Demon's Souls

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

Stewie Plisken:
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?

Yeah, I also disagree with the idea that because I like a good game with an interesting story I must hate a challenging, skill based one, and vice versa.

BUT, I think at heart, man might have a point. Why should a game have to appeal to everyone?

Of course, he seems to be missing the crux of the argument, which is the validity of the long checkpoint system as a game mechanic...

williebaz:

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?

EPIC!! my email wasn't nearly as good as yours.

Dammit! I actually tried to be constructive. No one told me that I was supposed to be mean =(

Although I did call him a "deaf to the current generation" idiot, so maybe that counts.

The Deadpool:
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...

Uhm... You're right. I haven't played DS yet-- and I said that in my first comment. From my original post on the topic:

solidstatemind:
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.)

No, I don't explicitly say it, but I think it's reasonable to expect people to conclude I haven't played the game from that statement.

But this isn't the Demon's Souls review we're commenting on here, so whether or not I played the game is only tangentally relevant. This Extra Punctuation was the exposition on how Yahtzee feels the use of artificially long periods between checkpoints as not being a viable game mechanic, rather a cop-out on the part of game developers--- that's it; that's all. I don't think I'm reading it wrong to say that while the thought process might've been initiated for him by the feedback on the DS ZP review, this was generally non-specific to Demon's Souls. Perhaps DS is the exception to the rule, but a single exception does not necessarily invalidate his point. And I have been arguing in support of his position, non-specific to any game. I simply thought that there were aspects that he didn't cover for whatever reason that worthy of consideration in this context. OK, and I got a little tired of the "Haha, the truth is you suck" crowd acting like that is any sort of a legitimate argument whatsoever, too.

I think if you consider my comments in light of that information and leave out any direct application of them to DS specifically, they will make much more sense, particularly in re: mindless repetition, the senselessness of trophy/award elitism, and, of course, the monkeys. (Can't leave out the monkeys. They get angry.)

To provide a quick recap of my argument:

I have a friend who enjoys Demon's Souls. He usually gets frustrated with games more easily than I do, so I'm going to guess that Yahtzee is probably exaggerating a lot about Demon's Souls specifically.

(Actually, new input here: reading between the lines of the ZP review and noting that he didn't drive the fact that DS is at least JRPG-like, a genre he normally loathes, into the ground definitely says something to me: I was going to give it at least a rental based upon that observation alone. I bet you he actually liked it a lot; but it's his job to generate traffic, and nothing generates traffic like dissention. Don't you think that with the flood of email saying "Yahtzee, please check out Demon's Souls! Itz teh B0mBz!", he didn't make the conscious decision that he was going to have to beat the piss out of something about the game? And it worked-- 715 comments on the ZP Review as of this writing, not including the hot lava flows of the EP. Added together it surpasses the hate-fountain of SSBB... and that's saying something!)

HOWEVER, as much as people love to defend a favorite game like they do a child, that exaggeration about Demon's Souls does not invalidate what he is saying about the core issue in general: putting long periods of time between checkpoints is not really a legitmate 'game mechanic'; it's really just lazy game design. I agree with his opinion on this, and think the people who disagree-- again, this is without specificity to DS-- are wrong. What it is, is a way to a) artificially lengthen the playtime of a game, and b) make a game appear harder by attempting to use frustration to simulate difficulty. {Supporting reasons can be found in previous posts.} Some folks- yourself included- have made interesting counter-arguments, but I can't help but notice that that are almost completely (if not 100%) based upon Demon's Souls ... and while it might be interesting to speculate how to use this EP to invalidate some of Yahtzee's original points in the ZP, the central thesis remains intact: 90% of the time, long periods between checkpoints is a bullshit move by the game developer.

The only way I brought DS into this specific conversation was to idlely wonder whether or not its difficulty might actually be a disservice by reducing its fanbase via turning off people who are more recreational gamers than challenge-seekers. And again, that wasn't necessarily a critique of the game itself, it was just a random observation.

But as a postscript, I still think the people who can only muster responses of "Yahtzee is a crybaby. Grow a pair." without any reasonable support are being ridiculously, irrationally defensive of DS (i.e.- fanboys), regardless of how good the game may or may not be, they certainly aren't making it more appealing to people such as myself. That I'm responding to you means that your arguments don't fall into that category, btw.

If folks TL;DR'd. Sorry: nothing much to do at work right before the holidays. Gives me plenty of time to ramble on and on (and on... and on...)

EDIT: Oh, and being a coder, I can tell you that the difficulty level can be used to accomplish much of what the "we want a challenge" crowd seeks, IF the developer bothers to think outside the established paradigms of "harder difficulty = monsters with more health/player with less health and ammo".

I went ahead and sent him an e-mail, a polite one that just states our side of the argument. Though in retrospect, I probably shouldn't have mentioned I'm from the U.S.

BTW people, PLEASE don't just spam him. It will only make things worse.

Not legitimate? Is it not legitimate to disable the save feature in an rpg in the middle of a fight? Is it not legitimate to have a check point system versus a save whenever you want system? What about requiring you to use a limited item to save? Was Resident Evil not legitimate? Is it not legitimate to fail to create a check point during a fight involving multiple bosses? What about failing to create a checkpoint in between boss transformations? Is that not legitimate? Do you want save to every time you dodge an attack or score a good hit? Is that what it means to be legitimate?

Your position is just wrong. It is easier to finish a game if you can save whenever you want. Trying to separate difficulty from time spent is silly. Difficulty is how long it takes you to win. It is time based. Increasing the time it takes you to win makes the game harder to beat. It is possible to make a game too difficult. This game might be too difficult for you.

I remember when Yahtzee did the viewer mail episode he mercilessly corrected every tiny mistake in the letters and I think turn about is fair play: The correct plural of Attorney General is Attorneys General not Attorney Generals.

And to think I held you to a higher standard Yahtzee...

There are quite a few developers, in particular Japanese based ones, who don't really agree with things like difficulty level, or playability, or even fairness in their games. This isn't really anything new. I'm pretty sure it started with the NES(or Famicom) with games like Super Mario Brothers and Ghosts & Goblins(or Ghouls and Goblins I can't remember which), or the Megaman series, which wasn't quite as hard, and had difficulty selects which did change a lot of the gameplay.

For a while American developers were just as bad, if not worse. If you don't believe me, look at the older Rainbow 6 games for the PC. I still get nightmares from some of those games. Sometimes games will be made that are too hard for the masses, and Demon's Souls sounds like one of them. I'm not trying to sound like too much of a grammar nazi, but shouldn't the title be Demons' souls?

You say nightmares but I bet deep down inside you are proud of yourself for beating games like the older Rainbow 6. That ultimately, you look back on the experience as favorable and it brings you joy (assuming you eventually won).

Pondering...

Would a unified 'difficulty rating' be a good idea to have for games in the future? A simple 1-5 rating where 1 would be a casual game like pegle while 5 would be games like this one, where frustration would be great cause it is designed to kill you as many times between check points as possible.

Yet... do we want to give Australia another way to ban games?

"oh, we don't have a 5 difficulty rating so it can't be rated... and therefore can't be sold, sorry."

IWBTG - High Challenge + Low Punishment = Momentary Fun

Demon's Souls - High Challenge + High Punishment + Careful, skillful play = Constant, rewarding fun.

TheDrunkNinja:

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.

If your sarcasm-o-meter is busted, maybe you didn't notice the "i'm awesome" part was a large dose of it, to match the tone of the review.

Hope that helps.

Anarex:

I really feel like Yahtzee missed the ball on this one.

1. He makes a comparison of Demon's Souls to I Wanna Be The Guy as a example of how to do difficulty RIGHT. The biggest problem with this is that they're TWO COMPLETELY DIFFERENT GAMES. Making the comparison purely because their difficulty is similar would be like comparing Super Mario to Super Street Fighter because they both have "Super" in their title.

A better comparison would have been between games of similar genres. While I may be wrong, I feel that Demon's Souls would fit somewhere more along the lines of "horror" (or more appropriately "Tension"), in which case, Demon's Souls could be compared to Resident Evil, or Silent Hill.

Even though the mechanics of these two games are completely different, the core "checkpoint/save" system for both these games are very similar (lengthy gaps between saves and generous amounts of backtracking). Without any form of acclimating punishment (higher risks -> higher rewards), all type of horror from the game is lost. So changing Demon's Souls at such a fundamental level would have wide arcing consequences. It'd be like playing Resident Evil 1 using save states, or playing Resident Evil 4 (with it's checkpoint mechanics, and NON-HORROR style gameplay). And nobody compares Resident Evil 4 to 1 anymore because every one knows they're completely unique experiences. Comparing one to the other just makes you look stupid.

2. Stating macro-design decisions things like "Wow, why hasn't anyone higher up just added difficulty settings? It's the most OBVIOUS solution ever" (para-phrase) is a tool move. First off, making a decision like "just throw more money at it" is never a good solution. There's budgets and deadlines companies have to adhere to, and changing NOT ONLY things like stat balancing (changing enemy HP and whatnot), but also enemy placement is a huge endeavor. It's not just changing values. For example, let's say we made all enemies have 20% less health, and damage. Does that mean all enemies give 20% less XP? Or would it be more appropriate to give the player 35% less XP since enemies are being nerfed in multiple categories. Do we change item drop tables? Does a whole new set of inventory items have to be created for these new difficulty levels? Does this open up exploits where power users can level faster at lower levels? Does the game actually get harder near the end because less XP gain -> more grinding for Demon's Souls -> higher chance of losing all your souls -> more wasted time? And so on, and so on.

This doesn't even touch other major aspects such as PvP. Users who play on easier difficulties are suddenly encountering a enemy player who has played on normal, and all of a sudden the easy player is whooped because they're not used to this standard of play. Would we remove PvP from Demon's Souls (it's main mechanic) depending on your initial selection? Do we remove hints which are neg repped? It's a constant spiral of changes and making light of the developers for it without seriously thinking through the consequences is just a bad show. Especially coming from a published Game Reviewer whose also has had their hands in Game Development (your Trilby series).

3. At the end of your review, you stated that you didn't have the time to waste on games such as Demon's Souls, even though you knew it was an RPG which was of somewhat notable length. You can't punish them for that. You don't go to a comedy, and rate it poorly because you were in the mood for a drama. If you don't have the time, why not play it only a little bit in between your other game reviews rather then bash it because of your own scenario? I don't review soccer games and immediately give them low marks because I naturally dislike soccer games.

4. Extreme over exaggeration is not professional. Every level has a shortcut to the boss, or the level itself is extremely short. 1-2 can be beaten in less then 5 minutes (if you know the path to the boss [pro-tip: walk straight]), and 1-1 lets you fight the boss (after unlocking the shortcut) in under a minute and a half (pro-tip: walk straight). Stating that the game takes you over an hour to get to your previous locale is very misleading, and doing so just to prove your point is something that doesn't belong in journalism. Regular chat's fine though. It also shows a strong misunderstanding of the game's core level design which is that every level (if they're too long) has a shortcut to the boss, much like Ocarina of Time. And to the people who say you might have missed it, I cry foul. Level 1-1 has 2 shortcuts, one is missable, but the other is MANDATORY. It unlocks the boss. Ignoring these details is total weaksauce.

***As an alternate solution to the checkpoint problem, some type of town teleport spell would have been a cleaner solution. That way death is left in the hands of player decision, and less on player patience.

*****They do give the user this ability to town teleport later on in the game, but it comes a little too late into the game. It should have been a spell the user gets the moment they beat after the first major boss (just before the dragon death sequence you quit at).

Holy hell, I've never seen Yahtzee so far off on his opinion of something in my life.

The only thing he's right about is that Demon's Souls isn't hard. It isn't. If he finds that the game mechanics are 'wasting his time' then he's doing it wrong.

Rete:
I really feel like Yahtzee missed the ball on this one.

1. He makes a comparison of Demon's Souls to I Wanna Be The Guy as a example of how to do difficulty RIGHT. The biggest problem with this is that they're TWO COMPLETELY DIFFERENT GAMES. Making the comparison purely because their difficulty is similar would be like comparing Super Mario to Super Street Fighter because they both have "Super" in their title.

A better comparison would have been between games of similar genres. While I may be wrong, I feel that Demon's Souls would fit somewhere more along the lines of "horror" (or more appropriately "Tension"), in which case, Demon's Souls could be compared to Resident Evil, or Silent Hill.

Even though the mechanics of these two games are completely different, the core "checkpoint/save" system for both these games are very similar (lengthy gaps between saves and generous amounts of backtracking). Without any form of acclimating punishment (higher risks -> higher rewards), all type of horror from the game is lost. So changing Demon's Souls at such a fundamental level would have wide arcing consequences. It'd be like playing Resident Evil 1 using save states, or playing Resident Evil 4 (with it's checkpoint mechanics, and NON-HORROR style gameplay). And nobody compares Resident Evil 4 to 1 anymore because every one knows they're completely unique experiences. Comparing one to the other just makes you look stupid.

2. Stating macro-design decisions things like "Wow, why hasn't anyone higher up just added difficulty settings? It's the most OBVIOUS solution ever" (para-phrase) is a tool move. First off, making a decision like "just throw more money at it" is never a good solution. There's budgets and deadlines companies have to adhere to, and changing NOT ONLY things like stat balancing (changing enemy HP and whatnot), but also enemy placement is a huge endeavor. It's not just changing values. For example, let's say we made all enemies have 20% less health, and damage. Does that mean all enemies give 20% less XP? Or would it be more appropriate to give the player 35% less XP since enemies are being nerfed in multiple categories. Do we change item drop tables? Does a whole new set of inventory items have to be created for these new difficulty levels? Does this open up exploits where power users can level faster at lower levels? Does the game actually get harder near the end because less XP gain -> more grinding for Demon's Souls -> higher chance of losing all your souls -> more wasted time? And so on, and so on.

This doesn't even touch other major aspects such as PvP. Users who play on easier difficulties are suddenly encountering a enemy player who has played on normal, and all of a sudden the easy player is whooped because they're not used to this standard of play. Would we remove PvP from Demon's Souls (it's main mechanic) depending on your initial selection? Do we remove hints which are neg repped? It's a constant spiral of changes and making light of the developers for it without seriously thinking through the consequences is just a bad show. Especially coming from a published Game Reviewer whose also has had their hands in Game Development (your Trilby series).

3. At the end of your review, you stated that you didn't have the time to waste on games such as Demon's Souls, even though you knew it was an RPG which was of somewhat notable length. You can't punish them for that. You don't go to a comedy, and rate it poorly because you were in the mood for a drama. If you don't have the time, why not play it only a little bit in between your other game reviews rather then bash it because of your own scenario? I don't review soccer games and immediately give them low marks because I naturally dislike soccer games.

4. Extreme over exaggeration is not professional. Every level has a shortcut to the boss, or the level itself is extremely short. 1-2 can be beaten in less then 5 minutes (if you know the path to the boss [pro-tip: walk straight]), and 1-1 lets you fight the boss (after unlocking the shortcut) in under a minute and a half (pro-tip: walk straight). Stating that the game takes you over an hour to get to your previous locale is very misleading, and doing so just to prove your point is something that doesn't belong in journalism. Regular chat's fine though. It also shows a strong misunderstanding of the game's core level design which is that every level (if they're too long) has a shortcut to the boss, much like Ocarina of Time. And to the people who say you might have missed it, I cry foul. Level 1-1 has 2 shortcuts, one is missable, but the other is MANDATORY. It unlocks the boss. Ignoring these details is total weaksauce.

***As an alternate solution to the checkpoint problem, some type of town teleport spell would have been a cleaner solution. That way death is left in the hands of player decision, and less on player patience.

*****They do give the user this ability to town teleport later on in the game, but it comes a little too late into the game. It should have been a spell the user gets the moment they beat after the first major boss (just before the dragon death sequence you quit at).

Good counter!

But let me add the following:

1: There are only so many "checkpoints" as noveau-gamers have come to know them, but the shortcut mechanic functions in the same capacity, only it cannot be quick-save abused which seems to be a huge complaint (gee, wonder why?

2: Every Nexus teleport point (spawned when you beat bosses) functions this way. In fact the first one is right before the room leading up to that dragon.

vxicepickxv:
There are quite a few developers, in particular Japanese based ones, who don't really agree with things like difficulty level, or playability, or even fairness in their games. This isn't really anything new. I'm pretty sure it started with the NES(or Famicom) with games like Super Mario Brothers and Ghosts & Goblins(or Ghouls and Goblins I can't remember which), or the Megaman series, which wasn't quite as hard, and had difficulty selects which did change a lot of the gameplay.

For a while American developers were just as bad, if not worse. If you don't believe me, look at the older Rainbow 6 games for the PC. I still get nightmares from some of those games. Sometimes games will be made that are too hard for the masses, and Demon's Souls sounds like one of them. I'm not trying to sound like too much of a grammar nazi, but shouldn't the title be Demons' souls?

No. The Old One (boss of whole game) has many souls you are trying to steal/free.

therefore Demon's Souls refers to them.

solidstatemind:
Some folks- yourself included- have made interesting counter-arguments, but I can't help but notice that that are almost completely (if not 100%) based upon Demon's Souls ... and while it might be interesting to speculate how to use this EP to invalidate some of Yahtzee's original points in the ZP, the central thesis remains intact: 90% of the time, long periods between checkpoints is a bullshit move by the game developer.

And I'd have to disagree with you. Just because most people use a tool improperly has no impact upon the tool itself.

Just because most people use animation to make kids show, does not make Cowboy Bebop any less adult. Just because most people use Wii for horrible gimmicky games does not detract from Silent Hill.

Demon's Souls takes the long range checkpoint feature and puts it to GREAT use. It creates an emotional reaction from the player most games this generation lacks, and adds to the atmosphere and sheer immersion of the game. The fact that few games before it have used it this way has no bearing upon it...

I love this use of a generic term to mean an exact figure. Long periods between checkpoints, i.e. too long for you. For some reason each game has to have a check point system designed around your personal tolerance for frustration and challenge. Maybe you better nail down what exact length is acceptable. This way, developers know how to customer tailor their games for you in the future.

Helba1984:

TheDrunkNinja:
He's pretty much referring to this elitist douchebag.

If your sarcasm-o-meter is busted, maybe you didn't notice the "i'm awesome" part was a large dose of it, to match the tone of the review.

Hope that helps.

Yet, despite that tiny tidbit of an excuse, you still presented yourself as the elitist douchebag you denied being. Also, the nature of nearly every single one of your other posts completely destroys your "sarcasm" argument's credibility. I make the accusation of your case for denying the fact that you are indeed an elitist douchebag to be nothing but empty excuses; and I have proof.

So guys... Demon's Souls isn't that hard...

I got it the other day and I've been playing it a lot. It is not nearly as hard as it was made out to be and I can't see how anyone could get frustrated with it. It's nowhere near the difficulty of, say... Devil May Cry or the old Megaman-games. It's hard, yes. But not to the point of controller-throwing...

So, I guess what I'm trying to say is: "What the hell Yahtzee!? Stop whining... And man up..."

It makes you wonder how he got through Devil May Cry 3 and Ninja Gaiden 2. Was he playing on easy to make sure he finished in time for a review?

http://i.imgur.com/taEe0.png

I found this to be amusing

MowDownJoe:
Y'know, just from reading all the idiotic things Atkinson has said, I'm half-tempted to send him an e-mail now and rub his own stupidity in his face from half a world away. Of course, I don't know how well that'd go over.

Believe me, I had the exact same thought.

Theres nothing to be ashamed about calling it a BS game. It sounds rediculous from multiple people who have played it

TheDrunkNinja:

Helba1984:

TheDrunkNinja:
He's pretty much referring to this elitist douchebag.

If your sarcasm-o-meter is busted, maybe you didn't notice the "i'm awesome" part was a large dose of it, to match the tone of the review.

Hope that helps.

Yet, despite that tiny tidbit of an excuse, you still presented yourself as the elitist douchebag you denied being. Also, the nature of nearly every single one of your other posts completely destroys your "sarcasm" argument's credibility. I make the accusation of your case for denying the fact that you are indeed an elitist douchebag to be nothing but empty excuses; and I have proof.

If you can't separate my obviously direct and sarcastic tone from my extremely valid arguments, that's either your fault, a consequence of Forum posts as a text-only medium, or some combination thereof in as-yet-undetermined proportions.

I'd wager the higher half goes to you, though.

see? that's sarcasm!

oh, wait - so was that! and this!

I'm going to E-mail it!

What a cruel twist of fate putting the email address. Nice touch! It's sad the Atkinson is so ignorant about 'minorities'

The first page had a great email template that I suggest we use. As an example of what I mean, here's what I replied to him with:

Subject: Dealing with the Vocal Majority

Greetings Mr. Atkinson,

It has come to my attention (along with you and many others) that a large amount of vocal minority is against you're opinions and actions regarding censorship. I believe it is necessary to inform you that while the vocal minority may appear to be a vocal majority, this is just a cheap trick created through fake email addresses and yelling. Yelling to seem bigger than one really is has been used throughout human history, so do not be deterred if people are harassing you and calling you retarded more than what seems physically possible for such a small group. This tactic has been used by well known dictators such as Hitler, so my advice is to not listen to what are essentially Nazis.

To combat this facade, I suggest you fight fire with fire. The vocal minority is behaving like a dictatorship, and so should you. Remove freedom of speech to silence their yelling. This should prove easy to you, as you attempt to do it on a regular basis. Soon the vocal minority will subside (probably through violence, which is an acceptable strategy if done in real life), and you can get on with your busy life.

Sincerely,

-Joseph Walter
Concerned foreign maverick

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

Notice the happy tone and agreeing with him while actually insulting him. Also notice the "P.S. Don't you just LOVE the game Yahtzee?" I believe adding that, or a variation of that would be hilarious if done on a grand scale. Also notice "Greetings Mr. Atkinson," and the way I wrote my name. It gives it a feel of professionalism that may actually make him read it before getting pissed off.

Also, Joseph Walter is a pseudonym, just and FYI.

I enjoyed this Extra Punctuation. I have yet to play the game, but I agree. I hate having to redo large parts after dieing. Hard is fun, but that's just annoying.

SFR:
The first page had a great email template that I suggest we use. As an example of what I mean, here's what I replied to him with:

Subject: Dealing with the Vocal Majority

Greetings Mr. Atkinson,

It has come to my attention (along with you and many others) that a large amount of vocal minority is against you're opinions and actions regarding censorship. I believe it is necessary to inform you that while the vocal minority may appear to be a vocal majority, this is just a cheap trick created through fake email addresses and yelling. Yelling to seem bigger than one really is has been used throughout human history, so do not be deterred if people are harassing you and calling you retarded more than what seems physically possible for such a small group. This tactic has been used by well known dictators such as Hitler, so my advice is to not listen to what are essentially Nazis.

To combat this facade, I suggest you fight fire with fire. The vocal minority is behaving like a dictatorship, and so should you. Remove freedom of speech to silence their yelling. This should prove easy to you, as you attempt to do it on a regular basis. Soon the vocal minority will subside (probably through violence, which is an acceptable strategy if done in real life), and you can get on with your busy life.

Sincerely,

-Joseph Walter
Concerned foreign maverick

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

Notice the happy tone and agreeing with him while actually insulting him. Also notice the "P.S. Don't you just LOVE the game Yahtzee?" I believe adding that, or a variation of that would be hilarious if done on a grand scale. Also notice "Greetings Mr. Atkinson," and the way I wrote my name. It gives it a feel of professionalism that may actually make him read it before getting pissed off.

Also, Joseph Walter is a pseudonym, just and FYI.

I enjoyed this Extra Punctuation. I have yet to play the game, but I agree. I hate having to redo large parts after dieing. Hard is fun, but that's just annoying.

To be fair, I severely doubt he is going to read them. I sent one anyway!

Helba1984:
If you can't separate my obviously direct and sarcastic tone from my extremely valid arguments, that's either your fault, a consequence of Forum posts as a text-only medium, or some combination thereof in as-yet-undetermined proportions.

I'd wager the higher half goes to you, though.

see? that's sarcasm!

oh, wait - so was that! and this!

Alright, you forced my hand on this. I didn't want to waste the time, but here's your proof:

Helba1984:
Yahtzee, I just lost even more respect for you because of this.

Your post was "Backpedaling, backpedaling, backpedaling, (insult viewers, epithets), backpedaling, (lie about checkpoint length), backpedaling, (insult game for having one standard level of difficulty and about 15 classes that completely change the game and you've only played one), (make excuses for not actually trying to beat game based on review length, when Kotaku specifically delayed their review until their reviewer beat the game in order to provide a more accurate review), backpedaling, end."

You want something you could actually complain about, checkpoint-wise, Yahtzee?

Play BAROQUE.

The game is not as unkind as you continue to insist it is; I posted a point-by-point rebuttal to your claims which you fail to recognize (other than backpedaling on the points which were obvious). But the Shortcut system in the game is exactly like a checkpoint, other than that it cannnot be quick-save abused, so it actually forces you to play the goddamn game.

Also, I don't think the complaints of casual gamers should weigh in on a game like this, because it's obviously not targeting them. that part of your post was just fluff to justify more backpedaling.

Edit:

If you happen to want an accurate review, rather than a comedy routine with smarminess, click here:

A prime example of what an elitist douchebag would post.

Helba1984:
Nope. You're caught in the Half-Life illusion.

Even if they let you wander around the land like a fucktard, WRPGs still have a developer-set narrative.

The only difference is the illusion that what you do changes anything in the long term.

Your point = epic fail.

Elitist douchebag.

Helba1984:
I am also a professional who happens to work in the industry, and I know precisely the motivating factors behind these trends I speak of; I am well versed and well educated in this subject matter in particular.

REALLY an elitist douchebag. This all only took me a few minutes to dig up by the way. Wasn't exactly a hard thing to do.

Helba1984:
Wow, so you mean that the Wiki is noexistant? And what, don't you figure everything out by trial and error? Do you have some godly cheat sheet for every game you play so you only have to play it once? How do you even play games at all? Every game requires effort and trial and error. This game just punishes you for being a Rambo wannabe and not using your noodle (the one in your brain).

Alright, I'll admit your being sarcastic here.

Keep in mind, sarcasm is a weak defense when it's sarcasm for the sake of being an elitist douchebag.

Helba1984:
Wow. You should avoid every RPG ever made, because that genre isn't for you. Also never ever play D&D, and don't bother trying to play FF or DQ at all. Also avoid Oblivion and Morrowind, avoid KOTOR, avoid pretty much anything out of Bioware or Japan in general.

Go play Halo and stop complaining.

More sarcasm. How surprising.

See? Weak defense.

Still an elitist douchebag!

Helba1984:
Wow, here I was thinking you understood that progressing and becoming more powerful in a game is sort of part of the game getting more difficult. You probably can't handle an FPS either, because you have to have guns "of a certain level" of power and have learned "by trial and error"that standing in front of an alien with your thumb up your ass will get you killed.

Better stick to Madden, BroGamer. http://www.vgcats.com/comics/?strip_id=287

Posting comic strips to make your point... is just... strange. And you do it all the time...

... Stop it for god sake's.

Another thing, posting 3-4 times MANY times in a row is borderline obsession. Actually, it just plain is. Take some time off, get some sedating meds, and calm down. I've noticed you've been pissing everybody off lately, and if you think that just means they're all retards, then you truly are an elitist douchebag.

martin's a madman:

SFR:
The first page had a great email template that I suggest we use. As an example of what I mean, here's what I replied to him with:

Subject: Dealing with the Vocal Majority

Greetings Mr. Atkinson,

It has come to my attention (along with you and many others) that a large amount of vocal minority is against you're opinions and actions regarding censorship. I believe it is necessary to inform you that while the vocal minority may appear to be a vocal majority, this is just a cheap trick created through fake email addresses and yelling. Yelling to seem bigger than one really is has been used throughout human history, so do not be deterred if people are harassing you and calling you retarded more than what seems physically possible for such a small group. This tactic has been used by well known dictators such as Hitler, so my advice is to not listen to what are essentially Nazis.

To combat this facade, I suggest you fight fire with fire. The vocal minority is behaving like a dictatorship, and so should you. Remove freedom of speech to silence their yelling. This should prove easy to you, as you attempt to do it on a regular basis. Soon the vocal minority will subside (probably through violence, which is an acceptable strategy if done in real life), and you can get on with your busy life.

Sincerely,

-Joseph Walter
Concerned foreign maverick

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

Notice the happy tone and agreeing with him while actually insulting him. Also notice the "P.S. Don't you just LOVE the game Yahtzee?" I believe adding that, or a variation of that would be hilarious if done on a grand scale. Also notice "Greetings Mr. Atkinson," and the way I wrote my name. It gives it a feel of professionalism that may actually make him read it before getting pissed off.

Also, Joseph Walter is a pseudonym, just and FYI.

I enjoyed this Extra Punctuation. I have yet to play the game, but I agree. I hate having to redo large parts after dieing. Hard is fun, but that's just annoying.

To be fair, I severely doubt he is going to read them. I sent one anyway!

True, but having a bunch of people send him emails is the primary goal here anyway. It's not a vocal minority. And... if he does read them it would be really funny.

SFR:

martin's a madman:

SFR:
The first page had a great email template that I suggest we use. As an example of what I mean, here's what I replied to him with:

Subject: Dealing with the Vocal Majority

Greetings Mr. Atkinson,

It has come to my attention (along with you and many others) that a large amount of vocal minority is against you're opinions and actions regarding censorship. I believe it is necessary to inform you that while the vocal minority may appear to be a vocal majority, this is just a cheap trick created through fake email addresses and yelling. Yelling to seem bigger than one really is has been used throughout human history, so do not be deterred if people are harassing you and calling you retarded more than what seems physically possible for such a small group. This tactic has been used by well known dictators such as Hitler, so my advice is to not listen to what are essentially Nazis.

To combat this facade, I suggest you fight fire with fire. The vocal minority is behaving like a dictatorship, and so should you. Remove freedom of speech to silence their yelling. This should prove easy to you, as you attempt to do it on a regular basis. Soon the vocal minority will subside (probably through violence, which is an acceptable strategy if done in real life), and you can get on with your busy life.

Sincerely,

-Joseph Walter
Concerned foreign maverick

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

Notice the happy tone and agreeing with him while actually insulting him. Also notice the "P.S. Don't you just LOVE the game Yahtzee?" I believe adding that, or a variation of that would be hilarious if done on a grand scale. Also notice "Greetings Mr. Atkinson," and the way I wrote my name. It gives it a feel of professionalism that may actually make him read it before getting pissed off.

Also, Joseph Walter is a pseudonym, just and FYI.

I enjoyed this Extra Punctuation. I have yet to play the game, but I agree. I hate having to redo large parts after dieing. Hard is fun, but that's just annoying.

To be fair, I severely doubt he is going to read them. I sent one anyway!

True, but having a bunch of people send him emails is the primary goal here anyway. It's not a vocal minority. And... if he does read them it would be really funny.

See, I hope it isn't a minority, considering he's talking about Australian citizens and I myself living in Canada have no say. I would like to see some percentage of people for VS against the rating.

I love the game, but I've got to agree with most of your points.

Alrighty, let's take this one at a time.

TheDrunkNinja:

Alright, you forced my hand on this. I didn't want to waste the time, but here's your proof:

- I forced you to dig through forums hunting for posts that match my writing voice? Wow, that's effort!

Seriously though, most of your rage toward me seems to be that you can't counter my points, so you focus on personal attack. Debate 101 says that's a bad move, friend.


A prime example of what an elitist douchebag would post.

- I'm an elitist douchebag why - because I noticed a trend wherein points which were quite heavily repeated (and loudly so) in the video review were quietly and sneakily retracted in the letter, all the while keeping with the "I was right anyway and nobody can disprove me" tone?

Because I posted an apt counter-argument?


Elitist douchebag.

- Again, focusing on me and not my point.

REALLY an elitist douchebag. This all only took me a few minutes to dig up by the way. Wasn't exactly a hard thing to do.

-Oh? Especially when it's true? I'm an elitist douchebag for stating that I have expertise in dealing not only with PR, the public opinion on a game, the reaction to and support for the game itself, and experience with casual markets in particular?

(or rather, to be more precise, the business of balancing efforts toward the traditional and casual markets in a game software setting)

I suppose if you think I'm a liar that may be valid, but given the chance I can provide references if you so require. I was merely stating a fact to provide the ethos for my next statement.

Also, I love how you post none of these in context, so that it just seems like I'm a troll and not like these were separate threads with many other posters.

Several are in fact part of a single point-by-point rebuttal to a single post.


Alright, I'll admit your being sarcastic here.

Keep in mind, sarcasm is a weak defense when it's sarcasm for the sake of being an elitist douchebag.

- Except when I'm right, in which case it's an even more douchbag-y move to target me instead of countering a point you know is apt.

More sarcasm. How surprising.

See? Weak defense.

Still an elitist douchebag!

- No need to repeat here.

TheDrunkNinja:

Posting comic strips to make your point... is just... strange. And you do it all the time...

... Stop it for god sake's.

Another thing, posting 3-4 times MANY times in a row is borderline obsession. Actually, it just plain is. Take some time off, get some sedating meds, and calm down. I've noticed you've been pissing everybody off lately, and if you think that just means they're all retards, then you truly are an elitist douchebag.

-

Ah, difficulty levels. I'm a bit of a masochist, so I tend to play hard by default. Alternatively, I did send an email to Atkinson using the address Yahtzee supplied. I felt a lot better about myself after I did. :)

My email went a little somethin' like this:

Attorney-General Atkinson, sir,

I was recently alerted to your position in regards to gaining an R18+ classification for video games in Australia. Apparently, you stated that those in accord with this were simply a "vocal minority". Sir, with all due respect, I wish to add my voice to that minority.

I am a twenty-two year old female game developer who has just completed a three year bachelor's degree in this field and am convinced that you are acting quite selfishly in this regard. From your interview, you are generalising the gaming public and the collective intelligence of parents who are responsible for what their children play. Last year I was in a game boutique and overheard a parent buying a two-year-old a Nintendo DS. Surely this is an indication that it is not the children that are the determining factor of game sales, but the parents?

I do not own, nor do I play games that are particularly violent, but I believe in the industry in which I work and you, sir, should represent the people properly and allow the correct voice of the people to be heard. A computer game is no different a media form than a film - you are still using a screen with moving images. If your argument is that there is increased immersion and input from a player, I would argue that film and television is becoming increasingly interactive. You are censoring something that any responsible adult should be capable of doing themselves.

If your concern is that children will acquire the game, may I remind you that film tickets to an R18+ motion picture are not allowed to be sold to an unaccompanied minor. I would urge you to reconsider your position and amend the classification to include this condition.

I can understand that you only want what is best for your constituents, but please be aware of the hampering you are placing on a booming industry that can do so much for Australia economically. With this classification, we can not only keep game sellers in business but also maintain a healthy creative culture for Australian game developers.

Yours sincerely,

 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