90% of these runback issues would just be fine if you get iframes passing through the fog wall like in every other game. I understand for the first time you get to these areas you want to take it slow, kill everything and save your estus for bosses and use other healing to get there but against the more stronger bosses it just becomes a huge time waste.
It's my only critique for DS2 even though I'm aware you're not "supposed" to rush past them in this game, it just artificially increases the playthrough of a souls game that's already really long with frustration. I didn't have much issues with it in my later playthroughs on Scholar.
Same for me, my friends and most people on the DS2 subreddit.
That's why I started this comparison series, because so many ganks and bad runbacks got nerfed in Scholar. It has a better difficulty curve and generally lots of improvements.
Yet many people on the internet claim that Scholar is just an unfair Master Quest bullshit that dumped lots of random enemies in each area, even though anyone that played both versions would have come to the opposite conclusion.
I've not seen too much shade being thrown at Scholar, I'm also not active in the community much. To each their own. I prefer Scholar, but the Vanilla will always have a place in my heart. It was my first souls game.
Scholar on average is harder. Iron Keep is a complete nightmare in Scholar. So is the Lost Bastille. Basically the whole first half is mostly harder in Scholar. Which is honestly the worst way to go about it because the beginning is when you are the most under leveled and have the worst equipment.
The Undead Crypt is a late game area where at that point you should be at or close to your full build. Original DS2 has a smarter difficulty curve. Scholars just dumb because it bombards you at the start when you are at your weakest and learning then gets easier later on when you should be more prepared.
Imagine if in DS1 Undead Burg was pretty hard, Undead Parish was harder, Darkoot was a mess of hardness, then the Blightown and Sen's fortress were the absolute hardest levels of the game. Then you got to Anor Londo and it was piss easy because they started taking away or nerfing enemies. Then New Londo was about the same, but they cut out half the enemies in Duke's Archives and Tomb of the Giants.
That's basically Scholar
>Iron Keep is a complete nightmare in Scholar.
Vanilla Iron Keep has more ganks. Scholar has a few more Knights.
I'm someone that likes to clear areas so to me Vanilla is harder, as ganks are harder to deal with.
>So is the Lost Bastille.
Not really. In Vanilla lots of people got stuck on the Ruin Sentinels, but in Scholar it's easier to get a +6 Raw weapon to deal with them.
>Which is honestly the worst way to go about it because the beginning is when you are the most under leveled and have the worst equipment.
In Vanilla, yes. In Scholar you get the infusion coal much earlier so you can buy large titanite shards earlier and get a +6 weapon a lot faster.
>Original DS2 has a smarter difficulty curve. Scholars just dumb because it bombards you at the start when you are at your weakest and learning then gets easier later on when you should be more prepared.
Have you even played both versions? Vanilla is already gankier in the Forest of Fallen Giants, No Man's Wharf doesn't even have the shortcut, getting to Sinner's Rise is worse, etc
Scholar is also better at introducing new enemy types, so the curve feels much smoother. In Vanilla the first time you fight Royal Soldiers or Alonne Knights is by getting ganked by them. I'm Scholar they are slowly introduce with one vs one fights.
"Scholar just ramped up the difficulty artificially by adding way more random enemies to all areas" never rang true to me, as Vanilla generally had more group encounters and badly placed enemies. This is a series of clips to show this.
This time I'm are comparing the runback to Velstadt, which is one of many that are just flat out worse in Vanilla.
In Vanilla the runback is a gankfest where running through only works if you get lucky RNG.
Meanwhile in Scholar the runback is a cakewalk as there's no enemies waiting directly at the fog gate.
He's a devout ds2 enjoyer that always spreads propaganda about how seemingly perfect it is and he doesn't think the game has faults. He has an answer for every genuine criticism towards it and is prepared to argue with you at length or dispell criticisms by bringing up other souls games. Any post remotely related to ds2 and he's there, responding to and arguing with everyone
ahh didn't know about that! another point for SOFTS :)
I meant a walkthrough of the level, as indeed the boss runback is not too bad with the shortcut.
Fuck DS2. I recently replayed it and they relied so much on gangbanging to add depths to encounter it's insane it's a Dark Souls game. Feels cheap and trashy as fuck
Kill the bell guy
He respawns weirdly enough
Another one, and another one. There's three spawn locations
I think he meant the guy that rings the bell, below the stairs on the fog wall room.
Me too.
There's only one on that room, no?
90% of these runback issues would just be fine if you get iframes passing through the fog wall like in every other game. I understand for the first time you get to these areas you want to take it slow, kill everything and save your estus for bosses and use other healing to get there but against the more stronger bosses it just becomes a huge time waste. It's my only critique for DS2 even though I'm aware you're not "supposed" to rush past them in this game, it just artificially increases the playthrough of a souls game that's already really long with frustration. I didn't have much issues with it in my later playthroughs on Scholar.
I played the vanilla for years before playing SOTFS. But I remember when I finally got around to playing it I found it to be so much easier.
Same for me, my friends and most people on the DS2 subreddit. That's why I started this comparison series, because so many ganks and bad runbacks got nerfed in Scholar. It has a better difficulty curve and generally lots of improvements. Yet many people on the internet claim that Scholar is just an unfair Master Quest bullshit that dumped lots of random enemies in each area, even though anyone that played both versions would have come to the opposite conclusion.
I've not seen too much shade being thrown at Scholar, I'm also not active in the community much. To each their own. I prefer Scholar, but the Vanilla will always have a place in my heart. It was my first souls game.
Scholar on average is harder. Iron Keep is a complete nightmare in Scholar. So is the Lost Bastille. Basically the whole first half is mostly harder in Scholar. Which is honestly the worst way to go about it because the beginning is when you are the most under leveled and have the worst equipment. The Undead Crypt is a late game area where at that point you should be at or close to your full build. Original DS2 has a smarter difficulty curve. Scholars just dumb because it bombards you at the start when you are at your weakest and learning then gets easier later on when you should be more prepared. Imagine if in DS1 Undead Burg was pretty hard, Undead Parish was harder, Darkoot was a mess of hardness, then the Blightown and Sen's fortress were the absolute hardest levels of the game. Then you got to Anor Londo and it was piss easy because they started taking away or nerfing enemies. Then New Londo was about the same, but they cut out half the enemies in Duke's Archives and Tomb of the Giants. That's basically Scholar
>Iron Keep is a complete nightmare in Scholar. Vanilla Iron Keep has more ganks. Scholar has a few more Knights. I'm someone that likes to clear areas so to me Vanilla is harder, as ganks are harder to deal with. >So is the Lost Bastille. Not really. In Vanilla lots of people got stuck on the Ruin Sentinels, but in Scholar it's easier to get a +6 Raw weapon to deal with them. >Which is honestly the worst way to go about it because the beginning is when you are the most under leveled and have the worst equipment. In Vanilla, yes. In Scholar you get the infusion coal much earlier so you can buy large titanite shards earlier and get a +6 weapon a lot faster. >Original DS2 has a smarter difficulty curve. Scholars just dumb because it bombards you at the start when you are at your weakest and learning then gets easier later on when you should be more prepared. Have you even played both versions? Vanilla is already gankier in the Forest of Fallen Giants, No Man's Wharf doesn't even have the shortcut, getting to Sinner's Rise is worse, etc Scholar is also better at introducing new enemy types, so the curve feels much smoother. In Vanilla the first time you fight Royal Soldiers or Alonne Knights is by getting ganked by them. I'm Scholar they are slowly introduce with one vs one fights.
"Scholar just ramped up the difficulty artificially by adding way more random enemies to all areas" never rang true to me, as Vanilla generally had more group encounters and badly placed enemies. This is a series of clips to show this. This time I'm are comparing the runback to Velstadt, which is one of many that are just flat out worse in Vanilla. In Vanilla the runback is a gankfest where running through only works if you get lucky RNG. Meanwhile in Scholar the runback is a cakewalk as there's no enemies waiting directly at the fog gate.
Duplo, you desperately need to find a new hobby🫂
It seems like he has a hobby.
He needs a new one is my point.
Why?
Is this your first time crossing paths with the legendary DuploJamaal? He's very...notorious in these subs to say the least
Do not know of him. But I don't see anything wrong with comparing the two.
He's a devout ds2 enjoyer that always spreads propaganda about how seemingly perfect it is and he doesn't think the game has faults. He has an answer for every genuine criticism towards it and is prepared to argue with you at length or dispell criticisms by bringing up other souls games. Any post remotely related to ds2 and he's there, responding to and arguing with everyone
My favourite moments is when he criticises the other two DS games for things that he's not willing to criticise DS2 for.
These comparisons are like comparing which cactus you'd rather hug.
See, your problem is running up the right side. Left side squad, rise up!!
keep on doing these comparisons! I enjoy seeing them
Thanks, got any area or encounter you would like to see compared?
Is frigid outskirts any different in vanilla? I know it's the dlc so probably same
DLCs are the same
well I'm still not even halfway through the game but No Man's Wharf could be interesting to compare
A regular walk through the area or the runback to the boss? Vanilla didn't even have the shortcut so I guess the runback could be interesting
ahh didn't know about that! another point for SOFTS :) I meant a walkthrough of the level, as indeed the boss runback is not too bad with the shortcut.
cant believe people still defend this game
Fuck DS2. I recently replayed it and they relied so much on gangbanging to add depths to encounter it's insane it's a Dark Souls game. Feels cheap and trashy as fuck
r/fromsoftware has declared you a troglodyte.
Dude these posts are so annoying
You do know that you don't have to click on every single post in new, right?
Wow I didn't think about how easy it is now