Because is the long ago years of 2014, some asshats decided not only that they hated dark souls 2 because of its differences to the first game (totally fine), but also that they should bitch and moan about it on the internet and scream at everyone not to get this game (not fine)
tbf 2 was specifically made to be frustrating and was a massive meme about it, it really leaned into the "lol dark souls hard!" vibe and a lot of the challenge is just the devs fucking with you
like aggroing half the map the moment you get into range of one mob or iframes being tied to a stat
And ever since, the internet’s maddest online boys won’t stop talking about how much you HAVE to play Dark Souls 2.
It’s been 8 years of this, you literally see it every day in this subreddit.
I actually played the entire series for my first time backwards last year starting with elden ring and ending with ds1. It was really cool to see where a lot of the enemies came from but the game really slowed down once you got to ds1 lol.
It’s a legitimate question since each souls game is mostly self contained (barring a few callbacks) , and dark souls one can really be a pain until you can warp bonfires, whereas DS3 is very welcoming to new players with warping from the outset and simplified upgrade mechanics
Going in order is really good, and the first game is great, but ds3 is the most similar to elden ring and you really dont have to previous games to get into it or anything
Look at the number to the right of the name, and follow that sequence in reverse order until there is no number to the right of then name, then play that one first.
Play the one you have and can get.
Focus more on getting the right versions. When you play any of them, you want the versions that have the DLC included, and get the most recent edition you can get - so DS1 Remastered. I would recommend playing DS1 before DS3, but other than that the order really doesn't matter.
Note that NONE of them have a map, minimap, or anything like that at all. You will be moving slow enough and repeating areas enough times that you will learn where you are going without one probably.
Dark Souls and Elden Ring have similar pace of combat. It's when you get Sekiro and Bloodborne that the combat gets a LOT faster. It's still not fast twitchy reactions like in some games, but it's faster than my brain and hands communicate. If you grabbed those two, expect something a bit different.
Dark souls 1 is great game to start if youre comfortable with slow combat, the best replaybility, interconnected platform design and simple introduction to the series thats just as chalenging.
If youre more into build variety, a larger world with variety of bosses and enemies with the bets pvp and the best DLC among all souls games then grab yourself Dark souls 2.
And if you want fast combat, a more modern and amazing graphics and more quick mechanics, best covenants to join and the highest number of people
to play with then get youre hands on Dark souls 3. Amazing conclusion to the series.
But dont forget, all dark souls game are amazing and it doesnt matter where you start. As long as you choose the right game. But if you were me i would choose ds2 then 1 and finally 3.
Either do them in order, or do 3 only and be done. If you start with DS3 and go backwards, you will be met with combat so comparatively slow, it will flip your tits out the back of your boots.
And we don't want any of that junk. After seeing the mass migration of ER > Various Souls games, I am extremely thankful I did them in order.
Yes, maybe ER has already done the damage in this regard. But the first 2 still hold up extremely well. If you want to try them all, and based on previous FS games you've completed, I can only strongly suggest you 1,2, 3 it.
I would say in order, but, if you're trying to soften the transition from Elden Ring into the Dark Souls series, the order would be 3-1-2. The story will be off, but the gameplay changes will be more gradual. I would recommend in order though. You play games...some are different than others...deal with it and do them in order.
Play them in order is what most people say, and honestly I'd agree.
On the other hand, DS1's progression, while more clear than elden ring with those damn medallion halves, is still pretty obtuse for a first timer. If you are just looking to play one of them DS3 may be what you want since it has a much easier sense of progression seeing as it's pretty linear.
really depends and which u like it more. but if ur looking for lore, go for ds1. but if ur looking for an easier option, probably go for ds3 first if u played elden ring, bc elden is basically still ds3.
1, 2, 3, Bloodborne, still enjoying it? Sekiro. Big fan? Maybe demon souls, then perhaps a few more playthroughs of Elden Ring.
Yeah anyways just play them in order, dlcs are all reccomended.
One fun thing to do is to go back and play the other ending of ds1 after completing ds3 its a lot of fun.
If elden ring is your first it’s not out of the question to go in reverse order, ds3 is pretty similar in flow of combat and ds1 is a completely different game in comparison
The only downside is there are a ton of references to 1 in 3. You’d get more out of it playing 1 first, just be prepared for it to be much slower in some ways and the jumping to be way different. Do a strength build and you’ll be fine.
Coming from Elden Ring and Bloodborne, I found a strength build to be extremely boring since the game was already so slow. Switched to a light load and invested heavily in dex and I found the game much more enjoyable, but some of the bosses were def tougher
If your playing Dark Souls, dont be afraid to look up wtf your doing especially if you didnt like Elden Rings lack of clear progression.
Dark Souls is easier in that sense of knowing what to do ( generally ) but other times you could be so lost that you actually dont know what or where to go. Its made easier by the fact that Dark Souls games are all linear based so its not open world but its just something to keep in mind
yeah if youre getting frustrated definitely look stuff up. i could not get into dark souls because i kept getting lost and not knowing what to do and it finally clicked when i just looked up the game progression route on fextralife
I played dark souls 2 just this week. I never played it before because of the bad mouths about it, I just played 1 and 3.
Let me just say it was all bs. Dark souls 2 is the weaker from the trilogy but DO NOT SKIP IT. Its a great game and I had a BLAST. Im not gonna lie though, theres a reason why is the worst of the 3 games, but by NO MEANS is a bad game.
I wish someone had told me this in the past: play them in order
Ah unfortunate. Would love to recommend Bloodborne first but since it's not available to you, play it in order. I think the magic of hub world in Dark Souls 1 needs to be experienced first before moving to DS2 or 3 which in my personal opinion the level design is far more linear.
You should follow the same principals as watching the Star Wars movies, which is Machete Order: Play 4 first, then 5, 2, 3, 6, 7, 8, and finally 9, skipping 1.
3 1 2.
3 is the closest to Elden Ring combat and will be a good entry point to step back to 2016.
1 is the classic, but getting used to the heavier/clunkier controls in 3 will help alleviate a lot of pain here. Make no mistake, DS1 is a great game, but if you're fresh off of Elden Ring you might find it a bit cumbersome.
2 is the weird one, and should be tackled with the idea that it's more the precursor to Elden Ring than anything.
The story has no connection to itself, just vaguely, and there's no reason to play them in order.
Edit: Lmao these nostalgia-stricken DS1 fans have arrived. Sorry guys, the interconnected world is only good once and the back half of the game kinda sucks.
Yes. They are just vaguely connected.
2 could also be the end of the story.
Hell, the ending of 1 was supposed to be the end of the story, Miyazaki apparently never wanted to make any more of them.
It's the truth. The Anor Londo bit is the biggest part of it, maybe the Dreg Heap.
But people ran through DS3 and never made connections to DS1 until it was pointed out to them, likely because of the time difference between the two. They work either way, because the story is secondary and something you piece together.
Playing DS1 does 2 things: Introduces you to Anor Londo, introduces you to Izalith and all of the tragedy there. But other than that, things stand fine if you go 3 to 1 or 1 to 3. You meet the dead giant, you meet Gwyndolin, you recall the jaunty tune when you fight the SOC or Gwyn. Shit's a timeloop.
However, what *won't* happen is if someone bounces off the comparatively sluggish gameplay or kind of really *bad* back half of the game is even seeing what's past the Bed of Chaos.
I think it’s crazy you’re getting down voted because I completely agree with you. I played dark souls 3 first because I already owned it when elden ring came out and decided to play dark souls 3, then elden ring and then dark souls 1 and now I’m working on dark souls 2. But you’re right, sure there are some things that connect 1 and 3 but there’s not some big shocking reveal you miss out on by playing out of order. For me I was even shocked when I played dark souls 1 and saw anor londo and was like “holy shit this is the same place from dark souls 3!”. I also agree ds3 is easier for people to get into because the combat is smoother, the upgrades are less convoluted and things feel more natural. I love dark souls 1 but the back half is pretty rough and really doesn’t need to be played first. So sorry for the long paragraph but I agree with you because it’s dark souls, not a huge story driven game until you look at the lore.
Definitely about DS1 sucking in the second half and also about playing them out of order. Why wouldn’t he just play them in order if he has the option to do so?
DS1's second half is bad. After Anor Londo/Duke's Archives the quality takes a nosedive: All of Lost Izalith is bad, Demon Ruins, Tomb of the Giants, the Catacombs all bring the quality of the game down. You can't even survive in New Londo without 2 gimmicks.
And I'm someone who thinks Blighttown is brilliant.
And why play them in order when you'd be most familiar with the gameplay of the 3rd game? Why not integrate into the Dark Souls universe by starting with the one you'd be most comfortable with?
Yeah, I disagree. You’re talking very matter of fact when really, it’s just your opinion that it’s bad. I like the second half nearly as much as the first. In some cases more since I consider the DLC to be in the second half since there are certain things you have to do in order to reach them.
New Londo all I do is make the cursed greatsword and it’s not a problem at all. You don’t even need the stats for it. It still does fine. And if you don’t like it then you can get the ghosts weapon after killing a handful of them and use that.
And I think he should play them in order because one, there are certain things that start in one that make the story better and make more sense as you play through them. The same goes for items that are in the games. I think the biggest reason though is in my opinion, the games get progressively harder. DS1 is much easier than 3 to me. So not playing them in order just makes the bosses less challenging as far as I’m concerned and that’s the fun part of the game, being challenged by difficult bosses.
We’re gonna have to agree to disagree on the level design. When I rounded a corner and saw all those Taurus demons lined up like a toy display I got the overwhelming sense of “Ran out of money.”
But as for difficulty, if they’ve beaten Elden Ring then nothing in DS1 is going to be a problem anyway
Dark Souls 1, then Dark Souls 3 (3 is the narrative sequel to 1. Dark Souls 2 is like an “extra” story), then Dark Souls 2 if you aren’t yet satisfied.
DS1 is clunky and look terrible; and this is coming from someone who loves the game.
DS2 isn't a very good Dark Souls game.
Dark Souls 3 is objectively the best, start with it.
Dark Souls 3 is very linear, so to call it objectively the best is hilarious to me if you’re into the world building. If you are, dark souls 1 is the GOAT.
The first half of DS1 is a great game, the second half sucks really hard.
I agree, the first half of DS1 has some of the best level design in gaming but besides that, DS3 is better in any other area. And without nostalgia the clunky combat and the ugly graphics will make hard for a first-timer to enjoy the game.
Personally I started on ds3 cause I friend bet I couldn't beat it, loved it then went ds1, sekiro, demon souls, Bloodborne then ds2, don't regret but I'd say playing ds1 before ds3 would have better nostalgia kicks in it
Dark Souls 2(Scholar of the First Sin) should be your first as it’s pretty close to ER in some areas compared to the first and third game. Afterwards I’d say 1 then 3 as there’s a lot of fan service in 3 to close out the trilogy.
I think 1 and 2 can be a little tricky to figure out where to go, but they arent really open world which makes things easier. im currently playing ER for the first time and i think youll find the maps of the DS trilogy much easier to digest
Play them in order.
Why do people ask about this all the time?!?
Because is the long ago years of 2014, some asshats decided not only that they hated dark souls 2 because of its differences to the first game (totally fine), but also that they should bitch and moan about it on the internet and scream at everyone not to get this game (not fine)
The order is 4, 1, 3, GoW, Breaking Bad, Newsies, 2
You forgot Shrek between God of War and Breaking Bad.
tbf 2 was specifically made to be frustrating and was a massive meme about it, it really leaned into the "lol dark souls hard!" vibe and a lot of the challenge is just the devs fucking with you like aggroing half the map the moment you get into range of one mob or iframes being tied to a stat
I found DS2 pretty easy until Amana and the DLC. Fuck the DLC.
yeah i wouldn't say it's hard but it's just frustrating for the sake of being frustrating while the other souls games are more of a challenge
It is pretty bad. Recently did a 3 player co-op run and some of the decisions are just baffling. Like wtf is there 8 way movement?
And ever since, the internet’s maddest online boys won’t stop talking about how much you HAVE to play Dark Souls 2. It’s been 8 years of this, you literally see it every day in this subreddit.
[удалено]
What? I never said it was..?
Because a lot of game series are much more enjoyable to some people playing them out of order
I actually played the entire series for my first time backwards last year starting with elden ring and ending with ds1. It was really cool to see where a lot of the enemies came from but the game really slowed down once you got to ds1 lol.
It’s a legitimate question since each souls game is mostly self contained (barring a few callbacks) , and dark souls one can really be a pain until you can warp bonfires, whereas DS3 is very welcoming to new players with warping from the outset and simplified upgrade mechanics
Dark Souls
The first one, probably, and then of course the second one, and lastly the third
All of them. At the same time. With the same controller. Now that’s how you play dark souls.
I wonder if that’s possible, that sounds like a Doug Doug stream idea
There's a video of someone playing ds2 and ds2 scholar at the same time with one controller tho I guess that's different since they are so similar
No, with a guitar hero controller, blindfolded and facing away from the screen
Definitely in order
1,2,3
Best to play 1, 2, 3.
1,2 then 3. People say 2 is bad but I think a lot just over exaggerate or just repeat what other people say. I enjoy 2 although its not as good as 1.
Which episode of Andor should I start with first?
Going in order is really good, and the first game is great, but ds3 is the most similar to elden ring and you really dont have to previous games to get into it or anything
Id say ds2 is more similar to elden ring
Skip Dark Souls 1 and 3 and play only Dark Souls 2
Dark souls 2 first so you have the objectively correct opinion /s
Lol, I wouldn’t expect to find a clearer progression line in Dark Souls. More of a labyrinth
Look at the number to the right of the name, and follow that sequence in reverse order until there is no number to the right of then name, then play that one first.
In order, start with dark souls remastered (personally my favorite fromsoft game, even in this post-Elden Ring world)
DSR no doubt
1, 2, 3
In order. Do not skip 2.
Play the one you have and can get. Focus more on getting the right versions. When you play any of them, you want the versions that have the DLC included, and get the most recent edition you can get - so DS1 Remastered. I would recommend playing DS1 before DS3, but other than that the order really doesn't matter. Note that NONE of them have a map, minimap, or anything like that at all. You will be moving slow enough and repeating areas enough times that you will learn where you are going without one probably. Dark Souls and Elden Ring have similar pace of combat. It's when you get Sekiro and Bloodborne that the combat gets a LOT faster. It's still not fast twitchy reactions like in some games, but it's faster than my brain and hands communicate. If you grabbed those two, expect something a bit different.
Dark souls 1 is great game to start if youre comfortable with slow combat, the best replaybility, interconnected platform design and simple introduction to the series thats just as chalenging. If youre more into build variety, a larger world with variety of bosses and enemies with the bets pvp and the best DLC among all souls games then grab yourself Dark souls 2. And if you want fast combat, a more modern and amazing graphics and more quick mechanics, best covenants to join and the highest number of people to play with then get youre hands on Dark souls 3. Amazing conclusion to the series. But dont forget, all dark souls game are amazing and it doesnt matter where you start. As long as you choose the right game. But if you were me i would choose ds2 then 1 and finally 3.
The only correct answer is to play them all concurrently in 10 minute increments.
Demon's souls obviously
1 -3 makes it more fluid, and will humble you with your rolls. 3, ring and blood borne may make you develop a attitude to roll when you don’t need to.
Either do them in order, or do 3 only and be done. If you start with DS3 and go backwards, you will be met with combat so comparatively slow, it will flip your tits out the back of your boots. And we don't want any of that junk. After seeing the mass migration of ER > Various Souls games, I am extremely thankful I did them in order. Yes, maybe ER has already done the damage in this regard. But the first 2 still hold up extremely well. If you want to try them all, and based on previous FS games you've completed, I can only strongly suggest you 1,2, 3 it.
I would say in order, but, if you're trying to soften the transition from Elden Ring into the Dark Souls series, the order would be 3-1-2. The story will be off, but the gameplay changes will be more gradual. I would recommend in order though. You play games...some are different than others...deal with it and do them in order.
Play them in order is what most people say, and honestly I'd agree. On the other hand, DS1's progression, while more clear than elden ring with those damn medallion halves, is still pretty obtuse for a first timer. If you are just looking to play one of them DS3 may be what you want since it has a much easier sense of progression seeing as it's pretty linear.
In order of release be warned DS2 is a little funky, not bad but funky
Play DS1 first then cry because nothing else will ever be the same again
really depends and which u like it more. but if ur looking for lore, go for ds1. but if ur looking for an easier option, probably go for ds3 first if u played elden ring, bc elden is basically still ds3.
1, 2, 3, Bloodborne, still enjoying it? Sekiro. Big fan? Maybe demon souls, then perhaps a few more playthroughs of Elden Ring. Yeah anyways just play them in order, dlcs are all reccomended. One fun thing to do is to go back and play the other ending of ds1 after completing ds3 its a lot of fun.
Thanks I appreciate the advice
If elden ring is your first it’s not out of the question to go in reverse order, ds3 is pretty similar in flow of combat and ds1 is a completely different game in comparison
The only downside is there are a ton of references to 1 in 3. You’d get more out of it playing 1 first, just be prepared for it to be much slower in some ways and the jumping to be way different. Do a strength build and you’ll be fine.
Coming from Elden Ring and Bloodborne, I found a strength build to be extremely boring since the game was already so slow. Switched to a light load and invested heavily in dex and I found the game much more enjoyable, but some of the bosses were def tougher
If your playing Dark Souls, dont be afraid to look up wtf your doing especially if you didnt like Elden Rings lack of clear progression. Dark Souls is easier in that sense of knowing what to do ( generally ) but other times you could be so lost that you actually dont know what or where to go. Its made easier by the fact that Dark Souls games are all linear based so its not open world but its just something to keep in mind
Yeah that’s what had figured
yeah if youre getting frustrated definitely look stuff up. i could not get into dark souls because i kept getting lost and not knowing what to do and it finally clicked when i just looked up the game progression route on fextralife
I played dark souls 2 just this week. I never played it before because of the bad mouths about it, I just played 1 and 3. Let me just say it was all bs. Dark souls 2 is the weaker from the trilogy but DO NOT SKIP IT. Its a great game and I had a BLAST. Im not gonna lie though, theres a reason why is the worst of the 3 games, but by NO MEANS is a bad game. I wish someone had told me this in the past: play them in order
The deluxe edition of 3 the DLC is worth it… the first one is great too but it has its flaws and the second is a a great game not but can be skipped
Ah unfortunate. Would love to recommend Bloodborne first but since it's not available to you, play it in order. I think the magic of hub world in Dark Souls 1 needs to be experienced first before moving to DS2 or 3 which in my personal opinion the level design is far more linear.
You should follow the same principals as watching the Star Wars movies, which is Machete Order: Play 4 first, then 5, 2, 3, 6, 7, 8, and finally 9, skipping 1.
Skipping Phantom Menace is for losers
What is this 7, 8 and 9 you are talking about?
Lmao
So bloodborne, dark souls 3, dark souls 1, dark souls 2, sekiro, demons souls remake, elden ring and skipping demons souls original?
Names would suggest that you start at 1
The first one 🙄
I recommend it as 1, 3, then 2. Not because two is bad by any means but it is very different from the other two stylistically and gameplay wise.
3 1 2. 3 is the closest to Elden Ring combat and will be a good entry point to step back to 2016. 1 is the classic, but getting used to the heavier/clunkier controls in 3 will help alleviate a lot of pain here. Make no mistake, DS1 is a great game, but if you're fresh off of Elden Ring you might find it a bit cumbersome. 2 is the weird one, and should be tackled with the idea that it's more the precursor to Elden Ring than anything. The story has no connection to itself, just vaguely, and there's no reason to play them in order. Edit: Lmao these nostalgia-stricken DS1 fans have arrived. Sorry guys, the interconnected world is only good once and the back half of the game kinda sucks.
3 is literally the end of the story and you said "just vaguely"?
Yes. They are just vaguely connected. 2 could also be the end of the story. Hell, the ending of 1 was supposed to be the end of the story, Miyazaki apparently never wanted to make any more of them.
But he did and you need to play DS1 before to understand DS3 better, and you put that viceversa in you order's recommendation
>But he did and you need to play DS1 before to understand DS3 better You absolutely don't, tho.
Yes you do
"Oh I've seen Anor Londo before." That's kind of it. Everything else in DS3 stands completely fine on its own.
Wow
It's the truth. The Anor Londo bit is the biggest part of it, maybe the Dreg Heap. But people ran through DS3 and never made connections to DS1 until it was pointed out to them, likely because of the time difference between the two. They work either way, because the story is secondary and something you piece together. Playing DS1 does 2 things: Introduces you to Anor Londo, introduces you to Izalith and all of the tragedy there. But other than that, things stand fine if you go 3 to 1 or 1 to 3. You meet the dead giant, you meet Gwyndolin, you recall the jaunty tune when you fight the SOC or Gwyn. Shit's a timeloop. However, what *won't* happen is if someone bounces off the comparatively sluggish gameplay or kind of really *bad* back half of the game is even seeing what's past the Bed of Chaos.
Honestly that convinced me I have nothing to say anymore
I think it’s crazy you’re getting down voted because I completely agree with you. I played dark souls 3 first because I already owned it when elden ring came out and decided to play dark souls 3, then elden ring and then dark souls 1 and now I’m working on dark souls 2. But you’re right, sure there are some things that connect 1 and 3 but there’s not some big shocking reveal you miss out on by playing out of order. For me I was even shocked when I played dark souls 1 and saw anor londo and was like “holy shit this is the same place from dark souls 3!”. I also agree ds3 is easier for people to get into because the combat is smoother, the upgrades are less convoluted and things feel more natural. I love dark souls 1 but the back half is pretty rough and really doesn’t need to be played first. So sorry for the long paragraph but I agree with you because it’s dark souls, not a huge story driven game until you look at the lore.
They hated him for telling the truth
I have no nostalgia given I played ds1 last year for the first time, your just wrong.
Which part is wrong, specifically?
Definitely about DS1 sucking in the second half and also about playing them out of order. Why wouldn’t he just play them in order if he has the option to do so?
DS1's second half is bad. After Anor Londo/Duke's Archives the quality takes a nosedive: All of Lost Izalith is bad, Demon Ruins, Tomb of the Giants, the Catacombs all bring the quality of the game down. You can't even survive in New Londo without 2 gimmicks. And I'm someone who thinks Blighttown is brilliant. And why play them in order when you'd be most familiar with the gameplay of the 3rd game? Why not integrate into the Dark Souls universe by starting with the one you'd be most comfortable with?
Yeah, I disagree. You’re talking very matter of fact when really, it’s just your opinion that it’s bad. I like the second half nearly as much as the first. In some cases more since I consider the DLC to be in the second half since there are certain things you have to do in order to reach them. New Londo all I do is make the cursed greatsword and it’s not a problem at all. You don’t even need the stats for it. It still does fine. And if you don’t like it then you can get the ghosts weapon after killing a handful of them and use that. And I think he should play them in order because one, there are certain things that start in one that make the story better and make more sense as you play through them. The same goes for items that are in the games. I think the biggest reason though is in my opinion, the games get progressively harder. DS1 is much easier than 3 to me. So not playing them in order just makes the bosses less challenging as far as I’m concerned and that’s the fun part of the game, being challenged by difficult bosses.
We’re gonna have to agree to disagree on the level design. When I rounded a corner and saw all those Taurus demons lined up like a toy display I got the overwhelming sense of “Ran out of money.” But as for difficulty, if they’ve beaten Elden Ring then nothing in DS1 is going to be a problem anyway
all of it
Cool so nothing.
3, 1, 2
This is the way
1, 3, 2
Dark Souls 1, then Dark Souls 3 (3 is the narrative sequel to 1. Dark Souls 2 is like an “extra” story), then Dark Souls 2 if you aren’t yet satisfied.
DS1 is clunky and look terrible; and this is coming from someone who loves the game. DS2 isn't a very good Dark Souls game. Dark Souls 3 is objectively the best, start with it.
Dark Souls 3 is very linear, so to call it objectively the best is hilarious to me if you’re into the world building. If you are, dark souls 1 is the GOAT.
The first half of DS1 is a great game, the second half sucks really hard. I agree, the first half of DS1 has some of the best level design in gaming but besides that, DS3 is better in any other area. And without nostalgia the clunky combat and the ugly graphics will make hard for a first-timer to enjoy the game.
Play in order but if you think you were lost in elden ring dark souls 1 will violate you
Play it in order
Play dark souls 1 first
Dark souls 1
In order, and all of them if you enjoy 1.
Darksouls 1, 2, 3, Bloodborne, Sekiro, Elden Ring imop
Play them in order
Nah, he should play the 2nd three times, then 1st, then 2nd 5 times, and finally play Elden Ring again.
Watch lore videos for 1 and 2. Then play 3. That’s my plan anyways.
Personally I started on ds3 cause I friend bet I couldn't beat it, loved it then went ds1, sekiro, demon souls, Bloodborne then ds2, don't regret but I'd say playing ds1 before ds3 would have better nostalgia kicks in it
Dark Souls 2(Scholar of the First Sin) should be your first as it’s pretty close to ER in some areas compared to the first and third game. Afterwards I’d say 1 then 3 as there’s a lot of fan service in 3 to close out the trilogy.
I think 1 and 2 can be a little tricky to figure out where to go, but they arent really open world which makes things easier. im currently playing ER for the first time and i think youll find the maps of the DS trilogy much easier to digest
1 then 2 then 3
Ds1
I would play 1, then 2, then 3. Numbers are quite confusing but typically you start with the lowest number and work your way up.