So I went ahead and bought Dark Souls 2: Scholar of the First Sin after I beat the Bloodborne DLC because I was on a Souls game kick.

After I got used to the awkward and stiff controls, I proceeded with the game. As I'm playing, I'm starting to remember why I didn't really like this game as much. Too much of the game's difficult relies on throwing a lot of strong enemies at you at once to emulate difficulty. I mean, yeah, it IS hard, but not for the right reasons. In Bloodborne - the DLC in particular - you had to fight enemy hunters, and the encounters were definitely difficult, but it was because the enemy had the same moves you did, but despite their difficulty, once you get their move set down, it becomes pretty trivial to beat them because you can do visceral attacks no problem. The difficulty is still there, but you've overcome it and can easily move on.

If the Bloodborne DLC had been designed by the same guys who made the Dark Souls 2 DLC, you'd probably have to fight three of those hunters at the same time while having two enemies in the background shooting at you. This sums up the Dark Souls 2 DLC in a nutshell. Over, and over, and OVER you have to fight several difficult enemies at the same time, and most of the times this amounts to either just strafing around until you can get behind one of them and backstab them, rinse and repeat. This isn't fun, and it's not challenging in the right way, it just makes me dislike the game, and it makes me despair when I die, because I have to do it all over again. This is without even mentioning the bonus areas of the DLC, which are designed for co-op - those areas are some of the most poorly designed areas in the entire souls series (if not the worst), and the bosses at the end of them are certainly not worth the effort to go through them.

The boss placement in the DLC is also really bad. They're always at the very end (maybe the third crown DLC changes this, I dunno, still haven't gotten around to it yet), so you'll go through several hours worth of hacking through dozens of enemies, and then finally you get to the boss. To their credit, at least the bonfires at the end of the DLC are really close to the boss, with how Dark Souls 2 is designed, I'm surprised they didn't put a few murder machines between you and the final boss. In the DLC's defense, the final bosses are usually really well designed, and the Dragon in particular was probably my favorite fight in all of Dark Souls 2... So it's kind of a drag that getting to him is such a chore.

Other than the pretty good final bosses, I will grant that the environments of the DLC are varied and interesting, and I appreciate the higher focus on short cuts. I just wish fighting through these environments was fun.

I have NO idea where all the praise for these abysmal pieces of content comes from. They're awful, and if I weren't trying to do a 100% run, I wouldn't touch these areas at all, it kills any enjoyment I get out of these games, and after playing through Bloodborne, and hell, even the Artorias of the Abyss DLC from the first Dark Souls, I know they can do so much better than this.

Sorry, just had to rant.

I am so embarrassed re-reading this. God sometimes I should really just chill out rather than posting a stupid rant on some forums that a majority of people won't even read, and those who do read it will just not give a shit. Ugh.

It sounds more like Souls 2 wasn't your bag than the DLC specifically, but maybe I'm reading it wrong. That's not me trying to dismiss what you're saying mind you. Those games are different for everyone. Souls 2 is probably my least favorite in the series, though the DLC areas were IMO the best content of the game. But yeah, they're pretty brutally hard compared to much of the main game.

The Gank Squad (the boss fight with the three enemies) is the single worst boss fight in the entire Souls series. I'll agree with you there.

I played through the first DLC which was stupid hard. I agree that the difficulty comes from the wrong things though. Damage-sponge enemies who don't ever get staggered, that ridiculous 3-npc gank-squad, all pretty ridiculous. I did like both boss fights in it though (the first one with all her stupid adds was rage-inducing, but good tactics definitely pay off)

The 2nd DLC seemed to double down on the let's throw tons of super-tanky/fast enemies at you simultaneously idea, and even make it impossible to tell what was ahead since the enemies just spawn out of the ground. For me, it felt like a violation of the "hard but fair" rules of that game world. I can't recall whether I even beat the first boss in that one. Am unlikely to pick it back up.

It's weird for me - as much as I enjoy all these games I've never played any of the DLC for them. While Dark Souls 2 managed to somewhat renew my faith in the series after Dark Souls 1, and Bloodborne definitely got me excited for future entries, I was never super psyched to revisit those worlds when I was done. Actually Bloodborne is the first time I really want to play the DLC but from everything I read it appears I'm boned because my character has gone through the game several times already. As much as I enjoyed Bloodborne (I did platinum it) I don't feel like replaying the game for the 4th time just so I can get a character that is strong enough for the new content, but not SO strong that bosses will consistently one shot me which is probably the worst difficulty gimmick in this entire franchise. Doing the chalice dungeons with half health and bosses that hit like a bag of bricks was an excruciating experienced of artificially inflated difficulty that I don't wish to relive anytime soon.

I really liked the dlc. I appreciated the different approaches they took with the level design. The Sunken King felt a lot more puzzle-y and zelda like. It had you shooting arrows to hit switches and whatnot. Old Iron King has you focusing on combat more, but they also let you use the environment to do a lot of the fighting for you. (using explosives, setting off the various flame statues, etc.) Ivory king is probably my least favorite of the three but I appreciate the change in scenery. Exploring the icy castle is fun.

I found the Sunken King DLC to be the best bit of content in the game. The final boss is especially well-designed, since he's the only boss in the game (in my experience) that's actually easier to fight alone then with buddies. The armor ghosts are also a really fun enemy concept.

So... Wow. My opinions have completely changed.

I've been replaying through Dark Souls 2: Scholar of the First Sin again, and just... Fuck I cringe reading this. ARE YOU KIDDING PAST ME? The DLC is by FAR the best part of the entire freaking game. Sinh is arguably my favorite boss in the entire Souls franchise, and the rest of the DLC is absolutely fantastic. The Sunken King DLC is definitely my favorite, it just felt the most cohesively built of the three, but the other two aren't that bad either. The ONLY thing I really didn't like about the DLCs were the bullshit phantom invasions, I still think they're stacked against you and they do too much damage, but at least their AI is extremely exploitable.

In regards to my other points: I still think that the game definitely relies on throwing a bunch of guys at you to make things hard, but it's not THAT hard to manage. Some of the early enemies though can be really unforgiving - the hollows in the Forest of Giants for instance that use the spear and shield combo seem to have infinite poise and can't be staggered, and I can imagine a new player getting incredibly frustrated with that. Also, hey past me, I got a hint for you - USE A BOW AND ARROW AND PULL ENEMIES ONE AT A TIME. It makes a lot of the game significantly easier, and makes a lot of the 3-4 enemy encounters into just 1-2 enemy encounters instead. In the second half of my current playthrough I was constantly using the bow an arrow to kill and pull enemies, it practically trivializes the game in some parts.

With that all being said, I can still agree that I don't like the boss placements in the DLC, I wish they were more spread out through the level instead of all stacked at the end. Thankfully the third DLC did actually alleviate this to some extent - you fight the giant tiger boss about an hour in, and then you go around to find the knights to fight the final boss. Past me and I can ALSO definitely agree that the bonus areas in the DLC meant for groups still suck major ass and are horrible, horrible, HORRIBLE content.

But yeah... Dark Souls 2 isn't anywhere near as bad as I remember it being. The base game definitely is the worst of the three Souls games in my opinion, but the DLC is absolutely fantastic content, hell, the DLC is probably better than all of Dark Souls 3, and hell, it's better than a lot of the first Dark Souls in my eyes.

Heh, I actually agree with your original opinion. Bosses were insanely difficult just because... why the hell not... and going through an annoying gauntlet every time to reach a reskinned Smelter Demon was terrible.

I managed to beat Fume Knight and Sir Alonne after so many damn retries, my most in the entire Souls and Bloodborne series. But after that I just had enough. Never bothered with the 3rd DLC.

Crap DLC that soured my opinion on DS2 as a whole.

That's too bad because the third one has some of the best moments in the whole series. I thought Iron King was good outside of that gauntlet stuff. Didn't care for Sunken King too much besides final boss. Opinions!

The DLC is definitely the best part of the Dark Souls II. For as much crap DSII gets for the lack of creativity, which isn't unwarranted, the DLC is some of the most creative that Dark Souls has ever been. Granted, not all of it worked. Ivory King should had made the snow melting make a more substantial difference in the level, making something different but familiar would have been cool if there wasn't so little changed. And that optional area with the horses is just plain frustrating. I did the all optional areas in the other DLCs and I didn't bother with that one. Still, I can appreciate that they at least tried to improve where they messed up in the main game and for the most part they succeed, making it really memorable. I still remember beating the Brume Knight by myself and feeling so proud that I did. DSII has a lot of bosses that are dudes in armor but he's a very good one of those.

And, hey, first post on the site.

@viewtifullife2: Welcome to the internet.

Lol... ok... Personally I thought the DLC areas were the best part of DS II. They were challenging but fair, the boss fights were all top tier and the weapons and spells found within were pretty damn cool. I don't know why people nerd rage so hard over this game. If it's frustrating and you're not enjoying it then play something else. By the way... PLAY LET IT DIE... sorry... i really like that game. Take care all and I hope you see the DLC through. Its amazing. Peace.

I'm glad you were able to change your opinion. Some people are so stuck with their original view they refuse to see things in a different light. I personally share your (new) opinion that the best part of DkS2 is the DLC (except for the buffed Smelter Demon, fuck that guy).

@random45: Heh, I actually kind of remember your post from a year ago after seeing it again. Don't feel too bad about it. I've had similar reactions to games before, especially ones where I find myself frustrated by the difficulty. I'm just glad to hear that you gave the DLC a second chance, as I agree: DS2's DLC is really good. I've even been thinking about it a lot lately after playing that first DS 3 DLC, which is so disappointing in comparison to the amazing Dark 2 DLC and The Old Hunters from Bloodborne. At some point, this year, I might need to give Dark 2 another playthrough.

I often quit a game out of frustration and hit the forums to write up a rant, then went back and everything went fine and thinking Maybe I should cool off and collect myself before posting out of frustration. ;P

I'm pretty sure all DSII DLC is still the best Dark Souls you can get including III.