will absolutely loathe 2.
So, he should play the game that he's going to enjoy. Encouraging him to play 2 and 3 is pretty dishonest on your part.

I meant 2, not 3. OP will absolutely loathe 2.

As I said before, I like all the three games; I just can know when someone will like certain games based on their opinions about the ones they played.
Seriously, stop trying to convince him to play 2. and 3.

Gets it. DS1 was a miracle to have come out as good as it was, rushed as much as it was. DS2 and 3 are equally flawed.
Find them cheap and consider the refund policy. Honestly Demon’s Souls should be next, either emulated or on PS3.

>tfw soulsbornekirofieldring soon

Attached: 1560050253303.png (631x710, 1003K)

eldensoulsbornekinofield

So don't use a shield? That is not a legitimate argument.

It ties the story up, it absolutely has it's own identity

2 has it's own identity and is total garbage, again, no legitimate point

You can easily cap strength without any effort whatsoever.

We weren't trying to convince him to play 2, we were trying to convince him NOT to play 2

Why are you lumping 3 in with 2? Nothing he said indicated he wouldn't enjoy 3 you're just being a massive homo

Attached: Untitled.jpg (2460x3691, 3.14M)

>DS2 and 3 are equally flawed
Compared to each other I meant. DS1>>>DS3=DS2.

Next year I'll upgrade my PC (my personal rule is upgrading every five years) so I should be able to emulate Demon's Souls given how my current rig can run it at more than 10 fps.
Unless a PS4 remaster drops before, then I'll go with it.

2's flaws are absolutely EVERYWHERE but you can still get a reasonable amount of fun out of it.

fuck no

Ds1>Ds3>>>>>>Ds2

Attached: 617.gif (391x365, 890K)

you are still forcing the player to invest in a stat that has no other purpose than to make iframes not fucking awful and that is just shitty game design

Ah, that's different.
Good job. Now help me convince him to not touch 3.

Because 3 is a weird Dark Souls / Bloodborne hybrid that offers nothing new and it's almost as linear as Bloodborne. Granted, there is a chance that he'll enjoy it but I doubt so.

What the fuck is even that gif

>Playing Elden Ring
That piece of shit is going to be a Witcher clone. Why would you waste your time with it?

Not gunna do that, Dark Souls 3 being a bad game is not a popular opinion and I do not share it whatsoever

ds2 showers you with levels, spending 20 points isn't an issue and you can just not do it if you prefer to use a shield instead of rolling

>sees open world
>GAAAAAAAAAH WITCHER 3

It's still cool to hate open world games?

Because why not?

Attached: 1541405446895.gif (200x133, 656K)

Neither do I but still believe that OP will have a miserable experience with it. Not as bad as the experience with 2 but still.

yeah, back to my original point of the game forcing you to hide behind a shield, shit game design

You are right that the combat will probably be more appealing to me.The main reason I haven't got it is because I am not convinced I will like a from game without the rpg elements and I think exploring, which I forgot to mention I liked alot in BB, will take a significant hit without those elements.

My face when I smell Ds2 fags trying to drag down Ds3

Attached: download.jpg (2048x842, 322K)

at this point there's no reason to not at least try every miyazaki game until he dies, he's proven himself to be a great designer

where are you getting 'forcing' from? i'm sure someone's beaten ds2 at soul level 1 by now, probably with a broken straight sword, you don't NEED to do anything

Majula and its inhabitants are by far the best thing about DS2

Sekiro is fine but it's really only good for one play through.
Ds2 shits the bed, but it has the most options by far
Ds3 is just Bloodborne with more build options and slightly less exploration, and better bosses

>game forces you to invest in adaptability
>nvm I got proven wrong, the game forces you to use shields now
You might be mentally challenged, just fyi.

Lobos beat it with a broken ladle, dude is an autistic god.

>THAT still hasn't been posted yet
The spammer is sleeping I see

Yea, the sozfs version has lots of content. Go for it.

Being open world automatically make a game garbage. Instead of designing levels and encounters (even it you're free to visit every area in the order you desire like the Souls games do), you just have a big open field full of nothing with some enemies thrown here and there.

They had no need to hire an expensive, famous western writer, but they did. Why would they do that? Because they want to create a cinematic experience where you walk from point A to point B to read the next dialog box.

I can understand why Miyazaki is doing that. A single The Witcher 3 or Red Dead Redemption 2 not only sold more than the entire Soulsborne tetralogy put together but had almost unanymous praise from both critics and gamers. He finally wants to step his game and enter the group of top developers instead of just being From Software, that weird Japanese company that made remade the same mecha, first person rpg and third person rpg 50 times.

ah yeah, i haven't seen much of his DS2 stuff nice. i used to watch him a bit but it started pissing me off how he A. makes sex jokes every 5 seconds, and B. wastes like an hour of every stream afk on his phone ordering UBER EATS(tm) and then eating food. like motherfucker, learn to cook, or better yet teach your trophy gf to cook for you. eat off stream you know

feel free to stay out of this if you aren't even going to read the thread fuckhead

If you are going to make a strength build you EITHER have to invest in agility to roll, which is shit game design, or you have to use a shield, which is shit game design

Either way DS2 has shit game design, this is not a new or even disputed fact

If you think Witcher 3 is a shit game you're a contrarian faggot

lmao why are 2fags so obsessed with 3? Like literally every time I see someone shitting on 3 it's some buttmad DaS2yearold

The DLCs are incredible but the base game is meh.

Best PvP system in the whole series but Soul Memory ruins it.

I’m surprised these aren’t all Dragon Ball games.

>Soul Memory
what do i need to know about this as a new player? i don't really like pvp but i like co-op and i like seeing other player messages and ghosts etc. should i try not to level up a lot? or should i grind heaps idk

You don't have to either invest in agility or use a shield, you can just not be shit and get by with a few iframes less if you get so triggered by investing between ten and twenty statpoints in a game where you can easily softcap all your main stats in ng triggers you so much retard.

Never played 3; I only played 1 but that was enough to convince me to never play a Witcher "game" again

>Go to A
>Talk to B
>Go to C
>Talk to D
>Go to E
>Kill some monsters in a cave
>Talk to F
>Go to G
>Talk to H
>Go to I
>Talk to J
>Go to K
>Talk to L
>Repeat

Soul memory isn't affected by whether you level up or not.

Not him but during my first and only playthrough of DS2 like a year ago I didn't encounter a single other player the whole game, neither as a sign nor as in being invaded.

>hasn't played a game
>thinks he is entitled to an opinion about it

1 and 2 aren't even remotely similar, kill yourself

same, I bough all three games during sale and had to force myself to finish 1 with all my might, after which all my interest in the other entries was gone

Is that how you played it? Not investing in agility at all?

I finally gave it a proper chance a few weeks ago and finished SotFS + all the DLC for the first time without summoning. It's really not that bad, thought I could never go back to the Souls formula after Sekiro but I went ahead and played the unanimously agreed worst one from start to finish in around a week and really enjoyed myself. I think the boss I died to the most was probably chariot of all things and only because I wanted to rush Titchy's scythe for my edgy build. It can't be that expensive anymore, it's optimized very well because it looks terrible, give it a try.

I've beaten the game at sl1 so yes.

To be honest, don't worry too much about it.
The tiers widen as you go up but there aren't too many people as is.
You will get to the point at ridiculous SM where you won't see anything though.
On the bright side 2 has more replayability than the rest of the series and has many viable builds

>just softcap in NG what's the problem

The problem is that you have to play that shit game twice to softcap unless you want to grind yourself into hating it even more, thanks for point that out for me

NG, not NG+ retard.

sure you did

The games on the same series all share the same basic design. A Resident Evil 2 plays the same as 3 or 1.
Situations where the sequel is a very different game from this predecessors that doesn't even look remotely like them (the Resident Evil 4 situation) are very rare.
Not tell me, is The Witcher 3 one of those situation.

I didn't even finish it. I dropped it when the main story ask you to help with the logistics for a wedding in a small settlement where you arrived after your sorceress friend teleported you.
I played 1 because at the time everyone raved about the then-upcoming 3 and how it would be "the videogame to end all videogames" so I gave the series a chance. I'm glad I did.

>Anyone defending DS2

Don't even bother engaging with these morons

sl1 runs are a cakewalk with mace.

You're clearly a major scrub if you think it's so unbelievably difficult to do it.

Yeah again, how is it that you think making assumptions is the same as having a valid opinion?

Can I say that Witcher 3 and Witcher 1 are vastly different games? Yeah, I can actually

I liked Dragon Ball when I was a teenager; now I'm indifferent towards it; same with Saint Seiya (even when I'm a huge anime fan).

To go into it even further, I wouldn't even worry about SM until you're near the end of NG+ or NG++

Oh really?
I hated how shit the combat was. I hated how you were just an errand boy. I hated how you very, very rarely engaged in monster hunting (even when story-wise there was a reason for it) even when the main character was supposed to be a monster hunter. I hated how you spend a lot of time talking with NPCs. I hated how there was very little gameplay. I hated how you spend a lot of time walking through empty fields being bored out of your skull (ironically I enjoyed exploring that swamp where you need to find some rocks to activate a teleporter, an area every Witcher 1 fan hated).

Does 3 get rid of all of those things? Is 3 an actual videogame and not a Game of Thrones simulator?

The combat in 1 is absolutely terrible, 3 is fast paced but streamlinded. The only complaint I have for 3 is that it is too easy, you have to play on the hardest difficulty in order to make the fights challenging. One of the fights in Blood and Wine though was harder than most souls bosses.

If you have a problem with talking to NPCs I'm not sure what to tell you, it is an action RPG with lots of story to tell. Good story though.

Ahh, the ol' "you never really beat it unless you did X"

What was your loadout?

stop talking about the witcher you niggers

Attached: 1558752614166.png (1024x768, 526K)

>Ahh, the ol' "you never really beat it unless you did X"
Are you retarded or something, you are just a scrub if you think the game was so incredibly hard it's impossible to do it even though tons of people did it without any issue. I used hand axe and rapier.

I'm not saying it was incredibly hard, I'm saying the game design is crap

You say that you can just invest 20 points into agility to fix iframes and I'm saying I shouldn't have to ungimp iframes to begin with, end of story

You don't have to do either retard.

>bro just react at 0.166 seconds or less every attack animation what's the issue

yes, git gud or stop crying or use a shield

Thanks for the help bro, I appreciate it.

lol, flexing at strangers on Yea Forums, very impressive

1 has best atmosphere and world
2 has best dlc (worth playing just for the dlc imo) but the base game has a couple flaws.
3 is overall best, but doesnt top the peaks of either previous games.

Thank you for reading my essay

Better than crying at strangers on Yea Forums

Crying? You mean offering up a widely agreed upon and valid criticism of the game which you simply dismiss with shit like yeah wow so what I completed it on sl1?

DS2 fans are just always the most moronic people, without fail

2 sucks. Skip it.

3 is just discount Bloodborne

You either git gud or spend a few stat points if you're a scrub, no need to keep crying.

>Best atmosphere

What a fucking joke, easily the worst atmosphere, not even remotely close to unsettling. Game is like someone is shining a flashlight on a half assed attempt to duplicate 1

>Best DLC

No, that would be 1

>Overall best

There isn't even a single area in that game above a single area in 1 or 3

its fun

Attached: yawn.jpg (278x225, 20K)

You might be mentally retarded btw.

>offers zero counterpoints

that's what I thought

My mistake, you are definitely mentally retarded.

only digging yourself deeper champ

If it helps, I hated 2 when i played it. Just didnt care for it all, said I'd never play it again. Then I played 3, ane suddenly 2 seemed fucking great. I really enjoyed 2 when I played it a second time and the DLCs are fantastic. 3 is thr worst game in the Soulsbourne series

Why didn't you like 3?

Aside from the bosses (which are good), it feels like the gameplay was hampered by the increased speed.

Most monsters being defeated by light attack spam is lame.

Also the PvP is shit.

The game is still good and I've played it several times, but that's due to the bosses being fun to fight and the presentation being very good. I can understand why some people really dislike it though.

That's weird because I feel the opposite really

Bosses were too easy except for Nameless King and Frieda