Demon's Souls

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 NEXT
 

I really dig how everybody who is giving Yahtzee shit about not wanting to stomach mindless repetition perfectly bites his criticism of just wanting to prove their gaming superiority.

"THE CHECKPOINTS WEREN'T THAT FAR APART, CHRIST YOU'RE A FUCKING TOSSER, L2P!"

How this is an issue baffles me; "learning the pattern" does not provide ontological satisfaction, finding meaning in a relatable artistic medium does.

On a side note, Kotaku labeling this game as a "new breed of survival horror" because of the fact that you could die at any point is backwards and pretentious. This is precisely what Yahtzee was talking about - the fear of having to waste your time redoing a half hour of game play is the exact opposite of the kind of horror that Silent Hill represents. If I actually died in Silent Hill as many times as I would in Demon's Souls, it wouldn't have half the gravity it does. Not having to play temporarily is a relief for me in Silent Hill - doing so in DS is fucking obnoxious.

Ok?

So I guess Yahtzee doesn't like the checkpoint system.

The game is still awesome.

The truth is what the game really tests is a persons patience, and not in the bad way. I know there are a lot of players that want nothing to do but quickly beat a level and move onto the next one.

As for me I don't mind playing a level a dozen times for the sake of mastering it.

And it doesn't require me to be beating my head up against a wall to do so, I'd only feel that way if I was one of those that wanted simply to rush through the game.

I want a game that has replay value, and the harder a game tends to be, the more replay value it tends to have.

Still I can understand Yahtzee's critic and the simple fact DS just isn't a game for him....and no I don't think the problem is he's just a pussy....=P

solidstatemind:
rofl. Ah, egocentrism. when you mix two (or more) different kinds, the explosion rivals what I imagine matter/antimatter interaction must be like.

FWIW, I've noticed that my level of tolerance is about 10-15 minutes between save points. Any more than that and a failure results in a substantial impact on the time I can allot to my personal recreation on any given day... and that time is very precious to me.

While I don't necessarily prefer the 'no-punishment-for-dying' game mechanic (BioShock, for example), I find it far more tolerable than the overly harsh punishment variety. Why? Because I'll still try to not die-- but maybe that's just me. Never even once did I do a berzerker charge on a Big Daddy in BioShock over and over next to a VitaChamber because, while I knew I could've, I wouldn't have felt like I really succeeded in beating the game if I had used that sleazy tactic.

That is called self-control, and I much prefer it over games that take the choice away from you and inflict a substantial time penalty-- particularly those that have 'unavoidable insta-kill' mechanics in them... it's very simple: out of my day, I get about 2 hours to have fun. 30 minutes between checkpoints means that if I screw up 3 times, I have spent 2 hours being frustrated, and no time left for relaxation or entertainment.

I'm sorry; that's just not recreation to me, and it's not the sort of gamble I like to engage in.

All that being said, I'll probably take a spin at DS over at my friend's house. He really enjoys it, and he usually isn't quite as good a gamer as I am, so maybe Yahtzee is being a bit hyperbolic... (but that doesn't mean his point completely lacks validity however.)

As I said, 30 minutes is an exaggeration. He seems to think that only nexus teleport points count as checkpoints, when there is a shortcut (if you explore the goddamn level instead of just trying to Rambo through to the end within 10 minutes of starting that prevents you from needing to repeat the first area, followed by a second that takes you almost directly to the area which opens the boss door.

Just about every level has those, you just have to find them and use them.

The shortcut system is just a way to prevent people from abusing quick-saves. That's it. That's all.

I am amazed how well Yahtzee, punctuates his articles.

Makes me feel smarter for reading them but dumber for knowing I don't do as well as this.

I don't think Yahtzee has played Ratchet: Deadlocked. That one had the player choose a difficulty level right off the bat and started out with four difficulty levels, opening the fifth level after beating the game once through. Unfortunately, the highest difficulty level wasn't so hard, since you kept all health, weapons and money from the first iteration. Still, they did do exactly what he asked for.

If Shattered memories gets banned here I'll lose the small scrap of confidence I had in the classification board to at least make 'semi' consistant decisions.

"But the time I have for playing games for a review is limited. When I'm killed and have to start over from half an hour ago, that's about an hour of wasted time. That's what made me angry about Demon's Souls. Every single time I pushed a little bit further, some new, dirty trick would be pulled and I'd have to re-play through the same dirty tricks that led up to it. And I'd get angrier and more hasty each time, increasing the likelihood of being killed by one of the earlier traps I thought I'd mastered."

Word of advice: Never, ever play Supaplex.

Ever.

This occurred to me constantly with every level that was remotely difficult in the game, to the point of extreme frustration and it taking me 2 or 2 and a half hours to complete a level whose implementation takes a total of 6 minutes when I perform everything well.

Well, I sent him a mail. Not a hate-mail, or spam-mail or anything of the sort. It was merely a statement of perplexity as to how he could claim gamers are merely a vocal minority, and a few arguments against that. And at the end, I wished him a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year from Norway.

While a Norwegian's perplexed views might not be of much import, at least I hope he got the gist of the message, which is that gamers are legion, and for the most part universal in their desires for quality entertainment. Of course, considering the sales charts lately, I've been proven very wrong. Still, that's another matter entirely.

I would recommend anyone that actually sends an e-mail to that address to stay polite. Stay on the subject. Don't get personal. It'll send a far more powerful message to him than something riddled with "u suck!" and "olol" as punctuation.

simply spamming him or sending hatemail will not help the issue, we've got to ensure that we send rational, well-thought out messages, or he'll just use us as examples of 'rabid gamers' that have been 'poisoned by the M-rating'.

LordWalter:

Yahtzee Croshaw:
Extra Punctuation: Demon's Souls

The problem with Demon's Souls isn't that it's hard, but that it purposefully wastes player's time.

Read Full Article

ahaha, I am, in fact, quite proud of my letter:

Subject: Legal Question on Acquiring Public-Affairs Permit

Greetings Mr. Atkinson,

I was wondering what the legal process would be for reserving a large area on public property in order to hold a community event. This year, the C.F.L.D.C will be hosting a rousing book-burning on the lawn of city hall. Coincidentally we will also be going through several works of world literature and drawing giant black Xes on anything that might make someone feel uncomfortable. We will then proceed to censor all other great works of cinema and video gaming and make sure that all incidences of violence, sex, or creativity are replaced by unicorns and rainbows. After all, how would children know about violence if we never TELL them? This is why times in the past pre-videogaming were so idyllic (Ah, to live again in the halcyon days of the dark ages, world wars, and near-nuclear annihilation!) This has clearly been shown to drastically reduce all manner of violent crime and deviant behavior in society (please ignore all those fancy "Scientists" and "Statisticians" in their ivory towers whose libertine "Scientific Methods" of study have found no such link whatsoever and claimed the media is merely scapegoating as a way of avoiding any analysis of serious sociological issues.) I applaud your continued resistance against public opinion and the concept of free speech. It is good to see that someone at least cares about the messages we pass on to our children

Sincerely,

- Walter A. Silveira
Chairman of the C.F.L.D.C (Censorship and Fascist Luddite Douchebags Committee)

P.S. Don't you just LOVE the game Yahtzee?

I'm proud of mine aswell:

To: croydon@parliament.sa.gov.au
From: Dr. William Eggbert
Subject: In-Depth and thorough assessment on adult-only rating
Message:

It's needed.

The Escapist Community Vs. Atkinson. The showdown of the century...It's about time Australia got into a war

Is that his real emial? if so i would be happy to send a complaint garnished with swear words to him.

I just completed demon souls, it was crap. =[

Posting Atkinson's e-mail adress - an act of epicness.
Niiice.
The article itself was really good, though.
Th

Anarex:
just well, disappointed. Go back to his review on Explosion Man. There is a part where is gets upset at the game offering to allow him to skip a level and he responds "You will not beat me." That was the gamer I thought Yahtzee was. The gamer that rises to a challenge and gets a great sense of accomplishment from beating that challenge. He is just not the person I thought he was and thats a little disheartening.

LOL you can't be serious

that is one of the saddest, most loserish things i've ever read

Yahtzee just comes off as a giant baby if you ask me.

It seems he was butthurt about the game kicking his ass, and felt his manliness was mocked or something, because his death "wasn't funny", unlike in IWBTG.

As for the checkpoints/difficulty system bitching... Grow a pair. I'm not gonna go all reviewer-ish on him, but come on. That's the point of the game.
That's like saying "hhurrr durr mega man 9 is TOO HARD give it a checkpoint every screen and an easy difficulty system so that I can say I beat the game and get to the AWESOMEEEE ENDING"

snowman6251:
Because it was only one short segment. It was a total of about maybe 5 minutes of gameplay that I had to repeat until I did it perfectly and was allowed to pass.

But that's just my point. You went through hours of gameplay without dying, and then this one 5 minute segment is repeated an obscene amount of time... How many? 5? 10? Half hour to an hour of constantly dying and retrying in the same spot, redoing the same moves, watching the same attacks, until the game brown beats into your head what it wants you to do.

Is that truly the superior way?

solidstatemind:
Yes, I did live in fear of death-- via suspension of disbelief.

There's a difference between suspension of disbelief (which btw, means accepting the in game reality as your own for a short period of time. Of course the in game reality accepts that your character CAN'T DIE) and forcing yourself to feel fear at will without any reason.

Hey, if you can control your emotions like that, awesome for you, but it says nothing for the quality of game design. Fact is Bioshock (and MANY other games) give you NOTHING to fear. You can talk about how you got scared anyways to your hearts content, and it won't change that.

solidstatemind:
so don't feel like I'm flaming you, ok?

Don't sweat it. No disclaimers needed here.

solidstatemind:
The following is absolutely, unimpeachably true: virtually any animal can be trained to accomplish a series of tasks if the trainers spend enough time and effort. Therefore, the 'mechanic' you are all defending is simply a measure of endurance... in this case, endurance of punishment for failure.

Are you sure you're arguing AGAINST me? Isn't the usual chekpoint filled, try the same 5 minute segment over and over again for an hour game the one that measure your endurance? Isn't "you messed up this, do it again and again and again" the way one trains a simple animal how to do a task? When you trrain a dog to go through a circuit, you don't train him to do the whole course at once. You train each step one by one first, make sure he gets it right.

You'll have an easier time training a dog to play Bioshock (where if you move foward and push the shooot button for a long enough time, you WILL win eventually) than training a child to play Demon's Souls.

Fact is, anyone who's played the game can attest to this, you DON'T die as often as you do in games like God of War. The difference is the deaths MATTER here. You fear them, you do your best to dodge them, and when you die in a place, you make damn well sure you don't do it again.

It is rare that one dies in the same spot more than once. Thus the game teaches you without repetition...

solidstatemind:
on each independant iteration, how can you truly differentiate between the person who skillfully overcame the obstacles, and the person who happened to be lucky enough to hit the right button (infinite monkeys, infinite typewriters aside)? If you can't, what are you really proving? That you're probably better than everyone else?

Who's proving anything to anyone?

Although if you wanna know the difference, it's simple. You play, say, Call of Duty, and you can get past 80% of the game normally, and the last 20% by the infinite monkeys and infinite typewriters method of gameplay. And plenty of people HAVE. I doubt anyone's passed a single stage of Demon's Souls without getting genuinely better. I doubt anyone's passes a stage based entirely on luck.

I'm not talking about, as a player, proving myself anyone's better. I'm talking about as GAME DESIGN, having player victory based solely on player skill is superior to having it based on luck and willingness to try the same 5 minute segment over and over again until the dice line up.

Despite popular belief, I'm a busy man. I work 40 hour weeks on top of some semblance of a social life my girlfriend insists on us having. I also have little patience for repetition. I'd rather walk for an hour than sit in trafic for an hour. So repeating the same 5 minute piece of a game over and over again until the AI feels like being nice, or I luck out enough last minute dodges is not my style.

solidstatemind:
The truth is that the 'long time between savepoints' is a cheap way for game developers to make their product appear to last longer, but ultimately, it's the same mechanic at work while you play Solitare, for fuck's sake! "Eventually, you'll get it right." I find no satisifaction in that.

The more I read, the more I'm convinced you never played the game. On ym first playthrough, I had to redo maybe half the stages. And even those maybe one or two were redone more than twice.

It's not about repetition like people seem to think.

The game's harsh punishment for death is offset by death being easily avoidable for someone with care and patience. Hand-eye coordination helps, but not running blindly around the corner will keep you alive far more often than quick dodging will...

Ooo, posting his email was a dirty move. Nice one.

I think the problem with an 18 rating in games, is the same problem with the AO (or is it A?) rating in America. Stores will refuse out-right to stock the product because of fears that it may be sold to people who are under-aged.

Instead of an age rating, instead of slapping higher and higher age ratings and guessing "well, this will solve it", maybe we need to stick to Film ratings but state on the front cover what is in the game? Maybe instead of mothers going out, picking up a game little Johnny at home wants so much (oh never-mind reading everything through), they acknowledge fully without having to read the back that the game contains sex, violence and so on. Maybe small ratings of the excessiveness of each of the "nasty things"? Or maybe I'm just over-complicating it, who knows?

Personally though, we need to stop sitting on our high-horse. Computer games aren't going to turn children into violent creatures who stalk the night kicking cats, unless people's parents forget to teach their children this important lesson. However, at least personally, parents are becoming more and more laid back in their discipline. I'm not saying go force children to their rooms without food or water with nothing to do for not saying grace at a meal. However, if a child acts out at school or at home at all, maybe smashes something or tells a teacher to die in a fire, then discipline needs to be up-held. Just sending the child to their room to play games with hopes that they'll change and be a good child in the future isn't the way to do it. It was never the way to do it ever.

The way I see it is there are two parts for someone to become anti-social. The "reasoning" and the "inspiration". Now, for the reasoning to occur, there needs to be no moral boundaries stopping them. However, since parents don't know how to discipline their kids, this isn't happening. The other one is inspiration. Now, stopping inspiration is harder than you think. You'd need to cut out all media and maybe you stand half a chance, and you don't need to be a professor of sociology or psychology to know that it's borderline impossible without causing major mental stagnation and development problems.

s69-5:

Fuhjem:

But we are legion.
We do not forgive,
and we do not forget.
These ghosts will haunt you, Mr. Atkinson.

This part makes you seem psychopathic. I would cut it. unless of course you want Atkinson to add more fuel to the fire and claim a gamer/ satanic link.

From the Wiki:
"Legion, the demon of Gadarenes, appears frequently as a character in popular culture. The Christian New Testament gospels of Mark, Luke and Matthew describe an incident in which Jesus meets a man, or men, possessed by demons who, when asked what their name is, respond:

Mark 5:9 "My name is Legion, for we are many."

Me = Not Aware of this.

Should fix that.

This more appropriate?

Fuhjem:

Dear Mr. Atkinson,

While you may believe that gamers and game enthusiasts alike are just a small minority composed of small, helpless children; the real world is quite the contrary.
In the real world, gamers count for around 70% of the worlds population. That 70% counts for human beings of ages from 5 to 33. Thirty-Three years old is not a child, and should be treated as an adult.
A percentage, as you hopefully know, is nothing more than a fancy fraction. 49/100 would be a minority. 50/100 would be an equilibrium. 51/100 is a majority. We account for 70/100. That is MUCH, much more than what is the bare minimum for a majority.

Now I don't know much about how math works in Australia, I'm from another country, but in reality 70% is a very large Majority and you should listen to that majority.
We know of your false promises to allow games an 18+ rating after re-elections. We do not believe them.
Australian gamers, who make up MUCH more of your population than you may think, will not let you be re-elected.

Now, please, enjoy the hot steaming load in your inbox.

Dys:

williebaz:
I'm going to spam micheal atkinson now.

croydon@parliament.sa.gov.au

I'd be amazed if he didn't have a filter or possibly someone to sort through all the hatemail. Even though he's a douche, he doesn't have unlimited time.

Fuhjem:
Do you guys think that this is a good letter for Mr. Atkinson?

Fuhjem:

Dear Mr. Atkinson,

While you may believe that gamers and game enthusiasts alike are just a small minority composed of small, helpless children; the real world is quite the contrary.
In the real world, gamers count for around 70% of the Australias population. That 70% counts for human beings of ages from 5 to 33. Thirty-Three years old is not a child, and should be treated as an adult.
A percentage, as you hopefully know, is nothing more than a fancy fraction. 49/100 would be a minority. 50/100 would be an equilibrium. 51/100 is a majority. We account for 70/100. That is MUCH, much more than what is the bare minimum for a majority.

Now I don't know much about how math works in Australia, I'm from another country, but in reality 70% is a very large Majority and you should listen to that majority.
We know of your false promises to allow games an 18+ rating after re-elections. We do not believe them.
But we are legion.
We do not forgive,
and we do not forget.
These ghosts will haunt you, Mr. Atkinson.

Now, please, enjoy the hot steaming load in your inbox.

Tell me what you think.

Change 'worlds population' to Australias, 70% of the worlds population do not play videogames, that's an outrageous claim (the majority of the worlds population are, in fact, living in poverty). I'd probably cut the anonymus part tool, enough people have been threatening him and it's acheived nothing.

I doubt he has a filter for this, how could he tell what's spam and what's not.

Just an idea, what if we forwarded all of our spam to him.

Vivendel:
I tried a different approach ;)

Pretty much every government in the world think so (including my own Norwegian government). Maybe you should reconsider too?

Sincerely yours,
Vivendel

I just lied and said I was Australian.

williebaz:

Dys:

williebaz:
I'm going to spam micheal atkinson now.

croydon@parliament.sa.gov.au

I'd be amazed if he didn't have a filter or possibly someone to sort through all the hatemail. Even though he's a douche, he doesn't have unlimited time.

Fuhjem:
Do you guys think that this is a good letter for Mr. Atkinson?

Fuhjem:

Dear Mr. Atkinson,

While you may believe that gamers and game enthusiasts alike are just a small minority composed of small, helpless children; the real world is quite the contrary.
In the real world, gamers count for around 70% of the Australias population. That 70% counts for human beings of ages from 5 to 33. Thirty-Three years old is not a child, and should be treated as an adult.
A percentage, as you hopefully know, is nothing more than a fancy fraction. 49/100 would be a minority. 50/100 would be an equilibrium. 51/100 is a majority. We account for 70/100. That is MUCH, much more than what is the bare minimum for a majority.

Now I don't know much about how math works in Australia, I'm from another country, but in reality 70% is a very large Majority and you should listen to that majority.
We know of your false promises to allow games an 18+ rating after re-elections. We do not believe them.
But we are legion.
We do not forgive,
and we do not forget.
These ghosts will haunt you, Mr. Atkinson.

Now, please, enjoy the hot steaming load in your inbox.

Tell me what you think.

Change 'worlds population' to Australias, 70% of the worlds population do not play videogames, that's an outrageous claim (the majority of the worlds population are, in fact, living in poverty). I'd probably cut the anonymus part tool, enough people have been threatening him and it's acheived nothing.

I doubt he has a filter for this, how could he tell what's spam and what's not.

There would have to be some sort of filter, perhaps blocking specific phrases, otherwise he'd literally spend all his time sorting through his mail (I can assure you a great many vocal Australians would email him, most of which would be abusive dribble).

Telekinesis:
Yahtzee just comes off as a giant baby if you ask me.

It seems he was butthurt about the game kicking his ass, and felt his manliness was mocked or something, because his death "wasn't funny", unlike in IWBTG.

As for the checkpoints/difficulty system bitching... Grow a pair. I'm not gonna go all reviewer-ish on him, but come on. That's the point of the game."

Did you even listen to what he said in his review? It was something like "Yes the game is difficult but it doesn't seem like I've been given much of a chance here" he is saying it's a bad game because they made it hard on purpose, if im playing a game and i cant beat a certain part and have to repeat it alot it doesn't seem very entertaining. Progressing through a game and getting to the ending with a challenge is entertaining but if that doesn't seem achievable then what's the point in continuing?

Wow... given Yahtzee's opinions on nostalgia, I never expected him to like IWBTG. That's a pleasant surprise.

And yes, thank you for posting Atkinson's e-mail addy. I don't know how much good it will do, but at least we can let him know that we're not all going to go away quietly.

Riobux:
I think the problem with an 18 rating in games, is the same problem with the AO (or is it A?) rating in America. Stores will refuse out-right to stock the product because of fears that it may be sold to people who are under-aged.

Sadly, I don't think that's what they're afraid of at all.

What the Moral Guardians are scared of is the thought that ANYONE would buy an AO game. Because sex is evil, even adults can't be trusted to make their own decisions, so we need to coddle the poor innocent children until they're 35 and/or herded off into an arranged marriage.

Sent Michael Atkinson an e-mail. I was polite relative to how I normally react to such a situation. But I probably came off as a jerk anyways :P

On to Yahtzee's article, I agree with his point about difficulty settings. Whenever a game doesn't have one, I get confused. It doesn't have to be an effort; you can simply create a variable that you multiply by certain constants to determine things like enemy hp and damage. But I don't really agree with Yahtzee's point about checkpoints. Where's the intensity if the price for failure is backtracking thirty seconds? He made a similar comment when discussing timed-button sequences, why contradict himself for everything else?

I still hate memory test games, but you're right about hard games not always being frustrating. When I played n+ I could die literally dozens of times in some of the stages, but I'd always respawn back in the same room so I wouldn't lose any progress, if the save points were set up so you'd have to go back to the first room in an episode when you died the game would have been virtually unplayable.

All this debate about whether the checkpoint system is really about difficulty is silly and should stop. It really just boils down to whether you want to play a game that inspires real fear or not. People that get truly upset about having wasted there time when they die should not be playing the game. Its not for you. If the game is making you angry about having died or messed up, the designer did its job right. That is the point. You are suppose to be upset and angry you died. It was built that way on purpose.

Some people game to see the story all the way through. Like a book or a movie. If you paid 60 bucks for it, they feel entitled to see the end without feeling frustrated. That is ok. It is a perfectly valid reason to play games. Go play the newest Prince of Persia or Assassin's Creed or Uncharted 2, they were made specifically with you in mind. It fact, more and more games are being made with this player in mind. But, accept that other players exist who gain enjoyment from something else. Understand that these players were here first. When we started gaming this is all we had. Do you think we played Final Fantasy or Super Mario for the rich story?

For many people, gaming is not just about seeing the story to the end. We want to loose. We want to die many times and be severely punished for doing so. When I see a boss for the first time, I want it to absolutely destroy me. When I die because I messed up, I want to be punished so that I will learn from my mistakes. There are limits, but it has to be meaningful punishment. It has to make you upset on some level. I want to be afraid of dying. To feel like I need to be careful. It makes the victory that much better for me. Just because it has no significance for you does not mean our view is invalid.

Why does every game have to be for the casual gamer? Some games should be just for us. Besides this game and the last Ninja Gaiden, name the last major console game that was for us. All the games used to be for us. Now only a very few. Giving the few games made for us negative reviews is wrong. We are the people the industry was built on. We should never be totally left out in the cold. Without us, you would have no games.

so we give him a evil email spam sandwich for his mail box

Sylocat:

Riobux:
I think the problem with an 18 rating in games, is the same problem with the AO (or is it A?) rating in America. Stores will refuse out-right to stock the product because of fears that it may be sold to people who are under-aged.

Sadly, I don't think that's what they're afraid of at all.

What the Moral Guardians are scared of is the thought that ANYONE would buy an AO game. Because sex is evil, even adults can't be trusted to make their own decisions, so we need to coddle the poor innocent children until they're 35 and/or herded off into an arranged marriage.

Haha, I doubt that's what they're afraid of as well, but that's likely what will happen due to a silly "family image". Although, if I'm wrong on that feel free to correct me. The problem is that despite our media and society being flooded by "questionable" things that go unnoticed or, simply, without a care, we still think that computer games alone influences crime. Honestly, crime needs motivation and influence and influence you can get anywhere.

Anarex:
All this debate about whether the checkpoint system is really about difficulty is silly and should stop. It really just boils down to whether you want to play a game that inspires real fear or not. People that get truly upset about having wasted there time when they die should not be playing the game. Its not for you. If the game is making you angry about having died or messed up, the designer did its job right. That is the point. You are suppose to be upset and angry you died. It was built that way on purpose.

Some people game to see the story all the way through. Like a book or a movie. If you paid 60 bucks for it, they feel entitled to see the end without feeling frustrated. That is ok. It is a perfectly valid reason to play games. Go play the newest Prince of Persia or Assassin's Creed or Uncharted 2, they were made specifically with you in mind. It fact, more and more games are being made with this player in mind. But, accept that other players exist who gain enjoyment from something else. Understand that these players were here first. When we started gaming this is all we had. Do you think we played Final Fantasy or Super Mario for the rich story?

For many people, gaming is not just about seeing the story to the end. We want to loose. We want to die many times and be severely punished for doing so. When I see a boss for the first time, I want it to absolutely destroy me. When I die because I messed up, I want to be punished so that I will learn from my mistakes. There are limits, but it has to be meaningful punishment. It has to make you upset on some level. I want to be afraid of dying. To feel like I need to be careful. It makes the victory that much better for me. Just because it has no significance for you does not mean our view is invalid.

Why does every game have to be for the casual gamer? Some games should be just for us. Besides this game and the last Ninja Gaiden, name the last major console game that was for us. All the games used to be for us. Now only a very few. Giving the few games made for us negative reviews is wrong. We are the people the industry was built on. We should never be totally left out in the cold. Without us, you would have no games.

Could you be more patronizing? I'm an old-school gamer myself and I can tell with certainty I would end up smashing the game disk to pieces. Hell, Yahtzee -whose review is apparently 'wrong'- is an old-school gamer and he still verbally assasinated Demon's Soul. Where do we fit in your plan?

Helba1984:
Yahtzee, I know you're all for comedy and sarcasm, but you missed a few glaring points that would have made things clearer for those who rely on you to help them choose games.

1: "No checkpoints"
No, there's no checkpoints in the sense that "Oh shit, I died, I'll respawn here and only have to walk five feet to get back where I was", but there ARE game mechanics that function the same way and it seems you either willfully omitted mentioning them or didn't spend any time exploring to find them.

In the first level, the two side towers of the main gatehouse have locked gates; make it down to the bottom from the top entrance via the battlement, and there's a lever you can pull to open them. Those gates stay open, and act like checkpoints because even if you die you can just fight back up the tower and instantly be back on the battlement without having to slog through the entire beginning again.

1a: "No saving until a boss is beaten"

Not true. Above-mentioned unlocked shortcuts STAY even if you quit the game, go somewhere else, or die.

2: "Dodging doesn't do shit"

Dodging works, but it's not a quicktime event. You have to keep dodging or blocking, and the skeleton scenario you described counts as TWO attacks, so you have to respond to both by either blocking, countering, or dodge/rolling. You can't just sit there like a twat and bask in the glory of your dodge. BTW - what he did to you is called a Riposte.

3: "Dragon came out of nowhere"

Sure, it's seem that way if you ran out onto the rampart like a football player chasing teenage skirts, but if you'd explored the castle gatehouse you'd have SEEN that dragon and realized the entire level is one big area, and HE FLIES BEHIND THE GATEHOUSE.

4: "Notes left by other players are worthless"

Again, you didn't play long enough to see this (clearly), but bad comments don't last more than a day. If messages aren't promoted, they're deleted during a server cycle (about once a day).

5: "Only way to get HP back is to defeat a major Demon"

Again you didn't seem to play enough to find this out, but you can also get your life back by helping another player (Via blue-eye stone), killing another player (via red-eye stone), or having a message that is promoted by a certain number of other players as being helpful.

6: "Difficulty.DemonsSouls = Concrete.obj + forehead.obj"

Again, not true. Each enemy simply requires a different tactic to beat, and the game punishes you for running in like Rambo without thinking about it. Once you learn a tactic to defeat each enemy, it's more about keeping up with the new ones and upgrading your armor than banging your head against an impossible wall. One solution does not fit all monsters.

Also, Turpentine kills those dogs MUCH quicker, upgraded armor will help you IMMENSELY against the Tower Knight and his guards, and yes, the underground way is much much easier.

In conclusion, all this stuff I learned on my own because I'm awesome that way, but if the difficulty is like so much water in your treacle, there's an official wiki that everybody who plays the game contributes to where you can quickly learn these hints and benefit from other players' experiences.

The game is great and I think you should give it another go with this knowledge.

- Helba

He's pretty much referring to this elitist douchebag.

They are the people who have adjusted their expectations. People who just don't remember the feelings of joy and accomplishment they got from beating those ancient NES titles. People who have become casual gamers out of necessity. I am not saying its wrong. I don't have time to game seriously anymore. I play about 2-3 titles per year now. The only real time I have to play is on the weekends. I get causal gaming. Its just not for me. I would rather play rarely and experience the joy I got when I was a kid. I have no interest in a watered down experience that fits better into my weekday schedule. Obviously, my style of play will not support the industry anymore. Casual gamers are important. I just want to make sure I get 2-3 titles per year just for me. Giving the very few games made for us negative reviews because they are too hard is just mean spirited.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here