Dark Souls 3 vs Dark Souls 2: Which Is Better?

Dark Souls 3, and this is the least controversial call on the page. Engaging combat mechanics and smooth controls leads our stored player praise for it, while clunky movement and combat mechanics leads the complaint list for Dark Souls 2, with inconsistent hitboxes filed right behind. The r/darksouls3 thread weighing the two says the same thing in fewer words: better AI design for mobs and bosses, and more responsive controls. The split is mechanical, not just a feel. Dark Souls 3 runs one Focus bar that spells and weapon arts both draw on, so casting and swinging compete for the same resource. Dark Souls 2 keeps charge-based spells and adds Hexes as a separate dark school. That gives Dark Souls 2 the better toybox and Dark Souls 3 the better fight.

Dark Souls 2, on the category as written rather than on level design. Its stored player praise leads on Majula as a memorable hub area and on a game that encourages exploration and curiosity, and neither claim appears anywhere in Dark Souls 3's record. What does appear there is the opposite complaint: some players feel the level design lacks interconnectedness. That is worth stating carefully, because the forums argue the reverse. The r/DarkSouls2 thread credits Dark Souls 3 with tying its world together like one big dungeon, calls Dark Souls 2 sprawling, then concedes there is far more fantasy variety inside the sprawl. Both readings sit in our data. If exploring is the reason you are playing, the sprawl is the point.

Dark Souls 3, because its difficulty is the kind you can learn from. Both games are hard and neither offers an easy mode, so the question is where the hard part sits. Dark Souls 2's stored complaints name enemy density and difficult boss runbacks first, then the adaptability stat, which feeds the hidden agility value that sets how long a roll leaves you invincible. A new player who never levels it is dodging worse than the game expects and has no way to find that out. Dark Souls 3 puts its challenge in the fights instead, and memorable and well-designed bosses is one of its stored positives, while Dark Souls 2's own record calls some of its bosses forgettable or easy. Being harder is not the same as being better at being hard.

Dark Souls 3, and it is the one category where our record is one-sided. Rich lore and atmospheric world sits in its stored praise, and Dark Souls 2 carries no story entry on either side of its ledger, positive or negative. Our mechanics data logs multiple endings for Dark Souls 3 and does not log them for Dark Souls 2, so the finish is something you steer in only one of the two. Dark Souls 3 is also the deliberate closing chapter, and the r/patientgamers thread turns exactly that into its case against it: the game is nostalgic where Dark Souls 2 tried to push the aesthetic somewhere new. Dark Souls 2 is the braver story. Dark Souls 3 is the better told one.

Dark Souls 2, and the reason is printed on its own store page. Scholar of the First Sin is the definitive edition, described there as every piece of Dark Souls 2 content released to date in one package, rebuilt to 1080p and 60 frames per second with enemy placement overhauled. Dark Souls 3 has no equivalent bundle in our catalogue: Ashes of Ariandel and The Ringed City are logged as separate purchases. The raw hours run the other way, at roughly 51 hours for a Dark Souls 3 story run and 106 to finish everything, against 53 and 72 for Scholar of the First Sin. So Dark Souls 3 is the larger pile of content and Dark Souls 2 is the one where a single purchase buys all of it, with well-received DLC bosses as the part players rate highest.

A draw, and it is the honest result rather than a dodge. Both games carry near-identical claims in our stored player praise: high replay value with diverse character builds for Dark Souls 3, diverse weapon and build variety for Dark Souls 2. The machinery underneath differs. Dark Souls 2 logs weapon crafting, customization and resource management that Dark Souls 3 does not, and its definitive edition reshuffles enemy placement rather than repeating the first run. Dark Souls 3 logs magic and multiple endings that Dark Souls 2 does not. One hands you more ways to build a character, the other a reason to reach the end again. Pick whichever half you actually replay for.

Dark Souls 2, narrowly, and only because of what goes wrong in the other one. On paper they match: our catalogue records up to six players online for both, with co-operative play logged for each. The separator is a complaint rather than a feature. Concerns about online hacking affecting multiplayer sit in Dark Souls 3's stored player record and nothing equivalent sits in Dark Souls 2's. The Steam discussion ranking the trilogy makes the same point from the other direction, calling Dark Souls 2's player versus player pretty good in the same breath as placing Dark Souls 3 above it overall. If invasions and duels are why you are still playing a Souls game, that one stored complaint is the whole difference.