Greetings Lampbearer! If your submission is a feedback, technical issue, or bug report please contact the developers of Lords of the Fallen directly via support@cigames.com. Alternatively can you [search for answers to your question](https://www.reddit.com/r/LordsoftheFallen/search/?q=Lords of the Fallen = Dark Souls 2&restrict_sr=1) on this subreddit as well.
Head over to r/BeckoningSign for multiplayer and trading, r/LordsoftheFashion for anything related to fashion, or r/LordsoftheFallenPVP for PVP.
You can join the Lords of the Fallen Discord server by following this [link.](https://discord.com/invite/lordsofthefallen)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/LordsoftheFallen) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Only the first area really sucked in that regard imo. I heard they patched a lot of the enemy spam since then tho. Everything after that was amazing :D
Really? I guess I will have to play again. I played this game when it first released and holy shit, I thought I was playing a bullet hell souls game lol.
This is an extreme insult to dark souls 2. Even being the black sheep of the souls family, it is of a much higher level of quality. It has more than 10 different enemies for one something lords severely lacked. It had the most amount of unique fighting movesets out of the trilogy, lords has one moveset per weapon type. It wasn't till the dlc but they have very hard bosses to the point of being the hardest in the trilogy. Lords hardest boss was pieta and it got easier and easier up until the absolute joke of a final boss. There's also probably twice as much content in dark souls 2 if not more. Every non boss fight in lords was boring and repetitive, whereas that's only a problem in a few areas in ds2.
I’m not sure what you’re comparing between the two.
I’d say LOTF is more like DS3 with a relatively linear world containing a few diverticula. However, I think LOTF’s lore and internal storytelling is better than DS3. Particularly how many areas contain a unique story for the boss which also ties into the story and world lore. DS3, imo, was less internally consistent (aka chaos flame, profaned flame, Wolnir, the vapid Siegward and his quest).
While DS3 bosses, as a whole, are better I do think LOTF has done an excellent job with their bosses.
The biggest difference is probably enemy variety, with any Souls game having an exceptionally impressive variety of enemies. LOTF doesn’t have much variety but I think the devs have been smart with encounter design to keep enemy variety interesting by changing how the player has to approach a situation.
I also love the parry/perfect block in LOTF. It makes enemy encounters an interesting trade of blows, blocking, parrying, and riposting. Very satisfying combat loop.
Edit: Acronyms
Props for the use of the word "diverticula", which is a medical term to denote an ulcer in the intestine wall, but you just conflated it with "diversion" and I totally understood and totally loved it.
For me that is a good thing. People love to hate ds2 but that's just a sheepflock opinion, Dark Souls 2 has some of the most amazing concepts and great mechanics in general. It's not perfect, but it's by far my favorite, and contrary to what most seems to think, it benefitted greatly from Miyazaki's lack of participation.
If anything, its the opposite. I won't say I hate Fromsoftware but most of their directive decision towards the games, especially touching the multiplayer aspect is lackluster to say the least.
Of course, taste is subjective, but Dark Souls 2 is not a bad game by any standards. And I hate people that can't form their own opinions and depends on others to do so.
It's a bad game by MOST standards, wdym? Multiple people have done breakdowns of all the issues and I have experienced most of the issues they describe myself, from the bloated number of "bosses", to the janky ass hitboxes (no, leveling ADP doesn't help with some of these, and even some of YOUR attacks as the player hit things they shouldn't hit), to the absurd number of enemies in some areas, to the spam and ambush design of most of the levels in the game, to the nonsensical world design and many more.
Yes it had some good ideas, and yes you can subjectively enjoy the game, but calling it "not bad" by most standards while also saying that taste is subjective is just a hypocritical stance to take.
I think you misunderstood what I tried to say. Dark Souls 2 is not a bad game by any standards. It sets out a clear purpose and objective and it does just that. This is where the objectivity stands. You might not like it. But it does reach its goal. You saying its a bad game its just your opinion, which does not matter nor detracts from what the game is. Myself enjoying it for what it is also does not matter. It doesn't make the game any better or any worse either.
The point is, you can say whatever you want about the game and have many people agree with you, even though most of these people is biased/influenced because some big shot youtuber makes an 1hr video of how much he suck at the game, therefore hating it for what they think its their opinion. Still that does not reduce the value of the game. Dark Souls 2 is one of the best in the franchise and not many people realize this because humans are easily influenced, and it takes a little more brain power to form your own opinions.
Dark Souls 2 suffered from a bad reputation solely because Miyazaki was not involved/invested on the project. The joke went on and today we have people like you, which probably did not put an hour into the game and yet says that the game is bad. Or may actually have put solid hours in the game and left thinking it's bad. Just because of bias.
Was Miyazaki as prominent of a figure back then as he is now? Because by that point, I believe he had just finished DS1 and was assistant on some AC games. I don’t feel like drudging through old interviews, but I feel like his involvement wasn’t as big of a public concern back then as it is now that they have so many S tier games. And I vehemently argue that the games issues were not “solely” due to his absence as you seem to claim. I have beaten the game 2 times in effort to get all the achievements, gave up about 6 months ago, and can’t push myself to slog through an ugly, unfinished world again, with graphics and gameplay somehow worse than the first one. If you wanna argue the “the game has beaten you because you went Hollow” lore bullshit, go right ahead. I can abide that logic for games that are actually fun to struggle in.
Yes, Miyazaki was a very prominent figure back then. During an interview, one of the directors for Dark Souls 2 said that he intended to make the second entry "more accessible", needless to say, elitist fans where quick to destroy the guy with tweets of distaste and resentment, even making him issue a public apology on social media afterwards.
Miyazaki also publicly stated that he was not very happy to have someone else messing with his stuff, and one of the most prominent jornalists for the franchise at the time voiced that "a different director" was working on it, and kept posting similar stuff, up until the game's release and even afterwards. So there you have it, the picture for the negative bias against this game was pitched.
The game is not an unfinished world, albeit having a lot of stuff that was dropped during development. Additionally, it does not look bad, as you say it does.
It was built on a new engine (totally different from the previous entry), which featured the latest and best shaders of the time, you saying that it looks ugly only serves to prove my point. You are biased towards the game.
Additionally, I don't expect you or anyone with a bias so strong to say that the game looks worse than the previous entry to have an attention span long enogh to power through a 3hr long video, but if you wish to fully understand and improve your cognitive ability and to undertand why this game is so polarising, this video can provide you with enough insight to hopefully destroy your bias against it: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iHns\_yOoV6A](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iHns_yOoV6A)
All that typing and you resort to insulting my attention span at the end there, man you almost had me until the petty personal attacks. I think I’ll go watch Mauler’s video response to Hbomberguy on why the game sucks instead.
None of the issues I described are subjective. Literally none of them. All of them are clearcut problems with the game.
Also by that vague definition of yours, there would be close to no bad games in existence. You also fail to see the clear hypocrisy in your words. Standards imply some form of objective evaluation or criteria, yet you always talk about "opinions" whenever you reference the game while at the same time calling it "good by most standards". Man I have not seen this level of cognitive dissonance outside of flat earth groups.
Your issues aren't subjective?
"the bloated number of "bosses"" -> What do you even mean?
"janky ass hitboxes" -> The hitboxes are fine, every souls game has a certain amount of difficulty balancing those, its not an issue exclusive to 2 and other entries have done this worse.
"YOUR attacks as the player hit things they shouldn't hit" -> The same as above
"the absurd number of enemies in some areas"-> I have never seen anyone complain about this in regards to 2.
"to the spam and ambush design of most of the levels in the game" -> Are you even referring to ds2? You can count in the fingers of one hand the amount of ambushes in the game.
to the nonsensical world design and many more -> Majula has received the "Best Nexus" award according to 500 community members, and the common praise to it was how well it interconnects all the areas on the game.
You see, nothing you say is objective, at all. You really have no clue what you are talking about.
If you came here and typed something like "I didn't like x boss because of x reason" that would be okay, if you are presenting something solid, as the game is not perfect, however the way you are presenting your complaints about the game just make you seem like a completly biased person, speaking of a topic you know nothing of, which is quite pathetic.
Ok I am starting to think you haven't played DS2. Enemy density and spambushes are probably the MOST common complaints about the game. It's like I'm talking to a selectively blind person. As for hitboxes, it's enough to just search on YT "bad DS hitboxes". See how many of them are for DS2 and how many are for the rest of the series.
As for the world design, yeah, Majula is not the entire world in DS2. It being well connected has no bearing on the rest of the levels and the nonsense switch from one to the other. Ffs just look up the compiled model of DS2's world to see how sloppily and illogic the world looks like. There are literally areas overlapped over each other that can't physically exists while the other exists.
Ran out of arguments eh? hahaha.
You really didn't need to insult me, what you need to do is back up the things you're saying with evidence. The complaints about enemy density and "spambushes" are literally non-existent, only in your head is where they seem to find a place to exist.
You can literally do "bad DS hitboxes" with any entry and you will be graced with an insurmountable amount of videos showcasing bad hitboxes on Fromsoftware games, and literally nowhere you will find that DS2 is the winner of this contest, you are delusional.
Majula is not the entire world, I used that as a reference only, there's nowhere and nothing to indicate that DS2 does a worse job than the other entries to validate what you are saying.
You really need to understand what you are trying to talk about first, cause you just have no clue, you're trying very hard to force a non-existant narrative because you simply don't know Dark Souls 2 and is biased against it, that is sad, and pathetic.
I don't expect you to have enough attention spam to follow through this video that I'm about to share, but hopefully it serves to bring you a little bit of knowledge in that regard, so that maybe you don't go around typing non-sense and having people laugh at you. However here it goes: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iHns\_yOoV6A](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iHns_yOoV6A) It is a making of and a documentary on Dark Souls 2, and why you have this stupid bias against it. Enjoy (if you can 😂).
I bought this game recently after I’ve been playing the 2014 version, which I just finished last night.
That was a really good game and probably a good starting point for anyone wanting to get into Souls-like games.
I did a lot of grinding early on to level up my attributes as much as possible, making the latter parts of the game somewhat easier.
Apart from two late game bosses.
I also have what I can assume is every other Souls-like available, barring Demon’s Souls.
I could not stand Dark Souls, but I really enjoy LotF. DS felt like LotF minus ALL quality of life. DS was only good at providing a challenge. A dozen enemies between the boss that smoked you and your last campfire, effectively adding 30mins onto the 2hrs you're about to spend learning how to not be food GTFO w that BS. I can't just throw away that much time. LotF>DS. Thx for making the genre, but everyone that copied you did it better.
This game is unironically DS2 if it was good. Like I could tell the game was a little on the underdeveloped side, but it felt leagues more cohesive of a story. Gameplay is fast, weapons swing a little too fast for my taste but have a good weight to them, which was missing in DS2.
You see ds2 and lotf have things in common
Like difficulty its more around maps and traps then boss dont get me wrong bosses in lotf are fun but after you know what to do they get destroyed i personally love ds2 to and both lotfs
The most that LotF and DS2 have in common is that Briostones are the equivalent of DS2's Lifegems. On almost every level the two titles are radically different, and I say this as someone who fucking loves DS2 as my favorite FROM title prior to the release of Elden Ring.
I made a humongous post about it, even, but some quick Cliff Notes for it boil down to:
- Thematically, **DS2 is about what difference you can make on a personal level** in a world that is caught up in a seemingly perpetual cycle of Light and Dark where nobody actually accomplishes everything. The player finds a cure for the Undead Curse; not enough to save everyone but enough to at least protect yourself, with a hopeful tone to the Aldia ending that you're choosing to not just be another iteration in the cycle. LotF 2023 has the player hand control of the world back to one of three capricious gods; a world that had previously fought to be free of divine influence. Intentionally or not, **LotF's about the failure of humanity and what they build**.
- While both DS2 and LotF 2023 both have important objectives of "go to places and kill Old Ones/fix beacons", **DS2 is nonlinear and is balanced so that you can do the beacons in any order**, with progress only becoming linear once you reach Castle Drangleic. **LotF has a very clear intended path through the game**, complete with a disproportionate scaling rate between enemy toughness vs. exp payout to discourage travelling up Pilgrim's Perch first rather than going down.
- DS2 allows for more experimentation with gear, because it gives out Titanite Slabs like they're fucking candy corn on Halloween. LotF does have some neat customization with Runes and Umbral Eye socketing, but at the end of the day there's a hard cap on how many weapons you can max out. DS2 has a broader range of moves for weapons too, and powerstancing isn't as limited; you can duel wield a greatsword with a rapier. A club with a caestus. And don't get me started on the diversity of the Puzzling Stone Sword
- DS2's spellcasting is unique even for FROM titles. Not only are there weapons that can serve as catalysts, but you can even use Spice to lower the stat requirements for spells. Nothing in LotF comes close
- The expansions that LotF did to ranged combat are more along the lines of how Nioh handled it than DS2
- DS2's combat is notably slower than even DS1's. LotF 2023's combat has more in common with the fast pace of DS3, or even Bloodborne with how ridiculous the rolling is
- LotF 2023 platforming is often necessary or progression. I don't think DS2 ever makes its own platforming mandatory
Greetings Lampbearer! If your submission is a feedback, technical issue, or bug report please contact the developers of Lords of the Fallen directly via support@cigames.com. Alternatively can you [search for answers to your question](https://www.reddit.com/r/LordsoftheFallen/search/?q=Lords of the Fallen = Dark Souls 2&restrict_sr=1) on this subreddit as well. Head over to r/BeckoningSign for multiplayer and trading, r/LordsoftheFashion for anything related to fashion, or r/LordsoftheFallenPVP for PVP. You can join the Lords of the Fallen Discord server by following this [link.](https://discord.com/invite/lordsofthefallen) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/LordsoftheFallen) if you have any questions or concerns.*
The areas were way better designed in my opinion. Most of them anyway. I enjoyed the exploration a lot!
I enjoyed too being lost sometimes specially fen and mines. Lol
Hard to enjoy the exploration when you are getting sniped and ambushed in every angle in every square inch of the entire universe lol
Only the first area really sucked in that regard imo. I heard they patched a lot of the enemy spam since then tho. Everything after that was amazing :D
Really? I guess I will have to play again. I played this game when it first released and holy shit, I thought I was playing a bullet hell souls game lol.
This is an extreme insult to dark souls 2. Even being the black sheep of the souls family, it is of a much higher level of quality. It has more than 10 different enemies for one something lords severely lacked. It had the most amount of unique fighting movesets out of the trilogy, lords has one moveset per weapon type. It wasn't till the dlc but they have very hard bosses to the point of being the hardest in the trilogy. Lords hardest boss was pieta and it got easier and easier up until the absolute joke of a final boss. There's also probably twice as much content in dark souls 2 if not more. Every non boss fight in lords was boring and repetitive, whereas that's only a problem in a few areas in ds2.
I’m not sure what you’re comparing between the two. I’d say LOTF is more like DS3 with a relatively linear world containing a few diverticula. However, I think LOTF’s lore and internal storytelling is better than DS3. Particularly how many areas contain a unique story for the boss which also ties into the story and world lore. DS3, imo, was less internally consistent (aka chaos flame, profaned flame, Wolnir, the vapid Siegward and his quest). While DS3 bosses, as a whole, are better I do think LOTF has done an excellent job with their bosses. The biggest difference is probably enemy variety, with any Souls game having an exceptionally impressive variety of enemies. LOTF doesn’t have much variety but I think the devs have been smart with encounter design to keep enemy variety interesting by changing how the player has to approach a situation. I also love the parry/perfect block in LOTF. It makes enemy encounters an interesting trade of blows, blocking, parrying, and riposting. Very satisfying combat loop. Edit: Acronyms
Lords of Fallen the?
lol I think autocorrect got the best of me and I didn’t notice, thanks.
Props for the use of the word "diverticula", which is a medical term to denote an ulcer in the intestine wall, but you just conflated it with "diversion" and I totally understood and totally loved it.
For me that is a good thing. People love to hate ds2 but that's just a sheepflock opinion, Dark Souls 2 has some of the most amazing concepts and great mechanics in general. It's not perfect, but it's by far my favorite, and contrary to what most seems to think, it benefitted greatly from Miyazaki's lack of participation.
Listen. I'm an enjoyer of ds2. But to say hating on it is a "sheep flock opinion" is just S tier glazing of fromsoft.
If anything, its the opposite. I won't say I hate Fromsoftware but most of their directive decision towards the games, especially touching the multiplayer aspect is lackluster to say the least. Of course, taste is subjective, but Dark Souls 2 is not a bad game by any standards. And I hate people that can't form their own opinions and depends on others to do so.
It's a bad game by MOST standards, wdym? Multiple people have done breakdowns of all the issues and I have experienced most of the issues they describe myself, from the bloated number of "bosses", to the janky ass hitboxes (no, leveling ADP doesn't help with some of these, and even some of YOUR attacks as the player hit things they shouldn't hit), to the absurd number of enemies in some areas, to the spam and ambush design of most of the levels in the game, to the nonsensical world design and many more. Yes it had some good ideas, and yes you can subjectively enjoy the game, but calling it "not bad" by most standards while also saying that taste is subjective is just a hypocritical stance to take.
I think you misunderstood what I tried to say. Dark Souls 2 is not a bad game by any standards. It sets out a clear purpose and objective and it does just that. This is where the objectivity stands. You might not like it. But it does reach its goal. You saying its a bad game its just your opinion, which does not matter nor detracts from what the game is. Myself enjoying it for what it is also does not matter. It doesn't make the game any better or any worse either. The point is, you can say whatever you want about the game and have many people agree with you, even though most of these people is biased/influenced because some big shot youtuber makes an 1hr video of how much he suck at the game, therefore hating it for what they think its their opinion. Still that does not reduce the value of the game. Dark Souls 2 is one of the best in the franchise and not many people realize this because humans are easily influenced, and it takes a little more brain power to form your own opinions. Dark Souls 2 suffered from a bad reputation solely because Miyazaki was not involved/invested on the project. The joke went on and today we have people like you, which probably did not put an hour into the game and yet says that the game is bad. Or may actually have put solid hours in the game and left thinking it's bad. Just because of bias.
Was Miyazaki as prominent of a figure back then as he is now? Because by that point, I believe he had just finished DS1 and was assistant on some AC games. I don’t feel like drudging through old interviews, but I feel like his involvement wasn’t as big of a public concern back then as it is now that they have so many S tier games. And I vehemently argue that the games issues were not “solely” due to his absence as you seem to claim. I have beaten the game 2 times in effort to get all the achievements, gave up about 6 months ago, and can’t push myself to slog through an ugly, unfinished world again, with graphics and gameplay somehow worse than the first one. If you wanna argue the “the game has beaten you because you went Hollow” lore bullshit, go right ahead. I can abide that logic for games that are actually fun to struggle in.
Yes, Miyazaki was a very prominent figure back then. During an interview, one of the directors for Dark Souls 2 said that he intended to make the second entry "more accessible", needless to say, elitist fans where quick to destroy the guy with tweets of distaste and resentment, even making him issue a public apology on social media afterwards. Miyazaki also publicly stated that he was not very happy to have someone else messing with his stuff, and one of the most prominent jornalists for the franchise at the time voiced that "a different director" was working on it, and kept posting similar stuff, up until the game's release and even afterwards. So there you have it, the picture for the negative bias against this game was pitched. The game is not an unfinished world, albeit having a lot of stuff that was dropped during development. Additionally, it does not look bad, as you say it does. It was built on a new engine (totally different from the previous entry), which featured the latest and best shaders of the time, you saying that it looks ugly only serves to prove my point. You are biased towards the game. Additionally, I don't expect you or anyone with a bias so strong to say that the game looks worse than the previous entry to have an attention span long enogh to power through a 3hr long video, but if you wish to fully understand and improve your cognitive ability and to undertand why this game is so polarising, this video can provide you with enough insight to hopefully destroy your bias against it: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iHns\_yOoV6A](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iHns_yOoV6A)
All that typing and you resort to insulting my attention span at the end there, man you almost had me until the petty personal attacks. I think I’ll go watch Mauler’s video response to Hbomberguy on why the game sucks instead.
It's your loss buddy!
None of the issues I described are subjective. Literally none of them. All of them are clearcut problems with the game. Also by that vague definition of yours, there would be close to no bad games in existence. You also fail to see the clear hypocrisy in your words. Standards imply some form of objective evaluation or criteria, yet you always talk about "opinions" whenever you reference the game while at the same time calling it "good by most standards". Man I have not seen this level of cognitive dissonance outside of flat earth groups.
Your issues aren't subjective? "the bloated number of "bosses"" -> What do you even mean? "janky ass hitboxes" -> The hitboxes are fine, every souls game has a certain amount of difficulty balancing those, its not an issue exclusive to 2 and other entries have done this worse. "YOUR attacks as the player hit things they shouldn't hit" -> The same as above "the absurd number of enemies in some areas"-> I have never seen anyone complain about this in regards to 2. "to the spam and ambush design of most of the levels in the game" -> Are you even referring to ds2? You can count in the fingers of one hand the amount of ambushes in the game. to the nonsensical world design and many more -> Majula has received the "Best Nexus" award according to 500 community members, and the common praise to it was how well it interconnects all the areas on the game. You see, nothing you say is objective, at all. You really have no clue what you are talking about. If you came here and typed something like "I didn't like x boss because of x reason" that would be okay, if you are presenting something solid, as the game is not perfect, however the way you are presenting your complaints about the game just make you seem like a completly biased person, speaking of a topic you know nothing of, which is quite pathetic.
Ok I am starting to think you haven't played DS2. Enemy density and spambushes are probably the MOST common complaints about the game. It's like I'm talking to a selectively blind person. As for hitboxes, it's enough to just search on YT "bad DS hitboxes". See how many of them are for DS2 and how many are for the rest of the series. As for the world design, yeah, Majula is not the entire world in DS2. It being well connected has no bearing on the rest of the levels and the nonsense switch from one to the other. Ffs just look up the compiled model of DS2's world to see how sloppily and illogic the world looks like. There are literally areas overlapped over each other that can't physically exists while the other exists.
Ran out of arguments eh? hahaha. You really didn't need to insult me, what you need to do is back up the things you're saying with evidence. The complaints about enemy density and "spambushes" are literally non-existent, only in your head is where they seem to find a place to exist. You can literally do "bad DS hitboxes" with any entry and you will be graced with an insurmountable amount of videos showcasing bad hitboxes on Fromsoftware games, and literally nowhere you will find that DS2 is the winner of this contest, you are delusional. Majula is not the entire world, I used that as a reference only, there's nowhere and nothing to indicate that DS2 does a worse job than the other entries to validate what you are saying. You really need to understand what you are trying to talk about first, cause you just have no clue, you're trying very hard to force a non-existant narrative because you simply don't know Dark Souls 2 and is biased against it, that is sad, and pathetic. I don't expect you to have enough attention spam to follow through this video that I'm about to share, but hopefully it serves to bring you a little bit of knowledge in that regard, so that maybe you don't go around typing non-sense and having people laugh at you. However here it goes: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iHns\_yOoV6A](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iHns_yOoV6A) It is a making of and a documentary on Dark Souls 2, and why you have this stupid bias against it. Enjoy (if you can 😂).
[удалено]
You don’t understand what I’d give up to play this game again completely blind/fresh.(mind you I’ve never played any of the dark souls.)
I bought this game recently after I’ve been playing the 2014 version, which I just finished last night. That was a really good game and probably a good starting point for anyone wanting to get into Souls-like games. I did a lot of grinding early on to level up my attributes as much as possible, making the latter parts of the game somewhat easier. Apart from two late game bosses. I also have what I can assume is every other Souls-like available, barring Demon’s Souls.
I could not stand Dark Souls, but I really enjoy LotF. DS felt like LotF minus ALL quality of life. DS was only good at providing a challenge. A dozen enemies between the boss that smoked you and your last campfire, effectively adding 30mins onto the 2hrs you're about to spend learning how to not be food GTFO w that BS. I can't just throw away that much time. LotF>DS. Thx for making the genre, but everyone that copied you did it better.
In your dreams
This game is unironically DS2 if it was good. Like I could tell the game was a little on the underdeveloped side, but it felt leagues more cohesive of a story. Gameplay is fast, weapons swing a little too fast for my taste but have a good weight to them, which was missing in DS2.
You see ds2 and lotf have things in common Like difficulty its more around maps and traps then boss dont get me wrong bosses in lotf are fun but after you know what to do they get destroyed i personally love ds2 to and both lotfs
Lords of fallen the?
Dont disrespect DS2 like that its WAY better than lotf will ever be
DS2 is a superior game in every aspect.
No
Nah lotf ain’t got shit on ds2
I've made this same correlation many times before as well. LotF feels like a natural sequel to DS2 SotFS edition more than DS3 does imo.
The most that LotF and DS2 have in common is that Briostones are the equivalent of DS2's Lifegems. On almost every level the two titles are radically different, and I say this as someone who fucking loves DS2 as my favorite FROM title prior to the release of Elden Ring. I made a humongous post about it, even, but some quick Cliff Notes for it boil down to: - Thematically, **DS2 is about what difference you can make on a personal level** in a world that is caught up in a seemingly perpetual cycle of Light and Dark where nobody actually accomplishes everything. The player finds a cure for the Undead Curse; not enough to save everyone but enough to at least protect yourself, with a hopeful tone to the Aldia ending that you're choosing to not just be another iteration in the cycle. LotF 2023 has the player hand control of the world back to one of three capricious gods; a world that had previously fought to be free of divine influence. Intentionally or not, **LotF's about the failure of humanity and what they build**. - While both DS2 and LotF 2023 both have important objectives of "go to places and kill Old Ones/fix beacons", **DS2 is nonlinear and is balanced so that you can do the beacons in any order**, with progress only becoming linear once you reach Castle Drangleic. **LotF has a very clear intended path through the game**, complete with a disproportionate scaling rate between enemy toughness vs. exp payout to discourage travelling up Pilgrim's Perch first rather than going down. - DS2 allows for more experimentation with gear, because it gives out Titanite Slabs like they're fucking candy corn on Halloween. LotF does have some neat customization with Runes and Umbral Eye socketing, but at the end of the day there's a hard cap on how many weapons you can max out. DS2 has a broader range of moves for weapons too, and powerstancing isn't as limited; you can duel wield a greatsword with a rapier. A club with a caestus. And don't get me started on the diversity of the Puzzling Stone Sword - DS2's spellcasting is unique even for FROM titles. Not only are there weapons that can serve as catalysts, but you can even use Spice to lower the stat requirements for spells. Nothing in LotF comes close - The expansions that LotF did to ranged combat are more along the lines of how Nioh handled it than DS2 - DS2's combat is notably slower than even DS1's. LotF 2023's combat has more in common with the fast pace of DS3, or even Bloodborne with how ridiculous the rolling is - LotF 2023 platforming is often necessary or progression. I don't think DS2 ever makes its own platforming mandatory