@_Matt_ @Blabadon@Alucard_Prime@acp_45
@DragonfireXZ95 said:
@lamprey263 said:
I really don't get all the shit talking of Dark Souls 2, then again I never played it on last gen consoles but the Scholar of First Sin version on current gen consoles was great. Anyhow, I don't have any issues with Dark Souls 3 either, the game is going through the rounds of finding and fixing bugs, working on balancing issues, and they'll likely add more content to it in form of new areas, bosses, weapons, armor, rings, etc. Right now, it's simply more Souls is how I see it.
2 is not a bad game. It just wasn't that great of a game. It's still a good game that I would recommend people play if they already played all of the other Souls games.
I haven't played sholar of the first sin, I played the normal version because I played the game at release. I watched videos from scholar of the first sin, it doesn't seem to look all that better but even then the technical side was really not the problem with this game.
For me it was the artwork and gameplay, type of enemies and lore in general, some say they like ds2 better, other's like ds1 better. Ds was by far the better game and bloodborne kinda sits in the midlle, I wore the stone armor in ds1 , had a large shield and weapon. Also had some magic spells.
So while bloodborne is piece of art, i still prefer the type of gameplay of the dark souls games, but if some people here say that ds2 is better than ds3, then I'm glad I haven't bough it yet. My question is this do you think ds2 is better than ds1 as well, and why do you think that.... Even a better question would be, is dark souls 3 like dark souls 1, because then that would be great (for me)
I'm planning to get the pc version, so I won't be able to sell it, still got ds2 as well maybe I should give it another chance... because the bloodborne style of play, imo, gets old fast. It kinda misses the whole rpg factor , if your character is always a speedy character no matter how you choose to customize your character.
Log in to comment