Yeah the world-building sucks in comparison tbh, the lead designer was involved in Bloodborne and not this. Miyazaki (think I got that right) came back for DS3 and it is really, really noticeable. My brother did absolutely everything there is to do in DS2, and he says nowadays that stand-alone DS2 is a great game, better than alooot of other games for sure, but as a Dark Souls game it isn't quite up to the same level.
But yeah the world-building/level design is definitely the aspect that took the biggest hit. Certain areas you can reach in a couple of minutes from the central 'hub' on foot, feel like they should be far away, there is a serious disconnect between areas and the shortcuts that do exist do not exhibit that naturally glorious feeling that is so apparent in 1 and 3 for the most part. I personally believe the combat took a hit in DS2 as well, I simply never got into it like the first and third installments - though I've seen arguments that the sheer variety of weapons and increased viability of sorcery actually make online multiplayer more 'fun', that being said the amount of time my brother spent raging at awful hitboxes and 'op' Havel Sorcerers leads me to question that.
Now all that aside, I myself will be playing through Scholar of the First Sin pretty soon, still powering through Andromeda for now, but I'm nearing the finish I believe and Scholar should be next. I need to finish it to say I've truly done everything Souls has to offer.
This post has been edited by WinterPhoenix: 15 April 2017 - 07:56 PM