Dark Souls 1 vs. Dark Souls 2, and why the sequel is better

[Squire Grooktook]

I just like Grass Shield so I can attack and run around more often.

[CMoon]

Out of curiosity, what platform did you play DkS 2 on? I've seen the debate on whether DkS 2 is faster or slower than 1 before, and usually it's people who played on PS3 who found it overly slow, with people who played on PC typically finding it faster. As mentioned earlier in this thread, there are platform to platform differences in the game other than the visuals, thanks to From's somewhat lazy coding.

Yup! PS3 for both DS1 & 2. This is part of the reason I'm interested in checking out the ps4 port eventually since I have been wondering how many of the problems I had with the game were with that particular port.

Agreed that there's a couple of areas where the lock-on range is shorter than it looks like it should be. I have no problem with "shorter lock-on range in dark areas" as a mechanic, but it does stick out when it happens in a somewhat brighter area, which does happen a few times. It's a lot more minor for me, since I'm playing primarily melee.

Yeah, try out an archer or spell user and see what you think. If you love a game, it is easy to start forgiving the blunders; but when I was still trying to decide whether or not I liked the game, this started hitting me in the face.

You only have to get it to 88 to have as many iFrames as the DkS 1 fatroll, and you have a faster recovery on top of that (that's four character points in ADP, which is nothing in a game where you end at SL 150 or so).

I don't like this rationale. In DS1, you can have fast roll out of the box. Fat roll is balancing (IE punishment) for using heavy armor and equipment. In DS2, you actually have to level quite a bit to be able to play the game the way a SL1 character plays in the first game.

I actually don't like tying iframes to a stat at all. It would be like having to level up mario to jump properly. It implies I have to play through the game significantly gimped until I can actually level enough to play the game the way I want to. Feels like a poor choice.

However, in terms of pure "how interesting of a challenge is this area to get past" -- how good is the "obstacle course" I'm running through, if you will -- DkS 2 blows 1 out of the water. Clever archer usage [...] I mean, does DkS 1 have any area as constantly pressuring as Shrine of Amana

Here's a case where we just have differing opinions. In conjunction with the wonky lock-on, I found myself not enjoying the rooms loaded with enemies with longer range than me and infinite ammo. Shrine of Amana and Brightstone Cove in particular feel very obnoxious to me with the huge enemy density and long range attacks. You're actually one of the few people I've heard praise this aspect of the design.

shitty Izalith/Crystal Caverns/Tomb of Giants

For the record, I like Tomb of the Giants, but I would argue the post O&S game is definitely inferior to what proceeded it (shame you don't like The Depths; they're great!) Lost Izalith though...what a waste.

The reason Dark Souls 2 is slower is because stamina is ridiculously limited, and since every fucking thing uses stamina, everything takes longer. Having to retreat and reengage every fight every few seconds is really stupid. Even MGS3 didn't make Imposing Imperator run out of breath halfway up the ladder.

This gets back to my issue with the way the stats work in DS2. Soft caps are lower, but the overall benefit seems lower too. I didn't want to say too much about this for fear of a 'git gud' response, but I found the limitation on stamina so imposing I actually went to using small weapons like daggers. I feel like there was some philosophical split between how DS1 could be played like an arcade game (maybe this is coming from my attempts at speed running it), and making DS2 more realistic.

Fuck realism!

[Bananamatic]

It's a boring as fuck and annoying strategy, but it's also the single most effective way to fight about 90% of the game's common enemies.

And even if you're not circle-strafe backstabbing, the emphasis on blocking in general fucking sucks. "Hold LB for defense" is awful in any action game. Dark Souls 2 did a very good thing by making shields weaker; honestly, that, and the fact that so many fewer enemies use shields, are the biggest two reasons I like 2 so much more than 1. Shields fucking suck in action games. I don't care that it's realistic that they were good; it's still bad for fun.

dark souls 1 also didn't have bullshit shields on 90% of the enemies, try to break a small/medium shield guard by attacking it with a heavy weapon in dks2, the enemy probably won't run out of stamina no matter how many times you hit him

in dks1 all you had to do to break the hollows' shields was to 2h a weapon (which also gave a WAY higher damage bonus than in dks2, giving you actually less reason to use a shield) and hit them once with it and they're wide open
the only exception IIRC was the rapier balder knight, his buckler had the stability of a greatshield for some reason

[Obscura]

Yeah, try out an archer or spell user and see what you think. If you love a game, it is easy to start forgiving the blunders; but when I was still trying to decide whether or not I liked the game, this started hitting me in the face.

Actually, my current build has some spell backup. The best description I have for it is "int-based melee"; the standard weapon loadout I've used for most of the game is Magic Longsword + Pyromancy Flame in the right hand and Fire Longsword + Sorcerer Staff in the left hand, with int as the primary damage stat (and a bit of STR later, since I wanted to fuck around with Claymores a bit). Usually, I walk around with either the longswords powerstanced or with the magic longsword 2-handed with the catalyst selected in the left hand for enemies like the Bastille dogs or the Tseldora spiders that I don't want to get close to, and also for the occasional bit of cheesy sniping from high places. I'd agree that if you wanted to try a solely ranged build, it would probably be a hugely frustrating experience; the flipside is that no matter what ranged stat you pick, you've got options up close (if you go Dex, you can go with Scimitar, Falchion, Dagger or possibly even Longsword; Faith has lightning or dark infusions; Int has Fire or Magic infusions, and also enchanted in a pinch).

I don't like this rationale. In DS1, you can have fast roll out of the box. Fat roll is balancing (IE punishment) for using heavy armor and equipment. In DS2, you actually have to level quite a bit to be able to play the game the way a SL1 character plays in the first game.

Can you have the fast roll out of the box with most classes without going naked? Knight starts at fatrolling, and I think most other classes start at midroll?

Anyways, the roll can be used for movement as well as for raw i-frames. You can get through the early game fine by sitting near the edge of an enemy's effective range and rolling backwards then punishing the recovery, basically playing "footsies" with them.

I actually don't like tying iframes to a stat at all. It would be like having to level up mario to jump properly. It implies I have to play through the game significantly gimped until I can actually level enough to play the game the way I want to. Feels like a poor choice.

Iframes are effectively tied to a stat in DkS 1; it's just a bit indirect.

Here's a case where we just have differing opinions. In conjunction with the wonky lock-on, I found myself not enjoying the rooms loaded with enemies with longer range than me and infinite ammo. Shrine of Amana and Brightstone Cove in particular feel very obnoxious to me with the huge enemy density and long range attacks. You're actually one of the few people I've heard praise this aspect of the design.

See, I personally found the whole "charge the sniper and roll through or around his projectiles" aspect of the game incredibly fun. It felt like I was actually able to play with a bit of initiative and aggression, the lack of which in DkS 1 annoyed the hell out of me, without the enemies just standing there and letting me hack the shit out of them. And even when they're in a place where you can't charge them, like the one "up the ladder" in Forest of Fallen Giants, it forces you to at least keep moving around, and keeps the action from becoming a staring contest.

This gets back to my issue with the way the stats work in DS2. Soft caps are lower, but the overall benefit seems lower too. I didn't want to say too much about this for fear of a 'git gud' response, but I found the limitation on stamina so imposing I actually went to using small weapons like daggers. I feel like there was some philosophical split between how DS1 could be played like an arcade game (maybe this is coming from my attempts at speed running it), and making DS2 more realistic.

Fuck realism!

I agree "fuck realism", but I see it the other way around; DkS 1 is "soldiers hiding behind shields", like some sort of Roman army re-enactment, while DkS 2 really feels like a faster, more "open" (for lack of a better word) game; generally, I can either kill or do really severe damage to an enemy and still have enough stamina left for a roll, and there's not a lot of them that sit and hide behind shields so if I can land my attack before they can, I can feel a lot freer to "strike first" (indeed, DkS 2's use of ranged enemies really punishes anyone who isn't willing to show a bit of aggression) and make something happen.

EDIT @ Bananamatic: I didn't know that 2-handing did more stamina damage in DkS 1, so thanks for that. In DkS 2 is MUCH better than the worthless kick in DkS 1, and you can really fuck up any enemy that tries to sit and block with that move. That said, I never really had a hard time killing things that had small or medium shields; against most of those enemies, for whatever reason, the Longsword's 2-handed RT avoids the shield entirely and hits anyways.

[Squire Grooktook]

How is the kick worthless? Barring the aforementioned 2 handed guard break, I found the kick to basically be a fighting game throw: get close and take a little risk to break their guard when they turtle. Works pretty well imo.

[Bananamatic]

in dks1 i just unequipped armor in order to get fastroll at all times, armor does way more in dks2 anyways (to the point where using havels in pvp is considered cheap due to how much damage it negates)

Anyways, the roll can be used for movement as well as for raw i-frames. You can get through the early game fine by sitting near the edge of an enemy's effective range and rolling backwards then punishing the recovery, basically playing "footsies" with them.

I thought the earlygame roll makes the game hell, you take so many hits during the part where you are already vulnerable and still have hyper armor on with low ADP that the best way to start a new game is to rush Dragonrider and put everything into ADP until at least 95-96 agility, wherever the breakpoint is

it also affects item usage time, against Pursuer at default level I took a lot of hits from the lack of iframes and then couldn't even use a lifegem due to low AGI
went dragonrider first, 95 agi, took almost no hits and could use lifegems just fine

the early points into adaptability are probably the biggest difficulty drop in terms of PvE

[Obscura]

How is the kick worthless? Barring the aforementioned 2 handed guard break, I found the kick to basically be a fighting game throw: get close and take a little risk to break their guard when they turtle. Works pretty well imo.

The problem I had with it is that the recovery frames on the kick aren't much shorter than the guard break animation itself, so since I was using strength weapons (which are generally relatively slow), they could get the shield back up after their guard break before I could actually make contact with an attack afterwards.

[Squire Grooktook]

How is the kick worthless? Barring the aforementioned 2 handed guard break, I found the kick to basically be a fighting game throw: get close and take a little risk to break their guard when they turtle. Works pretty well imo.

The problem I had with it is that the recovery frames on the kick aren't much shorter than the guard break animation itself, so since I was using strength weapons (which are generally relatively slow), they could get the shield back up after their guard break before I could actually make contact with an attack afterwards.

What? Really?

Every time I kicked a guy, I just hit r and combo'd him to death.

[Bananamatic]

even more reason to go the brute force route
i think you might even smash straight through the shield with a heavy enough weapon

[Cagar]

Dark Souls 2 is literally better in every way compared to DkS1, except muh map connections/world integrity. < So basically the stuff that barely matters to me.
Dark Souls feels like a great art project from a great Japanese mind, but Dark Souls 2 feels like a great game.
Dark souls often sacrifices gameplay for artistic purposes (by making boring-ass sections and way too long corridors), and I hate that. The difficulty balance is all over the place because of that too.

[Immryr]

i think liking the level design of either game is just a personal preference thing. dark souls two is filled with relatively linear areas which are essentially gauntlets for you to battle through, where as the first game is more intricate and more about exploration. personally I prefer the approach of the first game. the dlc areas in dks2 are great though and stand in stark contrast to the rest of the game.

I think both games are great and don't really understand how anyone could like one game and not the other. if I had to choose one I'd go with the first game though.


also - the kick is amazing!

[Marc]

Anyone point me to a good explanation of leveling up? On my play through both a used brute force with the strongest weapons and armour, I'd like to try out a different build on the PS4 game, but every explanation I've read so far makes my head hurt.

[Immryr]

what about levelling do you not understand? strength, dexterity, intelligence and faith are the four damage stats - put points into which ever one scales with the weapon you want to use. vit gives you health, endurance ups your stamina and adp gives you more iframes on your roll+ makes things like consuming estus go faster.

[Marc]

Scaling puzzles the shit out of me, for instance I've seen videos of people absolutely decimating bosses with magic, but no matter how I set up - especially on Souls 2 - nothing seemed to do anywhere near the amount of damage that simply increasing STR and using the Drangleic sword did.

[Bananamatic]

the game had many rebalance patches, lightning spears for example made PvE easymode but now it's completely useless with barely any casts and half the power so the videos might be outdated

if you want to do loads of damage, thrust weapon with high counter damage+leo ring, buffs>scaling in general

or use a blunt weapon because a lot of bosses are weaker against blunt, slash damage is probably the worst

[quash]

Just chiming in to point out that there are way more issues with the PC port of Dark Souls than people have let on. I have yet to beat the game because my save has corrupted three times now. It'll load me in the area of the last bonfire I rested at, but my character will be stuck in a collision loop and can't move. This will last for a minute or so until my character falls, dies, and gets respawned in the same collision loop. I know the first third or so of the game (up to ringing the bell) like the back of my hand because I've had to play through it four times.

Also, fuck Demon's Souls. It is an NES kusoge in disguise at best. Dark Souls is automatically better by virtue of at least making the enemies play by the same rules that you do (no infinite poise, max stamina, etc. bullshit).

[Squire Grooktook]

Also, fuck Demon's Souls. It is an NES kusoge in disguise at best. Dark Souls is automatically better by virtue of at least making the enemies play by the same rules that you do (no infinite poise, max stamina, etc. bullshit).

I don't remember if any of this is true (been too long) but bring back 20-30 minute checkpoint gaps and I'll be happy.

[Blinge]

Just chiming in to point out that there are way more issues with the PC port of Dark Souls than people have let on

DS fix

[Bananamatic]

infinite poise, max stamina, etc. bullshit

this sounds an awful lot like dark souls 2

[Chaos Phoenixma]

It's also not true.

Demon's Souls doesn't even have poise, though I don't have any issue with staggering most enemies outside of bosses or certain giant ones, which you'd expect to not get staggered. No idea about stamina because you can't see it, but I think only bosses don't have to deal with it.


I've only played Demon's so far from the series. Will get Dark Souls eventually for PS3 as well.

[Blinge]

psst.. Obscura, how do you explain this?

[quash]

Just chiming in to point out that there are way more issues with the PC port of Dark Souls than people have let on

DS fix

DSFix doesn't even scratch the surface, dude. I wish the resolution and locked framerate were the worst things about PC Dark Souls. Random frame rate drops (independent of resolution issues mind you, and don't you dare question my specs), screwed up command interpreter (using both Xinput and Dinput, though in my experience it is slightly better with the former), save files corrupting, abysmal netcode, the list goes on. I will probably end up getting the PS3 version at some point so I can play a version of the game that isn't entirely fucked.

[quash]

Demon's Souls doesn't even have poise

Which is even worse than what I originally said. I was just making it relatable to anyone that's played Dark Souls.

[Squire Grooktook]

^^^ Not quite the same. Infinite poise, if it were in, would mean all enemies have hyper armor at all times, I think? You can certainly break most normal enemies out of their attacks.

[quash]

psst.. Obscura, how do you explain this?

Not to say that I agree or disagree, but this is hardly the kind of supporting evidence you should be using for this, or really any argument.

[Obscura]

psst.. Obscura, how do you explain this?

How do you explain that Ocarina of Time is more popular than Ys: The Oath in Felghana? How do you explain that Skyrim is more popular than any Souls game? How do you explain that the GoW games are more popular than DMC 3, DMC 4, and Bayonetta?

Popularity and quality aren't the same thing.

[Blinge]

Marketing, brand awareness, accessibility, marketing.

Doesn't really apply to these two games within the same series that aren't different in terms of the above.

You set out to convince or prove that Dark Souls 2 is better than 1, by reason of 1 being "utterly flawed in execution as to not be generally enjoyable."
You appear to have failed.

Your explanation and responses were ridden with hyperbole, absolutism and a general petulance that served only to repel fans of Dark1 and make them less receptive to your arguments.

I've called you out on your point about having 'maxed' stamina, seeking a clarification. You've ignored me twice.

Guess I should just invoke Ghegs' law and have done with it.

edit: I'm aware that posting the poll result was a dick move.

[Squire Grooktook]

I think what's totally and utterly out of the question is "Dark Souls 1 is a bad game".

I can see liking one game over the other, but outright stating it like it's fact is not a viable opinion IMO.

[CMoon]

I think what's totally and utterly out of the question is "Dark Souls 1 is a bad game".

I can see liking 1 over the 2, but outright stating it like it's fact is not a viable opinion IMO.

Of all the other things that seem objective or nearly-objective, this one told me that Obscura just had some horrible experience with the game. Even my overly exaggerated negative opinion of DS2 would still give it an 8 out of 10. I don't want to make assumptions about Obscura's thoughts, but once you start feeling sour toward a game, you only dwell on the games faults. Regardless, its a weird statement since Obscura says a lot of positive statements about the game, but then dwells entirely on enemies using their shields too much, needing to backstab, etc.

[Obscura]

I think what's totally and utterly out of the question is "Dark Souls 1 is a bad game".

I can see liking 1 over the 2, but outright stating it like it's fact is not a viable opinion IMO.

Of all the other things that seem objective or nearly-objective, this one told me that Obscura just had some horrible experience with the game. Even my overly exaggerated negative opinion of DS2 would still give it an 8 out of 10. I don't want to make assumptions about Obscura's thoughts, but once you start feeling sour toward a game, you only dwell on the games faults. Regardless, its a weird statement since Obscura says a lot of positive statements about the game, but then dwells entirely on enemies using their shields too much, needing to backstab, etc.

There are a lot of things to be positive about with DkS 1. It's heavily flawed, to the point of being somewhat unenjoyable to me, but the overall idea of "lets bring the classic Japanese-style action RPG into the age of modern graphics, full 3D engines, and thick atmosphere" is a killer one.

Unfortunately, execution matters more than ideas. And as cool as so many of DkS 1's ideas are, the execution of the "action" part of the "action RPG" formula tends to fall flat on its face. And, seriously, that lighting.

@Blinge: I can't go into specifics on the character I beat DkS 1 with the first time, because I don't still have the savefile (as I mentioned, my roommate played the hell out of the game, and he eventually overwrote my save). That said, I know that I was putting points into END after the green bar was not getting longer anymore, just because I needed the carry weight.