I really dont understand these people. There is plenty of valid, honest criticism to be made against both iterations of DS2. As well as plenty of honest praise, of course. That kind of video essay would actually be productive. But what I find so offputting is the blatant lies, that anyone who's played these games can call them out for, and the general laziness in even getting their comparisons correct. It's like these people dont even want an honest discussion about a franchise they claim to like and care about. They just want to siphon attention from the toxic community through this performance. I mean how many of these two hour videos declaring Scholar or DS2 in general as objective trash do we need? Just an endless hate mob on a game everyone has deemed the sacrificial punching bag. I find it particularly disturbing when it fosters this hatred towards the developers. They're always personally attacking them and describing them like they're a bunch of incompetent, drooling children. Without ever giving any of the games unique ideas or cleverly designed areas any due credit. They act as if the same people who worked on this game, didn't also work on the exceptional games afterword. I mean Yui Tanimura literally co-directed Elden Ring?
@@Domo3000 Oh for sure! DS3 DLC IMO was what actually added the most deep and interesting lore to the game. The best and most memorable bosses. It's what gave the game its own identity because at launch, it really just felt like more of a huge DLC to Bloodborne. I really do feel that the duel development of BB and DS3 really hurt DS3 from being as meaningful and impactful as it could've been. There's this feeling of creative recycling and fan pandering that makes it all feel so slight. DS3 is a fine game but It spends so much time just kind of remaking areas from DS1, referencing lore from DS1 rather than creating new lore, and reusing assets from BB. Say what you will about DS2 but creating an entirely new world and lore context is probably its biggest strength.
@@JoshDoVids But it did create new lore. All the stuff with Sulyvahn and the Boreal Valley. I also dislike that people will say ‘it’s just fan service’, as if the references to ds1 and ds2 weren’t well thought out and connected and made to wrap up whatever loose ends the previous two games left. Also side tangent but I think a lot of the reason DS2’s lore wasn’t as influential in DS3’s lore is because the narrative that you could just indefinitely prevent hollowing with the crowns, literally denying the entire narrative constructed in the first game of the eternal consequences of the Undead Curse.
@@Domo3000 Eh, not really. Ariandel dlc is pretty bad, aside from the final boss. The best maps from ds3 are still in the base game: archdragon peak, cathedral of the deep, lothric castle. The ringed city had potential, but there isnt a lot of interesting design choices happening, and the 'city' section is just too short(the staircase). Tanimura just loves his gank fights, despite them not working. Even if you do exactly what the level design wants from you in the staircase section and drop down on one of the giants, insta-killing it, you still need to fight 2 of them at the same time, with a possibility of aggrooing more enemies if you decide to dodge backwards one too many times and ends up going down the staircase too much. There's just no sane person who would claim that the ringed city has better level design than the areas i mentioned earlier from the base game. The bosses, yes, are better. Doubt those were made by Tanimura though.
@@rigorm136 I am not saying it didnt create new lore at all. I actually think the additions of Pontiff, Aldrich, and the Deep in general are some of DS3's best additions. It's just outside of those things, a lot of it does feel slight. Also, the fact Lothric has such deep ties to DS1 and the figures in DS1 undermines the feeling of the timeless age of the world, the forgotten lessons and knowledge of older cycles, and the futility of the repeats of the same cycle that DS2 was riffing on. Like all of DS1 is nearly forgotten but the same mistakes and echoes of great figures with the old boss souls repeat. I thought all of that was far more fascinating than the kind of overt cultivation of the cycle through the legacy of Gwyn that DS3 presents. But I also dont agree that the prevention of hollowing undermines the lore at all and I think the tenuous connections DS2 makes to DS1 are far more engaging to uncover than simply presenting things we've seen before in higher definition. I just think DS3 would've been stronger if it followed up on these narrative threads/themes of DS2 instead of ignoring them. That's all I really mean. It seems more concerned with placating fan expectation after the backlash to DS2 than actually presenting new and unique things. Until the Ringed City DLC arc that is.
"I tested this (but I won't show any footage) just trust me bro" seems to be a pretty common theme throughout his video. I really wonder why there aren't a lot more people calling him out in the comments for just making things up all the time. For anyone that played both versions it should be obvious that he's straight up lying in every second sentence.
They bombard you with so much bullshit so quickly that you don't have the time to process one thing before another two things equally as baffling hit you and your brain gets shut off from overloading. Or when I saw it, I could tell the guy's argument was very emotionally charged and had poor factual evidence and I clicked to something else a couple minutes in
I don’t know how anyone could think Shrine of Amana is easier in vanilla. There were double the enemies, and the priestesses had a gigantic aggro range.
Played vanilla pre patch, vanilla after the scholar update, and scholar. Shrine in scholar is so much better in literally every way. I hated vanilla Shrine.
This is wild. DS2 is my favorite game of the franchise, and even then I kind of subconsciously accepted that SOTFS was worse. It's crazy to see that what I thought was entirely incorrect
I am very thankful I am on console since SOTFS is the only version available. Means there was no possible way of me going through Shrine Of Amana in vanilla lolol. Beautiful area, frustrating to play. My unga bunga brain hates any form of magic lolol.
I dont mind if someone dislikes something, just have actual reasons instead of just lying. There are things to dislike about scholar, but they make strawmen of themselves and discredit their arguments before even making a point.
I can't believe he lied about the torch scaring the spiders in vanilla. Like even if he had a mandella effect AT LEAST go back and play the game to confirm what youre saying.
It's also great how he shows footage of it not working in Vanilla, but still insists that it worked when he tested it (but somehow there's no footage of it working). He's really grasping hard to come up with reasons to hate on Scholar
It's insane and the fact that his comments believe him mean that they never played ds2 vanilla. Wait that's it Vanilla DS2 isn't as easy to get as Scholar is right now so people are just gonna believe him since they have no way of playing Vanilla.
And lots of people just want to hate DS2, so "lol they made an even worse version where they doubled down on all their mistakes" gives them more ammunition even if it has no basis in reality
You can actually buy the DS2 bundle and you get vanilla on steam because they didnt remove it completely unlike DS1 PTDE. They even still got the 15€ discount when buying scholar if you own DS2 vanilla unlike DS1 remastered that was time limited.
@Domo3000 I'm playing through Vanilla at the moment and what you said in this video is the truth. Can't wait for my sinner playthrough though. Picked up Vanilla first.
@NisseDood more than likely 70-90% of his community either (1.) strictly play on console and don't own a PC so all they have is sotfs (2.) jus wanna ride his meat and join in on the bandwagon hating on scholar or (3.) it's a combination of both BUT adding in the fact that they (Including him) jus want to b*tch piss moan whine and COMPLAIN period end of story You could somehow turn the sky purple And they would still find a reason to b*tch about it not being blue You just can't make some people happy no matter what you try haters gonna hate idek I guess that's karma When hes sitting there being a click bating lying disingenuous grifting piece of garbage
It's probably something hypocritical like "Vanilla has a better difficulty curve (but let's just ignore the fact that players could enter the DLCs way too early without knowing that they are supposed to be endgame content)"
@@Domo3000 But isn’t that a good thing? New players aside, I mean. For example in DS3 you can enter Ashes of Ariandel as soon as you reach Cathedral of the Deep which has access to useful upgrade materials and cool weapons before Abyss Watchers.
@@rigorm136 if you want to you can also access the Scholar DLCs early, like the Eleum Loyce key is just a few minutes later in Drangleic Castle so you could just go back back to the entrance, but you won't accidentally enter it without knowing that the actual path forward would be towards the castle. It's just more obvious that they are meant for later, and not just a huge difficulty spike.
@@Domo3000 Yeah I know, but the DS3 dlc also tells you that you should have “braved the depths of Lothric Castle” before continuing by leaving a message on the floor. Anyways thanks for the response.
it's just a very strange rewrite of history. "ds2 was perfect and everyone loved it. scholars came out and RUINED it! now people play scholars and HATE the game when they would of loved DS2 vanilla!" is what people say now and seem to just farm content about... when its literally the exact opposite of what happened. DS2 1.0 was such ballbusting bullshit that it soured alot of people on the game. years of patch work, a bundle of DLC, and scholars making the game a whole lot better and thats why general opinion on it changed eventually. anyone that plays Scholars and gets annoyed by 'bullshit' in it well, the bullshit was worse in Vanilla (especially launch) sooo.... why just lie?? why take the angle of 'scholars makes the game HARDER!!!' when its so easy to prove how absurd DS2 vanilla was in comparison??? like ive seen people freak out on people trying to play through the series cus 'sotfs is BULLSHIT and if you play it you will end up hating the game when if u play vanilla you end up loving it!!!'... when sotfs being easier means youll have a better chance of grabbing new players!
Another amazing video. I just love how this guy playing the game, burning out his stamina, hitting empty air, disregarding ds 2 tracking, leaving no room to dodge. He's definitely don't know how to play these games. I want to see he's ds1 playthrough, should be some funny DSP playstyle.
I’m so late to it, but I’m doing my first ds2 playthrough rn No idea why I skipped over it ( maybe all the ppl saying it sucked like mauler put me off it) But for me, having just beat Mytha the Baneful Queen, I’m having SO MUCH FUN!!! The game feels like a dream, it’s not perfect by any means. But it’s just so easy to vibe with, I love it. I was expecting this meh experience but no, I’m having a rad time.
My favorite souls game is Ds2,I really will not deny that it's the kinda objectively the worse,but it's much lighter(especially in difficulty) than the others,and the excess of jank really gives it some charm that makes you vibe with it
I was watching this very review when I saw a comment saying basically "this dudes lying, go check out domo" which I initially thought "probably just some hater or something" only to come here & be shown the complete deception that is that video. Insane, I played vanilla back in 2014 but I was a kid then & many details of vanilla escaped my memory. Thanks for taking the time to show all this. I have no clue why that dude wouldn't just...include all the information here? Wild to STILL push the envelope that ds2 is a bad game by lying like we're all still 15 or something. Telling the truth isnt that hard. Kudos to you Domo. Subbed.
Bro Paused his comments bc of how many people called him out. Scholar is my first run thru ds2. If you cant get through atleast the main game its a skill issue
I feel you, I heard so many stupid takes criticising Elden Ring for things every other game did or for things that were in previous souls games. It's like they don't enjoy something so they have to make up stuff to make it look bad (things such as: game is unfair, no enemy variety, Mountaintops of the Giants being bloated when its the smallest region in the game). I was so afraid of Lost Izalith because of all the shit I heard about it and then when I got there it was actually fine
Lost Izalith doesnt have really any serious issues, but red glowing floor and constant hit sound from lava isnt pleasant experience, and boss itself probably the worst in entire souls franchise.
1:57 the way nobody on the scholars haters mention this is wild 💀 they reallly just dont have skill this is what is all about, saying that vanilla is better simply is a excuse to admit they suck at playing the game
I was disappointed when I first heard that ds2 scholar was the worse version when I bought it. Then I was surprised that the game wasn't that bad and didn't understand why it was so hated.
I swear they make these on the fly not thinking that there’s several channels wikis and the games on steam people can play, or friends who own them they can play there copy. Im starting to think brain cells and common sense are in short supply
No, you see, whenever he says "twice as many in Scholar" and such, he just mistook his own footage and didn't realize that he was looking at Vanilla the entire time, drawing very valid conclusions about how "Scholar" is much worse in all those aspects. Honest mistake anyone can make. About every other sentence. In an 80 minute video that took probably quite a bit of effort to edit. Despite playing both and probably remembering what it was like upon revisiting the footage. That's the only explanation I can offer at this point.
He's taking the long way around though. Run backs between ds1 and 2 are more or less the same amount of time. The shortest route is infinitely safer and faster.
If I could like this video a thousand times I would. Played scholar as my 1st souls game. I can't stand when people lie to you to make things seem worse. They should just be happy that they have an extremely cheap dlc bundle with a more digestible, enjoyable experience.
You know, when you talk about a potential $40 purchase, you might wanna be correct and truthful about it. I bought the vanilla version, thinking it would be better, and now I regret that decision..
I know it isn't perfect. But I genuinely prefer Sotfs Dark Souls 2 over Demon's Souls. 🤷♂️ Dark Souls 2 doesn't deserve to be the punching bag of the series, when by default its a better game than a lot of the crap that's coming out these days (looking at you Ubisoft)
The only valid argument I maybe see is the enemy placement compared to the original game, but after watching some your vids I’m gonna spin the block on DS2 once more.
I have to wonder if these people are actively misremembering the differences between the games. Because a lot of the smaller details are really easy to get confused in your head years after you've played the games for the first time. Then again, that may be giving them too much credit. People probably just want to hate on something to be able to vent unrelated frustration and also to make money without putting in the work
If it was actually a bad game then we would see actual criticism and not just made-up nonsense or accusing things of being problematic that actually exist in every Souls game. The vast majority of people that played DS2 enjoyed it. It's just a tiny minority of haters that want to convince everyone that the game is bad because they don't want to acknowledge that they are just bad at the game.
@@Spellweaver5 original position fallacy, you need to prove a game is bad, not state it with shitty arguments, then when someone debunks those shitty arguments try and rely on fallacy fallacy.
@@Domo3000 actual criticism existed as far back as 2015 at least. Pretending that it didn't, is disingenuous. And frankly, when even you aren't trying to deny that the game has issues with enemy spam, and the most you say is "it was worse in Vanilla", that has to mean that the criticism of enemy spam is itself valid, it's simply not an argument in favour of vanilla. As for things that were in all Souls games, I struggle to remember ADP being in other souls games as well as trivially accessible infinite healing, geographically inconsistent areas, brain-dead enemy AI, enemies (turtles and old knights) spinning like they are standing on top of a record player to track the player while attacking.
@@Domo3000ah I see what you mean. So he claimed something "good" in scholar had to be in vanilla too because his narrative is "scholar is objectively worse in every scenario" and admitting scholar did something good that's not in vanilla would contradict his argument I think I understand lol
You can look at my last ten or so videos to see lots of examples of differences that show that Vanilla had more ganks, worse runbacks and lacked several mechanics. Scholar is the fleshed out and more balanced version.
0:08 It’s funny how he says that but his footage literally disproves what he just said He still got killed by a spider in boss room even with the torch lol
You can be pretty sure that the people complaining about enemy placement in DS2 never engaged with regular mobs in DS3 either, as their way of playing is just blindly rushing from boss to boss
@@Domo3000 It seems that most Soulsborne players do this exact same thing in every Fromsoftware game. And then they complain about getting gank up on by group of enemies even though it’s their fault for being impatient, like for a example Ancient Wyvern boss
Reminds me of Cinema Sins or Cosmonaut Variety Hour. Just inventing things to criticize. What bothers me most about this, is I watched his video and was like, “Yeah that sounds about right. I guess vanilla was a lot better than I remember.” But it wasn’t better than I remember. He just made it seem like it was, and since I haven’t played it in a while, I took his word for it. Assuming he wasn’t just absurdly mistaken about everything, he was probably counting on people like me to make up the bulk of his views.
4:55 yes, I'd say it does look worse in comparison, actually. Although that may just be an unfortunate selection of clips. Still not very convincing on your part.
its so weird that he acts like those varangians and the ogre are a problem, it speaks to his assumption that every enemy in the game must be aggressive and prepared to fight him, so he takes initiative and fights everything he sees, not questioning if they were even aggro to begin with.
I don't understand what the problem with the enemy placement or levels even being hard is. Why are you even playing a souls game if you just wanna breeze through empty levels? Why people can gladly spend 50 attempts on a boss, and that's fine; yet die a couple times in a level and then act like it's the most unfair thing ever I don't know.
idk dude i played Dark Souls 2 around the same time i picked up ds3 and sekiro in late 2021 after playing ds1, game just was dogshit in comparison to all those other experiences. Obviously wasn’t all bad but definitely a dud in the series to me. I have owned the game for nearly 2 and a half years, longer than bloodborne and ER by many months (ER obviously) and haven’t been able to sit through past even the latter early game areas without giving up from boredom, dissapointment or just frustation I rarely feel with the others. TLDR: My experience of Dark Souls 2 is very opposite to that of all its online defenders. Game not gud. edit: Keep in mind this was Scholar of the first sin i played, but i fealt the game was fucked down to the roots, so I doubt its original release was much different.
Dark Souls 2, i mean, aside from its obvious want for a complete recreation with full directorial vision realised, or some kind of project-'06 treatment, could very well do with a Halo:Remastered 'swap between the version' treatment. Cos I like a lot of what Scholar did, but then there's times when i look at that original Shrine of Amana and think "ah, I do want to go through all that bullet hell." Like, worse? Better? Who can say? But when i hear the stories of release version Amana I kinda want to be there. Certainly more tolerable in Scholar, and that is the better option for many, I agree.
Scholar is like a rom hack of the original that improves on some aspects of the game but it also makes some areas(such as the very beginning) harder. It is only slightly better than the original(which is really not that bad of a game).
The beginning was gankier and harder in Vanilla. Forest comparison: th-cam.com/video/8FdMy30_f98/w-d-xo.html No Man's Wharf comparison: th-cam.com/video/8Nm5kD9DK30/w-d-xo.html Lost Bastille comparison: th-cam.com/video/SnSvH-4ates/w-d-xo.html
@@Domo3000 I have seen those videos but I just feel like it was harder in Scholar(maybe it is because it was the first version I played) but other than that, I enjoyed most of the changes in the game.
I was seriously disappointed by that video because I was at the very least expecting to learn something more about the game, but the whole thing was a mess and really could've used a script or smth
Nah, I distinctly remember some of the things you mentioned here different, especially Shrine of Amana. I don't know if you're playing some updated version of "Vanilla" but it doesn't match up.
That's only happening to you because you are desperately looking for reasons to hate this game. For the vast majority of people here it helps them to appreciate the well done enemy encounter design and the smart ways you can approach them.
@@Domo3000 I am a huge fan of Fromsoft games, which is why I played through sotfs. Played through it twice and hated it both times. All but like 2 bosses are boring and easy as hell, the animations are so stiff it looks like every character gotta go take a dump 24/7, the enemy placement apparently in both versions of the game is annoying, and can't forget about adaptability. Everyone is entitled to their own opinions of course, however in my most humble of opinions this game is a massive turdstain on Fromsoft's legacy.
@@TeekoSheekoIsn't this literally a you problem? Annoying is annoying to you. ADP is an optional stat, you can beat the game deathless without it. Your last statement should really be, "I didn't like the game, and my emotions tell me this game is a massive Turdstain on from Soft's legacy". Which, ok. Your feelings your issue. But the QoL you now enjoy, cool stuff like powerstancing, better magic, better checkpoint placement, more attention to pvp, and a lot of other stuff began here. I can't imagine playing ds1, then 2 and not feeling elation at the four ring slots, seed of the tree of giants, and unique combos with dual wielding, which demon souls barely even managed.
You're Duplo aren't you? Just shut up already, you cherrypick as much or even more than they do, and they actually make good points, while all your points often are the same ctrl + v and stuff like "They added more to the side paths to show that you can come back later", but why do you have to come back later to like, Dragonslayer? He's freakin easy.
@@Domo3000 Because you only ever say the exact same thing in every Reddit thread, feels far less in good faith and like you're just filling a trolling quota lmao.
@@tomasstargamer6308 or maybe because Scholar haters always bring up the same five easily debunkable false claims There's no need to write it new every time if they always bring up the same false talking points they parrot from clickbait TH-camrs
ds2 is ,a ,good game screw the reviewers. ds1 sucked big time and ds2 was better. ds2 had lots of cut content and namco screwed them over and because of ps3 and xbox360 even the lighting system was scrapped.I hope we get a directors cut some day. also not to ignore the fact this game is the most optimized of all in the series.
I like them all for different reasons. If I had to pick a worst one id go with des (not the remaster, the original). Like Pokemon red and blue it's iconic but it's age really shows more than even ds1. Still all are good tho
yes i agree its a good game but when people say it sucks . ds2 I mean man many people who played it in 2024 realize namco screwed it and the hidden potential it had with all the cut content and all man screw namco. they screwed the 2010 splatterhouse in the same way
I really dont understand these people. There is plenty of valid, honest criticism to be made against both iterations of DS2. As well as plenty of honest praise, of course. That kind of video essay would actually be productive. But what I find so offputting is the blatant lies, that anyone who's played these games can call them out for, and the general laziness in even getting their comparisons correct. It's like these people dont even want an honest discussion about a franchise they claim to like and care about. They just want to siphon attention from the toxic community through this performance. I mean how many of these two hour videos declaring Scholar or DS2 in general as objective trash do we need? Just an endless hate mob on a game everyone has deemed the sacrificial punching bag. I find it particularly disturbing when it fosters this hatred towards the developers. They're always personally attacking them and describing them like they're a bunch of incompetent, drooling children. Without ever giving any of the games unique ideas or cleverly designed areas any due credit. They act as if the same people who worked on this game, didn't also work on the exceptional games afterword. I mean Yui Tanimura literally co-directed Elden Ring?
Everyone agrees that the best part of DS3 are the DLCs, for which we can also thank Yui
@@Domo3000 Oh for sure! DS3 DLC IMO was what actually added the most deep and interesting lore to the game. The best and most memorable bosses. It's what gave the game its own identity because at launch, it really just felt like more of a huge DLC to Bloodborne. I really do feel that the duel development of BB and DS3 really hurt DS3 from being as meaningful and impactful as it could've been. There's this feeling of creative recycling and fan pandering that makes it all feel so slight. DS3 is a fine game but It spends so much time just kind of remaking areas from DS1, referencing lore from DS1 rather than creating new lore, and reusing assets from BB. Say what you will about DS2 but creating an entirely new world and lore context is probably its biggest strength.
@@JoshDoVids But it did create new lore. All the stuff with Sulyvahn and the Boreal Valley. I also dislike that people will say ‘it’s just fan service’, as if the references to ds1 and ds2 weren’t well thought out and connected and made to wrap up whatever loose ends the previous two games left. Also side tangent but I think a lot of the reason DS2’s lore wasn’t as influential in DS3’s lore is because the narrative that you could just indefinitely prevent hollowing with the crowns, literally denying the entire narrative constructed in the first game of the eternal consequences of the Undead Curse.
@@Domo3000 Eh, not really. Ariandel dlc is pretty bad, aside from the final boss. The best maps from ds3 are still in the base game: archdragon peak, cathedral of the deep, lothric castle.
The ringed city had potential, but there isnt a lot of interesting design choices happening, and the 'city' section is just too short(the staircase). Tanimura just loves his gank fights, despite them not working.
Even if you do exactly what the level design wants from you in the staircase section and drop down on one of the giants, insta-killing it, you still need to fight 2 of them at the same time, with a possibility of aggrooing more enemies if you decide to dodge backwards one too many times and ends up going down the staircase too much.
There's just no sane person who would claim that the ringed city has better level design than the areas i mentioned earlier from the base game. The bosses, yes, are better. Doubt those were made by Tanimura though.
@@rigorm136 I am not saying it didnt create new lore at all. I actually think the additions of Pontiff, Aldrich, and the Deep in general are some of DS3's best additions. It's just outside of those things, a lot of it does feel slight. Also, the fact Lothric has such deep ties to DS1 and the figures in DS1 undermines the feeling of the timeless age of the world, the forgotten lessons and knowledge of older cycles, and the futility of the repeats of the same cycle that DS2 was riffing on. Like all of DS1 is nearly forgotten but the same mistakes and echoes of great figures with the old boss souls repeat. I thought all of that was far more fascinating than the kind of overt cultivation of the cycle through the legacy of Gwyn that DS3 presents. But I also dont agree that the prevention of hollowing undermines the lore at all and I think the tenuous connections DS2 makes to DS1 are far more engaging to uncover than simply presenting things we've seen before in higher definition. I just think DS3 would've been stronger if it followed up on these narrative threads/themes of DS2 instead of ignoring them. That's all I really mean. It seems more concerned with placating fan expectation after the backlash to DS2 than actually presenting new and unique things. Until the Ringed City DLC arc that is.
When i am in a spreading misinformation contest and my opponent is a ds2 hater: 😢
Honestly, i prefer vanilla over sotfs, but that guy is just spreading misinformation, scholar actually fixes and adds a lot of stuff
To a degree i prefer vanilla because i dont like the forlorn, but ive only encountered them once so far and i had np estus left when they invaded
Absolute misinformation I see. Not even close. I am glad that justice is being had.
not like this guy will even listen to people calling him out. he's so full of himself
and wow. he paused the comments of his video so that he doesn't hear anymore people calling out his BS. what an egomaniac.
Just listening to this xander guy talking already makes me sick
He's so pretentious
"I tested this (but I won't show any footage) just trust me bro" seems to be a pretty common theme throughout his video.
I really wonder why there aren't a lot more people calling him out in the comments for just making things up all the time.
For anyone that played both versions it should be obvious that he's straight up lying in every second sentence.
They bombard you with so much bullshit so quickly that you don't have the time to process one thing before another two things equally as baffling hit you and your brain gets shut off from overloading. Or when I saw it, I could tell the guy's argument was very emotionally charged and had poor factual evidence and I clicked to something else a couple minutes in
Not many people played both versions, and those that did, rarely remember the details.
I don’t know how anyone could think Shrine of Amana is easier in vanilla. There were double the enemies, and the priestesses had a gigantic aggro range.
And if you played the game on release, their spells homed on you way harder
As someone who played both Vanilla and SotFS, I can confidently say that Shrine of Amana is much better in the latter.
Played the day one release and patched version on PS3 then scholar on pc and i swear shrine was easier in scholar.
not for me. placement in sotfs is more cancer and there is a freakin old knight and more ganking frogs
Played vanilla pre patch, vanilla after the scholar update, and scholar. Shrine in scholar is so much better in literally every way. I hated vanilla Shrine.
I love how so many complaints can be fixed by just paying attention the the game.
"I hate this game. I keep making things up about it, and that annoys me."
Feeble king moment
This is wild. DS2 is my favorite game of the franchise, and even then I kind of subconsciously accepted that SOTFS was worse. It's crazy to see that what I thought was entirely incorrect
I am very thankful I am on console since SOTFS is the only version available. Means there was no possible way of me going through Shrine Of Amana in vanilla lolol. Beautiful area, frustrating to play. My unga bunga brain hates any form of magic lolol.
Let me tell you it is a big hell hole 😂
Vanilla seems to have quite a few group triggers for...non-groups.
I dont mind if someone dislikes something, just have actual reasons instead of just lying. There are things to dislike about scholar, but they make strawmen of themselves and discredit their arguments before even making a point.
I can't believe he lied about the torch scaring the spiders in vanilla. Like even if he had a mandella effect AT LEAST go back and play the game to confirm what youre saying.
It's also great how he shows footage of it not working in Vanilla, but still insists that it worked when he tested it (but somehow there's no footage of it working).
He's really grasping hard to come up with reasons to hate on Scholar
@@Domo3000 It just shows how there's no integrity. He could even have left that part out but no, he had to lie.
It feels like he's trying to railroad new fans into not playing ds2 and farming engagement.
It's insane and the fact that his comments believe him mean that they never played ds2 vanilla. Wait that's it Vanilla DS2 isn't as easy to get as Scholar is right now so people are just gonna believe him since they have no way of playing Vanilla.
And lots of people just want to hate DS2, so "lol they made an even worse version where they doubled down on all their mistakes" gives them more ammunition even if it has no basis in reality
You can actually buy the DS2 bundle and you get vanilla on steam because they didnt remove it completely unlike DS1 PTDE.
They even still got the 15€ discount when buying scholar if you own DS2 vanilla unlike DS1 remastered that was time limited.
@Domo3000 I'm playing through Vanilla at the moment and what you said in this video is the truth. Can't wait for my sinner playthrough though. Picked up Vanilla first.
@NisseDood more than likely 70-90% of his community either (1.) strictly play on console and don't own a PC so all they have is sotfs (2.) jus wanna ride his meat and join in on the bandwagon hating on scholar or (3.) it's a combination of both BUT adding in the fact that they (Including him) jus want to b*tch piss moan whine and COMPLAIN period end of story You could somehow turn the sky purple And they would still find a reason to b*tch about it not being blue You just can't make some people happy no matter what you try haters gonna hate idek I guess that's karma When hes sitting there being a click bating lying disingenuous grifting piece of garbage
I wonder if these guys actually try to argue that gating the DLC behind an extra paywall makes it better
It's probably something hypocritical like "Vanilla has a better difficulty curve (but let's just ignore the fact that players could enter the DLCs way too early without knowing that they are supposed to be endgame content)"
@@Domo3000 But isn’t that a good thing? New players aside, I mean. For example in DS3 you can enter Ashes of Ariandel as soon as you reach Cathedral of the Deep which has access to useful upgrade materials and cool weapons before Abyss Watchers.
@@rigorm136 if you want to you can also access the Scholar DLCs early, like the Eleum Loyce key is just a few minutes later in Drangleic Castle so you could just go back back to the entrance, but you won't accidentally enter it without knowing that the actual path forward would be towards the castle.
It's just more obvious that they are meant for later, and not just a huge difficulty spike.
@@Domo3000 Yeah I know, but the DS3 dlc also tells you that you should have “braved the depths of Lothric Castle” before continuing by leaving a message on the floor. Anyways thanks for the response.
@@rigorm136 ds2 does the same thing, both in vanilla and scholar, scholar has extra insurance for those who don't read things.
it's just a very strange rewrite of history.
"ds2 was perfect and everyone loved it. scholars came out and RUINED it! now people play scholars and HATE the game when they would of loved DS2 vanilla!" is what people say now and seem to just farm content about... when its literally the exact opposite of what happened.
DS2 1.0 was such ballbusting bullshit that it soured alot of people on the game. years of patch work, a bundle of DLC, and scholars making the game a whole lot better and thats why general opinion on it changed eventually.
anyone that plays Scholars and gets annoyed by 'bullshit' in it well, the bullshit was worse in Vanilla (especially launch) sooo.... why just lie?? why take the angle of 'scholars makes the game HARDER!!!' when its so easy to prove how absurd DS2 vanilla was in comparison???
like ive seen people freak out on people trying to play through the series cus 'sotfs is BULLSHIT and if you play it you will end up hating the game when if u play vanilla you end up loving it!!!'... when sotfs being easier means youll have a better chance of grabbing new players!
Another amazing video. I just love how this guy playing the game, burning out his stamina, hitting empty air, disregarding ds 2 tracking, leaving no room to dodge. He's definitely don't know how to play these games. I want to see he's ds1 playthrough, should be some funny DSP playstyle.
You are just pumping out these bangers bro. You're doing the lord's work my man.
I’m so late to it, but I’m doing my first ds2 playthrough rn
No idea why I skipped over it ( maybe all the ppl saying it sucked like mauler put me off it)
But for me, having just beat Mytha the Baneful Queen, I’m having SO MUCH FUN!!! The game feels like a dream, it’s not perfect by any means. But it’s just so easy to vibe with, I love it. I was expecting this meh experience but no, I’m having a rad time.
My favorite souls game is Ds2,I really will not deny that it's the kinda objectively the worse,but it's much lighter(especially in difficulty) than the others,and the excess of jank really gives it some charm that makes you vibe with it
I put down ds1 and 3 after multiple sessions, but 2 i never wanted to put down. I still like 1 but 3 has just been too fanservicy for my liking
I was watching this very review when I saw a comment saying basically "this dudes lying, go check out domo" which I initially thought "probably just some hater or something" only to come here & be shown the complete deception that is that video. Insane, I played vanilla back in 2014 but I was a kid then & many details of vanilla escaped my memory. Thanks for taking the time to show all this. I have no clue why that dude wouldn't just...include all the information here? Wild to STILL push the envelope that ds2 is a bad game by lying like we're all still 15 or something. Telling the truth isnt that hard. Kudos to you Domo. Subbed.
Bro Paused his comments bc of how many people called him out. Scholar is my first run thru ds2. If you cant get through atleast the main game its a skill issue
Should have just taken the L and deleted the video instead
I feel you, I heard so many stupid takes criticising Elden Ring for things every other game did or for things that were in previous souls games. It's like they don't enjoy something so they have to make up stuff to make it look bad (things such as: game is unfair, no enemy variety, Mountaintops of the Giants being bloated when its the smallest region in the game).
I was so afraid of Lost Izalith because of all the shit I heard about it and then when I got there it was actually fine
Lost Izalith doesnt have really any serious issues, but red glowing floor and constant hit sound from lava isnt pleasant experience, and boss itself probably the worst in entire souls franchise.
@@Edgariki Boss is pretty bad but it was more funny to me than annyoing, red glowing floor was never a problem for me.
1:57 the way nobody on the scholars haters mention this is wild 💀 they reallly just dont have skill this is what is all about, saying that vanilla is better simply is a excuse to admit they suck at playing the game
I was disappointed when I first heard that ds2 scholar was the worse version when I bought it. Then I was surprised that the game wasn't that bad and didn't understand why it was so hated.
The AI-line read at 1:12 is too good
The mood is set to cheerful, yet it sounds so passive aggressive
@@Domo3000 Yeah, and the timing is perfect. It's so funny
I swear they make these on the fly not thinking that there’s several channels wikis and the games on steam people can play, or friends who own them they can play there copy. Im starting to think brain cells and common sense are in short supply
I watched this Xander dude not so long ago and left some timestamps addressing his f* ups
No, you see, whenever he says "twice as many in Scholar" and such, he just mistook his own footage and didn't realize that he was looking at Vanilla the entire time, drawing very valid conclusions about how "Scholar" is much worse in all those aspects. Honest mistake anyone can make. About every other sentence. In an 80 minute video that took probably quite a bit of effort to edit. Despite playing both and probably remembering what it was like upon revisiting the footage.
That's the only explanation I can offer at this point.
Or. And hear me out. He's lying on purpose. Crazy thought
No shit.
0:25 shortest DS2 boss runback lmfao, even with homing projectiles during animations without s!
He's taking the long way around though. Run backs between ds1 and 2 are more or less the same amount of time. The shortest route is infinitely safer and faster.
If I could like this video a thousand times I would. Played scholar as my 1st souls game. I can't stand when people lie to you to make things seem worse. They should just be happy that they have an extremely cheap dlc bundle with a more digestible, enjoyable experience.
People should just shut tf up if they haven't played the game yet. The amount of false claim for ds2 is riguritating.
You know, when you talk about a potential $40 purchase, you might wanna be correct and truthful about it. I bought the vanilla version, thinking it would be better, and now I regret that decision..
Subbed, i love both vanilla and sotfs and that guy is spreading so much false info. Im glad youre making these videos
I know it isn't perfect. But I genuinely prefer Sotfs Dark Souls 2 over Demon's Souls. 🤷♂️
Dark Souls 2 doesn't deserve to be the punching bag of the series, when by default its a better game than a lot of the crap that's coming out these days (looking at you Ubisoft)
The only valid argument I maybe see is the enemy placement compared to the original game, but after watching some your vids I’m gonna spin the block on DS2 once more.
I played through vanilla tseldora and the torch didn't work with spiders but it did in scholar😊
i tested it!
i swaer!
I have to wonder if these people are actively misremembering the differences between the games. Because a lot of the smaller details are really easy to get confused in your head years after you've played the games for the first time. Then again, that may be giving them too much credit. People probably just want to hate on something to be able to vent unrelated frustration and also to make money without putting in the work
You are doing gods work, finally the best souls game is beating the "trash game" allegations🙏🏻
Fallacy fallacy. Existence of shitty criticism doesn't make a bad game into a good game.
If it was actually a bad game then we would see actual criticism and not just made-up nonsense or accusing things of being problematic that actually exist in every Souls game.
The vast majority of people that played DS2 enjoyed it. It's just a tiny minority of haters that want to convince everyone that the game is bad because they don't want to acknowledge that they are just bad at the game.
@@Spellweaver5 original position fallacy, you need to prove a game is bad, not state it with shitty arguments, then when someone debunks those shitty arguments try and rely on fallacy fallacy.
@@Domo3000 actual criticism existed as far back as 2015 at least. Pretending that it didn't, is disingenuous.
And frankly, when even you aren't trying to deny that the game has issues with enemy spam, and the most you say is "it was worse in Vanilla", that has to mean that the criticism of enemy spam is itself valid, it's simply not an argument in favour of vanilla.
As for things that were in all Souls games, I struggle to remember ADP being in other souls games as well as trivially accessible infinite healing, geographically inconsistent areas, brain-dead enemy AI, enemies (turtles and old knights) spinning like they are standing on top of a record player to track the player while attacking.
@@janehrahan5116 do you want me to point you towards one of the many, many fair criticisms of the game?
It took me a while when I first started ds2 sotfs that I had to walk around the bonfire and then I toggle Fackel Anzunden
Eh? When I used the torch in brightstone cove the spiders NEVER attacked me anywhere (Scholar) on three runs and several resets of the spider boss
This feature was added in Scholar, but he falsely claimed that it worked in Vanilla as well.
@@Domo3000ah I see what you mean. So he claimed something "good" in scholar had to be in vanilla too because his narrative is "scholar is objectively worse in every scenario" and admitting scholar did something good that's not in vanilla would contradict his argument
I think I understand lol
As someone who’s only played Scholar, can someone tell me the major differences between the two.
You can look at my last ten or so videos to see lots of examples of differences that show that Vanilla had more ganks, worse runbacks and lacked several mechanics.
Scholar is the fleshed out and more balanced version.
0:08 It’s funny how he says that but his footage literally disproves what he just said
He still got killed by a spider in boss room even with the torch lol
Hey guys do you wanna know why DS2 is so bad? Because an old lady told me im gonna die 🗣🗣📢📢
Ds1 have at least 2 different npcs that tells u that u Will die, so ds1 Is even worst ?
@@AtreyusNinja terrible indeed
@@JoseViktor4099 🤣👍
People never give games a chance. It's like the enemy placements feel way worse in 3 but people just want to make ds2 look bad
You can be pretty sure that the people complaining about enemy placement in DS2 never engaged with regular mobs in DS3 either, as their way of playing is just blindly rushing from boss to boss
@@Domo3000 It seems that most Soulsborne players do this exact same thing in every Fromsoftware game. And then they complain about getting gank up on by group of enemies even though it’s their fault for being impatient, like for a example Ancient Wyvern boss
Reminds me of Cinema Sins or Cosmonaut Variety Hour. Just inventing things to criticize.
What bothers me most about this, is I watched his video and was like, “Yeah that sounds about right. I guess vanilla was a lot better than I remember.” But it wasn’t better than I remember. He just made it seem like it was, and since I haven’t played it in a while, I took his word for it. Assuming he wasn’t just absurdly mistaken about everything, he was probably counting on people like me to make up the bulk of his views.
4:55 yes, I'd say it does look worse in comparison, actually. Although that may just be an unfortunate selection of clips. Still not very convincing on your part.
No, they dony, pt2
The phantom at 2:07 cracked me up more than it should have man ha ha
its so weird that he acts like those varangians and the ogre are a problem, it speaks to his assumption that every enemy in the game must be aggressive and prepared to fight him, so he takes initiative and fights everything he sees, not questioning if they were even aggro to begin with.
at 3:00 minutes was that not another flexile sentry that was off to the right for a split second?
Nope. It is only one. I even boot up my console to check.
Let him cook
Scholar slander is wild💀
Yeah just making things up to artificially make Scholar look worse because he can't admit that the only reason he prefers Vanilla is nostalgia
@@Domo3000I think they all just cope because they acted in this way toward vanilla on release and all the way up to scholar release as well
I don't understand what the problem with the enemy placement or levels even being hard is. Why are you even playing a souls game if you just wanna breeze through empty levels? Why people can gladly spend 50 attempts on a boss, and that's fine; yet die a couple times in a level and then act like it's the most unfair thing ever I don't know.
idk dude i played Dark Souls 2 around the same time i picked up ds3 and sekiro in late 2021 after playing ds1, game just was dogshit in comparison to all those other experiences. Obviously wasn’t all bad but definitely a dud in the series to me. I have owned the game for nearly 2 and a half years, longer than bloodborne and ER by many months (ER obviously) and haven’t been able to sit through past even the latter early game areas without giving up from boredom, dissapointment or just frustation I rarely feel with the others.
TLDR: My experience of Dark Souls 2 is very opposite to that of all its online defenders. Game not gud.
edit: Keep in mind this was Scholar of the first sin i played, but i fealt the game was fucked down to the roots, so I doubt its original release was much different.
Dark Souls 2, i mean, aside from its obvious want for a complete recreation with full directorial vision realised, or some kind of project-'06 treatment, could very well do with a Halo:Remastered 'swap between the version' treatment. Cos I like a lot of what Scholar did, but then there's times when i look at that original Shrine of Amana and think "ah, I do want to go through all that bullet hell." Like, worse? Better? Who can say? But when i hear the stories of release version Amana I kinda want to be there. Certainly more tolerable in Scholar, and that is the better option for many, I agree.
Scholar is like a rom hack of the original that improves on some aspects of the game but it also makes some areas(such as the very beginning) harder. It is only slightly better than the original(which is really not that bad of a game).
The beginning was gankier and harder in Vanilla.
Forest comparison: th-cam.com/video/8FdMy30_f98/w-d-xo.html
No Man's Wharf comparison: th-cam.com/video/8Nm5kD9DK30/w-d-xo.html
Lost Bastille comparison: th-cam.com/video/SnSvH-4ates/w-d-xo.html
@@Domo3000 I have seen those videos but I just feel like it was harder in Scholar(maybe it is because it was the first version I played) but other than that, I enjoyed most of the changes in the game.
I was seriously disappointed by that video because I was at the very least expecting to learn something more about the game, but the whole thing was a mess and really could've used a script or smth
3:00 Isn't that a second guy on the right? You can see his arms for a split second and hear chains rattling or something? Is it a different mob type?
Chain rattling is the sound of the Exploding Hollow that stands up here.
Dawg if U played the game U will know that is the exploding enemies
Du bist deutsch? Oder war das fremdes Gameplay bei der Straid Sektion?
Nah, I distinctly remember some of the things you mentioned here different, especially Shrine of Amana. I don't know if you're playing some updated version of "Vanilla" but it doesn't match up.
You can also look at Vanilla walkthroughs to see that the enemy placement is the same.
Sotfs try to make legitimate criticism, impossible challenge.
SOTFS haters being consistent with their bullshit claims for all other souls games that also do the same challenge: IMPOSSIBLE
@@YEY0806dark souls 1 would never have a bad hitbox!
>dark souls 1 hitboxes hitting you when the explosion effect is already gone
@@chickennugget6684 don't forget the grabs
@@YEY0806 N-no D-dark souls 1 is a p-perfect game in e-every way. Miyazaki c-can do no w-wrong ever.
Thanks. Now i know that both versions suck so I'm just not gonna play any
I hate dark souls 2, do I get a pass for this one?
No, because I’m here now
When I’m in a try not to hyperfixate on meaningless entertainment competition and my opponent is a souls fan:
You know all you guys are doing by making these videos is making both games look bad rather than just the one crap game.
That's only happening to you because you are desperately looking for reasons to hate this game.
For the vast majority of people here it helps them to appreciate the well done enemy encounter design and the smart ways you can approach them.
@@Domo3000 I am a huge fan of Fromsoft games, which is why I played through sotfs. Played through it twice and hated it both times. All but like 2 bosses are boring and easy as hell, the animations are so stiff it looks like every character gotta go take a dump 24/7, the enemy placement apparently in both versions of the game is annoying, and can't forget about adaptability.
Everyone is entitled to their own opinions of course, however in my most humble of opinions this game is a massive turdstain on Fromsoft's legacy.
@@TeekoSheekoIsn't this literally a you problem? Annoying is annoying to you. ADP is an optional stat, you can beat the game deathless without it.
Your last statement should really be, "I didn't like the game, and my emotions tell me this game is a massive Turdstain on from Soft's legacy".
Which, ok. Your feelings your issue. But the QoL you now enjoy, cool stuff like powerstancing, better magic, better checkpoint placement, more attention to pvp, and a lot of other stuff began here.
I can't imagine playing ds1, then 2 and not feeling elation at the four ring slots, seed of the tree of giants, and unique combos with dual wielding, which demon souls barely even managed.
@@BygoneT It's an opinion. Have a nice day.
You're Duplo aren't you?
Just shut up already, you cherrypick as much or even more than they do, and they actually make good points, while all your points often are the same ctrl + v and stuff like "They added more to the side paths to show that you can come back later", but why do you have to come back later to like, Dragonslayer? He's freakin easy.
Outright lies aren't good points.
And how does it make points less valid if they have been copy pasted?
@@Domo3000 Because you only ever say the exact same thing in every Reddit thread, feels far less in good faith and like you're just filling a trolling quota lmao.
@@tomasstargamer6308 or maybe because Scholar haters always bring up the same five easily debunkable false claims
There's no need to write it new every time if they always bring up the same false talking points they parrot from clickbait TH-camrs
ds2 is ,a ,good game screw the reviewers. ds1 sucked big time and ds2 was better. ds2 had lots of cut content and namco screwed them over and because of ps3 and xbox360 even the lighting system was scrapped.I hope we get a directors cut some day. also not to ignore the fact this game is the most optimized of all in the series.
I like them all for different reasons. If I had to pick a worst one id go with des (not the remaster, the original). Like Pokemon red and blue it's iconic but it's age really shows more than even ds1. Still all are good tho
yes i agree its a good game but when people say it sucks . ds2 I mean man many people who played it in 2024 realize namco screwed it and the hidden potential it had with all the cut content and all man screw namco. they screwed the 2010 splatterhouse in the same way
I love it.