>>15766123;)
>>15766124>pvp Easily way better meta and mechanics. DSIII makes pvp chugger friendly.
>weapon variety DS2 has better weapons. DSIII is just straightswordwins.
>level design DS2 was less linear than DS3. You could take any path from Majula early game while DSIII is on rails. DS2's levels are also so bad they're good while DS3's levels are just bad.
>replayability Replaying DS3 is such a chore especially crucifixion woods and farron's swamp.
>covenants DS2 covenants were more rewarding and fun than DSIII covenants. You don't even become a sun bro until Lothric castle. While you can sunbro pretty early in DSII
>Ng+ and aboveDSII's NG+1 and NG+2 had different enemie layouts and new invaders while Dsiii's NG+ and above had no variety
>DLCDSII's three DLCs blow DSIII DLCs out of the water so hard it's not even a contest. You could beat Ashes of Ariendel in less than 20 minutes on NG+ although the Ringed City is better than the Crown of the Sunken King.
>Aldia and SOTFSEnough said
>Fight clubs The DS2 Bridge fight clubs are leagues above DSIII fight clubs outside Pontiff's.
DSII had terrible bosses compared to kino fights like the Demon Prince, Gael, Pontiff, in DSIII, had garbage hit boxes and visuals but it still is a better game than DSIII in the above regards.
Played both since release day. Even got invaded by Only Afro in DSII couple of times.
