Jimquisition: Dumbing Down for the Filthy Casuals

 Pages PREV 1 . . . 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 . . . 30 NEXT
 

Sono try using fire bombs the two dogs will die easy then roll and throw. If you have low endurance you wont be able to block so stay light and roll.

VyceVictus:

Korten12:

sonofliber:

hi my friend who play this game with a trainer (he didnt have the skills to finish the game), say you are spewing lies, about the whole "difficulty is what makes this game work" he loves the setting, the atmosphere, the sound and the asthetics of the game.

Hi to your "friend," also he missed the point. The setting dark and depressing. The idea that your supposed to be on among many undead (although the Chosen undead), and that this is a brutal world that doesn't care for you, your friend, or I. Removing difficulty then removes tension, but it also removes any connection between story and gameplay. Because if it's not hard than it brings you out of the experience because your character isn't supposed to be some invincible god who can tackle any challenge.

You can't understand how the bosses are supposed to be menacing if you're able to push through them because you aren't playing by the story. Your character then is "out of character," by becoming something they aren't supposed to be. That is why even when your the max level, enemies on NG+++++++, are still hard and will never suddenly become easy. Because no matter how strong you're, your character is supposed to be small compared to them. They aren't supposed to be unique in the sense of power. Bosses are supposed to look at you like an ant.

Your friend can't experience the game. He may claim he likes them, but he can never be "in character" and thus never experience it. Because his character is no longer part of the story.

So what?
Who are you to say who "experiences" what? You both "experienced" the game by playing it. And right here, we see how his experience has absolutely no bearing whatsoever on yours. Just like all the other analogies of books and movies and sports and peanuts or whatever, you can experience medium however you want. Gaming in general and this game in particular doesnt have to be just one way, regardless of whether or not it's casual or hardcore. You and his friend bought the game, you and him gave From money, you and him got wahtever you wanted out of it. An assist or easy mode or whatever will not change that.

The developer. Yes, the people who MAKE THE GAME. Your not the creator, they created the game to push a message, to push an experience. Going against that isn't what they intended because everything fits together to make this experience. That's the point you are not getting. Everything is supposed to come together. You lose the experience. There is no other experience if you remove it. Than your just a game with no meaning, and no experience other than "it's a video game."

If you believe that authors, directors, and such don't have a specific meaning and experience they hope you feel, than your wrong. Yes, some DO have multiple meanings and hope to get more experiences out of it. But not all. Not everything is the same, not all abide by the same rules. Trying to make it so they all follow a standard or rules is indeed going against the whole purpose of the game in the first place.

Korten12:

sonofliber:

Korten12:

Hi to your "friend," also he missed the point. The setting dark and depressing. The idea that your supposed to be on among many undead (although the Chosen undead), and that this is a brutal world that doesn't care for you, your friend, or I. Removing difficulty then removes tension, but it also removes any connection between story and gameplay. Because if it's not hard than it brings you out of the experience because your character isn't supposed to be some invincible god who can tackle any challenge.

You can't understand how the bosses are supposed to be menacing if you're able to push through them because you aren't playing by the story. Your character then is "out of character," by becoming something they aren't supposed to be. That is why even when your the max level, enemies on NG+++++++, are still hard and will never suddenly become easy. Because no matter how strong you're, your character is supposed to be small compared to them. They aren't supposed to be unique in the sense of power. Bosses are supposed to look at you like an ant.

Your friend can't experience the game. He may claim he likes them, but he can never be "in character" and thus never experience it. Because his character is no longer part of the story.

now you see, no one talks about removing the difficulty (that would be wrong), but instead adapting it to less skilled players, intead of having to run back to your body, you just lose 1/3 of your souls to your body, intead of the frigging cappra deamon with his 2 dogs, its just the cappra daemon or him with just 1 dog, make an attack have 1 more second of delay, that sort of change, not "well just spam right button to win"

you would breeze thru (if you played on easy) the new cappra deamon boss, my friend now can actually have a change to beat him, that my friend is easy mode, not a fundament change, but little tweaks here and there

Still not getting the point, now your just playing for the sake of playing it. I love Dark Soul's gameplay, it's fun, but what makes it fun is it's difficulty. It provides an never ending challenge. Death is part of the game play and part of the storyline, making death have less of an effect is removing that fear. The idea of the story is that when you die, you lose your souls (and humanity) and thus are back to being a standard hollow. It's part of the story. But if you only lose some, then suddenly your not an average undead, your more than that and that's not what the game is going for.

Making the encounters easier, than removes the ant being among giants, because now it's more like, a human being among humans. Your on equal footing. We play games to not only just play them but to experience them. When the game is trying to push this experience and you refuse it. Your missing the point.

It would be like watching a movie and then you remove all the major plot points and just left with the scenes in between. The movie loses it's focus and no longer has the impact and meaning it once had and your just watching a hollow movie. And where is the fun in that? Where is the fun is losing out on the experience the game wants you to experience?

the word you are missing is TO YOU, my friend would still find it challenging, he would still lose his souls (even if its not that much) and humanity (and there for the loot advantages), so yeah, you are analising this as if you are the one playing, but the thing is, you are not, it someone less skilled that what you dont find challenging he does.

BioRex:

GrimHeaper:

Korten12:

No it's not, I am talking about GAMEPLAY to Story, not Lore to story.

It has that as well. I said " Rich lore to go with it's story"
Guess what the gameplay is tied to, the story.

You I think I thought of a better comparison, though this may be redundant by the time it gets posted :P
Lowering the difficulty in Dark Souls is to making the fights less flashy in Bayonetta. The core of Dark Souls is to hard, the core of Bayonetta is to be stylish. (note I don't think less of bayonetta and it's not a style over substance type of style, I mean literal being awesome, I mean you ride up a rocket into space on a motorcycle that was bloody BADASS!!!) So an easy mode in dark souls is akin to a mode in Bayonetta where you don't ride a rocket into space while on a motorcycle. Damn I need to replay Bayobetta...

You should also fight the secret boss on the hardest mode if you haven't.
only need 10 million halos.

GrimHeaper:

Yet if you actually paid attention to the father boss fight you would notice how helpless Bayonetta was.
This is the introduction to Bayonetta. All those things she has fought so far are small fry.
Yes, even that god at the end.

If you truly wanted a hopeless battle you would put a bayonetta boss in darksouls. >.>
You a puny human against something that can destroy entire countries in a blink of the eye and can move at the speed of lightning. A hopeless battle is by definition one you cannot win.

Never mind, I won't argue with you anymore. With that last part I clearly see you're missing the point of what I am trying to say. Picking bits and pieces and trying to argue on that. Dark Soul's isn't about being HOPELESS. It's being an ant among giants, pushing through despite the difference. Not that there isn't hope.

Monxeroth:
Really now Jim?
This is getting ridiculous even for you.
Most recent videos have been nothing but the same argument about varying things over and over again and its getting REALLY old.
Could you just please put some effort into a future video that isnt filled with your rambling about the same kind of bullshit argument i hear on a daily basis:
*Oh, it doesnt affect you, so why do you care?
*Oh, you already have access to what you want without being interfered by something else, so why do you care?
*Oh, this thing may or may not have a negative impact on the gaming community, but lets for argument sake say it doesnt, then why would you care?

I mean fucking hell Jim, youre a broken record by now.

And they are all valid arguments on different topics he has discussed.

Korten12:

GrimHeaper:

Yet if you actually paid attention to the father boss fight you would notice how helpless Bayonetta was.
This is the introduction to Bayonetta. All those things she has fought so far are small fry.
Yes, even that god at the end.

If you truly wanted a hopeless battle you would put a bayonetta boss in darksouls. >.>
You a puny human against something that can destroy entire countries in a blink of the eye and can move at the speed of lightning. A hopeless battle is by definition one you cannot win.

Never mind, I won't argue with you anymore. With that last part I clearly see you're missing the point of what I am trying to say. Picking bits and pieces and trying to argue on that. Dark Soul's isn't about being HOPELESS. It's being an ant among giants, pushing through despite the difference. Not that there isn't hope.

No, it seems like there really isn't that much hope running around in that game.
Everything is fucked seems to be the core story of the game.
There are games that are much more cheery like Shadow of the Colossus that do that ant among giants much better even though everything in that game is also fucked.

sonofliber:
hi my friend who play this game with a trainer (he didnt have the skills to finish the game), say you are spewing lies, about the whole "difficulty is what makes this game work" he loves the setting, the atmosphere, the sound and the asthetics of the game.

Your friend may be enjoying himself, but if he is playing the game with a trainer, he doesn't know what the game is, never mind if it "works". No one is saying you can't appreciate the game's aesthetics, but that's like looking at screen shots from a film. You wouldn't be truly engaging it's content.

sonofliber:

the word you are missing is TO YOU, my friend would still find it challenging, he would still lose his souls (even if its not that much) and humanity (and there for the loot advantages), so yeah, you are analising this as if you are the one playing, but the thing is, you are not, it someone less skilled that what you dont find challenging he does.

Still the problem that this "new challenge" still goes against the overall meaning and story. Because making the battles on more even footing, even if they are a challenge doesn't make them suddenly fit. That's what you don't seem to get. Your trying to put it in much simpler terms, your ignoring any of the story parts I am saying. All you have been doing is just taking the "challenge" part of what I say and argue that without the entire point.

Rooster Cogburn:

VyceVictus:
Juts to reiterate, my main point is not that every game needs an"easy mode", my main point is that if any game allows for anytype of add on assistance or help (or even, yess, a stat decreased easy mode), that will in NO WAY affect you being able to enjoy the original challenge as intended. Im not saying DS MUSt get an add on patch or anything, but if the sequel does, you have no need to be concerned. Its not gonna "Fuck Your Game Up". You WILL have the original. No one wants to deny anyone that.

If I COULD use it, it affects the sense of accomplishment (which I remind you is the stated goal of this game's designers) and the tension. The OPTION, the very presence of it, impacts tension and feelings of achievement. You belittled my emotional response to these games, but that is the whole intention behind them! In addition to that, difficulty is essential to the Dark Souls design in the way that shooting at things is essential to Call of Duty's design. To tell me they are going to add a mode completely without that, but leave everything in the entire game that relies on it and expounds on it exactly the same just seems ridiculous to me. It can't happen, nobody makes games like that. The reason we are able to get the focused, crafted experience we have now is precisely because they are focusing everything on the one design. In Dark Souls, you are presented with an impassable obstacle. You overcome it not with quick reflexes and precise aiming, but by taking your time and learning about the game. That's what it is all about, the learning and expanding your knowledge of the game. Without the obstacle there is nothing to learn. That leaves nothing for the casual player to do except blow through it.

Give easy mode players a game like that and they will be SCREAMING for a story they can appreciate, and combat they can appreciate, enough content to fill their time, a branching leveling system and bosses that don't 1 hit KO them a thousand times in a row. The kind of player that needs an easy mode will never get passed Bed of Chaos, no matter what the stats are. So that fight needs to be designed with the needs of both audiences in mind. Easy mode players will never get through Blighttown, regardless of what the stats are. They ALL need to be designed with both audiences in mind. Everything will be limited to what can be made workable for both audiences. The Dark Souls experience we have now is so well crafted precisely because it does not NEED to bend to the needs of multiple audiences. The coop, the core gameplay, the messaging system, the covenant system, the learning experience, upgrade system, is made relevant by the difficulty. Everything is designed around difficulty. That's the whole idea!

As for the "peanuts", heh..well, DS DOES have peanuts in it, amongst other delicious nougat and caramel and chocolate. The difficulty is just one aspect. A main core one, but not the entire package.
That said, in my activity of gaming, I am free to get out of a game whatever I want, anyone is. I liked the combat and setting, art, and atmosphere, but not other things I mentioned, This doesnt mean I have to not play the game just because of those certain detractions. You dont have to want to play DS JUST because it's hard, there's more to it than that. And so, if the developers decided to put something out that addressed those detractions, why not? Especially if its optional. You say leave "us" alone, but Im saying nobody is bothering or imposing you to begin with. I have faith in From software after all these years to believe they wouldnt abandon their hardcore fanbase, but I also know they have just as much talent in making things accessible and fun at the same time challenging (Armored Core, Otogi, hell Metal Wolf Chaos) Nobody is taking anything from you. An addition to the playin field is not going to make you any less of a star player. And in the end, if DS stays the same, great and bad, it would still be worth experiencing (to wit giving From our money). This is not a zero sum game.

Please don't mention the "star player" thing, it might be interpreted to mean that I care about measuring myself against others, that I am ELITIST. That tends to really set me off. It could even be construed as an ad hominem in this case.

I realize there is a lot to appreciate in Dark Souls aside from the difficulty. But I'm sorry, this is a difficulty game. Not a difficult game, a difficulty game. The idea of an easy mode runs counter to it's design and goals. It's simply antithetical. You are saying they are going to make a game that is some crazy inversion of Dark Souls, and then promising that won't impact my experience in any way. I don't think that is fair to the fans of the series or a reasonable expectation. If you told Starcraft fans their game should be an FPS because that's all you want to play, and they are bad for maniacally hiding their pictures and story behind strategy gameplay just to be jerks, I think they would laugh. That is exactly what this is but for some reason no one is laughing. Dark Souls has to fight harder then anything else to exist and have an identity because it does not fit easily into people's expectations.

If you or anyone wants to try to get into the game, I would love nothing more than to help them. Seriously, I know I'm a pain, but I would be happy to help you get into it, and I can even coop on Xbox. It doesn't matter if you're a newbie or whatever, because learning and learning from each other is what it's all about. And once you get drawn in I hope you understand.

Difficulty is not a genre, RPG is. Assists or modifications dont stop it from being an RPG. I mentioned earlier about the change of Ghost Recon to Advanced Fighter and from Resident Evil to RE4. In those regards, though core mechanics changed, it didnt stop those games from being the core of what they really were (tactical shooter and survival horror respectively). Even if I were advocating such a drastic change (which I'm not), so long as it's an RPG the core would be the same. But all that aside, there are many other ways beyond a blunt easy mode stat conversion that could increase accessibility without altering the core challenge or fundamental mechanics. Moreover, there are a number of ways the mechanics could be improved and still be as challenging as ever. Even after all my criticisms, I want to make it clear that I still think it's a great game. Even if I dont feel the need to get fully into NG++++ or doesn't mean I dont enjoy it.

GrimHeaper:

Korten12:

GrimHeaper:

Yet if you actually paid attention to the father boss fight you would notice how helpless Bayonetta was.
This is the introduction to Bayonetta. All those things she has fought so far are small fry.
Yes, even that god at the end.

If you truly wanted a hopeless battle you would put a bayonetta boss in darksouls. >.>
You a puny human against something that can destroy entire countries in a blink of the eye and can move at the speed of lightning. A hopeless battle is by definition one you cannot win.

Never mind, I won't argue with you anymore. With that last part I clearly see you're missing the point of what I am trying to say. Picking bits and pieces and trying to argue on that. Dark Soul's isn't about being HOPELESS. It's being an ant among giants, pushing through despite the difference. Not that there isn't hope.

No, it seems like there really isn't that much hope running around in that game.
Everything is fucked seems to be the core story of the game.
There are games that are much more cheery like Shadow of the Colossus that do that ant among giants much better.

Final response to you. Than you mistake the story, yes the world is fucked but you're it's last hope. Even if it's a small hope. Hence the bonfire's, they're the saving grace. It's why the ending of the game if you choose the good ending is lighting that last bonfire because there is hope. As you go through your journey you're lighting the fires over the land and eventually light that last light.

And now your mistaking "Size" for what I mean by "Giants."

VyceVictus:

Difficulty is not a genre, RPG is. Assists or modifications dont stop it from being an RPG. I mentioned earlier about the change of Ghost Recon to Advanced Fighter and from Resident Evil to RE4. In those regards, though core mechanics changed, it didnt stop those games from being the core of what they really were (tactical shooter and survival horror respectively). Even if I were advocating such a drastic change (which I'm not), so long as it's an RPG the core would be the same. But all that aside, there are many other ways beyond a blunt easy mode stat conversion that could increase accessibility without altering the core challenge or fundamental mechanics. Moreover, there are a number of ways the mechanics could be improved and still be as challenging as ever. Even after all my criticisms, I want to make it clear that I still think it's a great game. Even if I dont feel the need to get fully into NG++++ or doesn't mean I dont enjoy it.

Actually there is a genre that Dark Souls falls into. It's the sub-genre known as Rouge-Like, Dark Souls is a lite Rouge-Like game. It's a niche genre for brutally difficult games that lots of times have many RPG elements to them. It's an unforgiving sub-genre, it doesn't encompus all difficult games (as even if a game is brutually difficult, it usually has RPG mechanics to go with it.)

It's a sub-genre that only has one difficulty - Hard, so Dark Souls does indeed fall into a specific Genre rather than just RPG.

Korten12:

VyceVictus:

Korten12:

Hi to your "friend," also he missed the point. The setting dark and depressing. The idea that your supposed to be on among many undead (although the Chosen undead), and that this is a brutal world that doesn't care for you, your friend, or I. Removing difficulty then removes tension, but it also removes any connection between story and gameplay. Because if it's not hard than it brings you out of the experience because your character isn't supposed to be some invincible god who can tackle any challenge.

You can't understand how the bosses are supposed to be menacing if you're able to push through them because you aren't playing by the story. Your character then is "out of character," by becoming something they aren't supposed to be. That is why even when your the max level, enemies on NG+++++++, are still hard and will never suddenly become easy. Because no matter how strong you're, your character is supposed to be small compared to them. They aren't supposed to be unique in the sense of power. Bosses are supposed to look at you like an ant.

Your friend can't experience the game. He may claim he likes them, but he can never be "in character" and thus never experience it. Because his character is no longer part of the story.

So what?
Who are you to say who "experiences" what? You both "experienced" the game by playing it. And right here, we see how his experience has absolutely no bearing whatsoever on yours. Just like all the other analogies of books and movies and sports and peanuts or whatever, you can experience medium however you want. Gaming in general and this game in particular doesnt have to be just one way, regardless of whether or not it's casual or hardcore. You and his friend bought the game, you and him gave From money, you and him got wahtever you wanted out of it. An assist or easy mode or whatever will not change that.

The developer. Yes, the people who MAKE THE GAME. Your not the creator, they created the game to push a message, to push an experience. Going against that isn't what they intended because everything fits together to make this experience. That's the point you are not getting. Everything is supposed to come together. You lose the experience. There is no other experience if you remove it. Than your just a game with no meaning, and no experience other than "it's a video game."

If you believe that authors, directors, and such don't have a specific meaning and experience they hope you feel, than your wrong. Yes, some DO have multiple meanings and hope to get more experiences out of it. But not all. Not everything is the same, not all abide by the same rules. Trying to make it so they all follow a standard or rules is indeed going against the whole purpose of the game in the first place.

Authorial Intent?
Some would say that loses relevance as soon as the work is out to the public. Is Starship Troopers a satire, an action movie, or a comedy? Though the director meant one thing, the movie audience is completely free to interpret it as another. (and even in that case the movie director was free to make his own interpretation from the original author's intent). But this is the way of art, it cannot exist without both author and audience. And art by it's nature is free to be interpreted, along with or in spite of authorial intent. Its one thing to know what the author intends, but that doesnt automatically prevent you from other interpretations. Dark Souls is beauty in ugliness, ugliness in beauty. Even if thats not one of the authors thematic intents, anyone is perfectly fee to derive that from the text (the contents of the game) itself.

Korten12:

sonofliber:

the word you are missing is TO YOU, my friend would still find it challenging, he would still lose his souls (even if its not that much) and humanity (and there for the loot advantages), so yeah, you are analising this as if you are the one playing, but the thing is, you are not, it someone less skilled that what you dont find challenging he does.

Still the problem that this "new challenge" still goes against the overall meaning and story. Because making the battles on more even footing, even if they are a challenge doesn't make them suddenly fit. That's what you don't seem to get. Your trying to put it in much simpler terms, your ignoring any of the story parts I am saying. All you have been doing is just taking the "challenge" part of what I say and argue that without the entire point.

you dont seem to grasp the concept of differents perception, here:

you:
cappra deamon with 2 dogs: holy damn that was an awesome fight so hard, man i feel next boss is going to screw me.

my fried :
cappra deamon with no dogs: holy damn that was an awesome fight so hard, man i feel next boss is going to screw me.

see, both had the same experience, for each of you the challenge was the same, but the challenge itself had to change to adapt to both your skill sets, the feeling of you are screw because they are more powerful remains the same, the difference is at what skill set each challenge is focus to.

and well you dont like the whole you keep your souls, its the same as normal then (if you change what i said before you woudnt need the latter)

Rooster Cogburn:

sonofliber:
hi my friend who play this game with a trainer (he didnt have the skills to finish the game), say you are spewing lies, about the whole "difficulty is what makes this game work" he loves the setting, the atmosphere, the sound and the asthetics of the game.

Your friend may be enjoying himself, but if he is playing the game with a trainer, he doesn't know what the game is, never mind if it "works". No one is saying you can't appreciate the game's aesthetics, but that's like looking at screen shots from a film. You wouldn't be truly engaging it's content.

and well the whole easy mode is so that he will be able to experience the same things as you and the same challenge as you, but adjusted accordingly to his skill level

GrimHeaper:

BioRex:

GrimHeaper:

It has that as well. I said " Rich lore to go with it's story"
Guess what the gameplay is tied to, the story.

You I think I thought of a better comparison, though this may be redundant by the time it gets posted :P
Lowering the difficulty in Dark Souls is to making the fights less flashy in Bayonetta. The core of Dark Souls is to hard, the core of Bayonetta is to be stylish. (note I don't think less of bayonetta and it's not a style over substance type of style, I mean literal being awesome, I mean you ride up a rocket into space on a motorcycle that was bloody BADASS!!!) So an easy mode in dark souls is akin to a mode in Bayonetta where you don't ride a rocket into space while on a motorcycle. Damn I need to replay Bayobetta...

You should also fight the secret boss on the hardest mode if you haven't.
only need 10 million halos.

Oh that fight would cleave my anus in two I'm guessing. Graphic language but fitting I believe.

sonofliber:

Rooster Cogburn:

sonofliber:
hi my friend who play this game with a trainer (he didnt have the skills to finish the game), say you are spewing lies, about the whole "difficulty is what makes this game work" he loves the setting, the atmosphere, the sound and the asthetics of the game.

Your friend may be enjoying himself, but if he is playing the game with a trainer, he doesn't know what the game is, never mind if it "works". No one is saying you can't appreciate the game's aesthetics, but that's like looking at screen shots from a film. You wouldn't be truly engaging it's content.

and well the whole easy mode is so that he will be able to experience the same things as you and the same challenge as you, but adjusted accordingly to his skill level

But what skill of his is the easy mode compensating for? Planning? Spacial awareness? Observational skills? If the easy mode you would like is not aimed at these then one would not do well in the game either way. Your friend may be selling himself short on what are or are not his capabilities.

Korten12:

GrimHeaper:

Korten12:

Never mind, I won't argue with you anymore. With that last part I clearly see you're missing the point of what I am trying to say. Picking bits and pieces and trying to argue on that. Dark Soul's isn't about being HOPELESS. It's being an ant among giants, pushing through despite the difference. Not that there isn't hope.

No, it seems like there really isn't that much hope running around in that game.
Everything is fucked seems to be the core story of the game.
There are games that are much more cheery like Shadow of the Colossus that do that ant among giants much better.

Final response to you. Than you mistake the story, yes the world is fucked but you're it's last hope. Even if it's a small hope. Hence the bonfire's, they're the saving grace. It's why the ending of the game if you choose the good ending is lighting that last bonfire because there is hope. As you go through your journey you're lighting the fires over the land and eventually light that last light.

And now your mistaking "Size" for what I mean by "Giants."

Then don't use words wrongly.

Yep here we are everything is still pretty fucked. You are trying to justify difficulty with the story and tone.
Most people just don't care about those things.
Are you telling me DS3 will be sunshine and rainbows? No something will happen in 2 that screws everything again so the game will still be "hard".

BioRex:

sonofliber:

Rooster Cogburn:
Your friend may be enjoying himself, but if he is playing the game with a trainer, he doesn't know what the game is, never mind if it "works". No one is saying you can't appreciate the game's aesthetics, but that's like looking at screen shots from a film. You wouldn't be truly engaging it's content.

and well the whole easy mode is so that he will be able to experience the same things as you and the same challenge as you, but adjusted accordingly to his skill level

But what skill of his is the easy mode compensating for? Planning? Spacial awareness? Observational skills? If the easy mode you would like is not aimed at these then one would not do well in the game either way. Your friend may be selling himself short on what are or are not his capabilities.

He probably is, but some people don't want to put forth the effort.

sonofliber:

you dont seem to grasp the concept of differents perception, here:

you:
cappra deamon with 2 dogs: holy damn that was an awesome fight so hard, man i feel next boss is going to screw me.

my fried :
cappra deamon with no dogs: holy damn that was an awesome fight so hard, man i feel next boss is going to screw me.

see, both had the same experience, for each of you the challenge was the same, but the challenge itself had to change to adapt to both your skill sets, the feeling of you are screw because they are more powerful remains the same, the difference is at what skill set each challenge is focus to.

and well you dont like the whole you keep your souls, its the same as normal then (if you change what i said before you woudnt need the latter)

No, it's not the same. See, Cappra demon is the only boss that has just small enemies that attack you. What about smough and ornstein? Two bosses that fight you both at the same time and when you kill one of them the other get's more powerful? How do you change that? By making you fight them one on one making them very simple to kill without having to worry about the other?

Cappra demon is one example that only works but other bosses don't work like that because they don't have small enemies that they can simply remove.

VyceVictus:

Authorial Intent?
Some would say that loses relevance as soon as the work is out to the public. Is Starship Troopers a satire, an action movie, or a comedy? Though the director meant one thing, the movie audience is completely free to interpret it as another. (and even in that case the movie director was free to make his own interpretation from the original author's intent). But this is the way of art, it cannot exist without both author and audience. And art by it's nature is free to be interpreted, along with or in spite of authorial intent. Its one thing to know what the author intends, but that doesnt automatically prevent you from other interpretations. Dark Souls is beauty in ugliness, ugliness in beauty. Even if thats not one of the authors thematic intents, anyone is perfectly fee to derive that from the text (the contents of the game) itself.

Here is the problem with your example. When you watch Starship Troopers you're on the same foot as everyone else. Your not watching the movie and yourself involved in it. Your a passive viewer and you watch the scenes play out the same as everyone else does and takes in a different experience.

In Dark Souls, people who play it as it is currently make have different experiences but will ultimately come with some very similar conclusions as to the meaning, and such. But if you suddenly change this, no longer is everyone on equal footing than they will come out with a different experience because they weren't the same. It's hard to compare experiences when they happened nothing alike.

When you read a book, you read it the same as everyone else. No one is given an advantage or disadvantage and thus that is what allows them to experience it differently. But changing that, will radically come out with an experience that is not intended. Starship troopers can be interperated in many different ways because everyone experiences it the same way but comes out with different results.

Changing the difficulty you no longer don't just experience it differently but you also interperate it in a way not intended thus you lose any real meaning it may have had.

GrimHeaper:

Then don't use words wrongly.

Yep here we are everything is still pretty fucked. You are trying to justify difficulty with the story and tone.
Most people just don't care about those things.
Are you telling me DS3 will be sunshine and rainbows? No something will happen in 2 that screws everything again so the game will still be "hard".

You should get a job in jumping over points. You would be really good at it.

What happens afterwards or before has no bearing on the current story. It's a self-contained story that in a time of dark, even the smallest light can grow strong.

Also considering Dark Souls II has been highly hinted to be a prequel or a sequel but taking place in a far off land. It has no bearing either way to Dark Souls story.

BioRex:

sonofliber:

Rooster Cogburn:
Your friend may be enjoying himself, but if he is playing the game with a trainer, he doesn't know what the game is, never mind if it "works". No one is saying you can't appreciate the game's aesthetics, but that's like looking at screen shots from a film. You wouldn't be truly engaging it's content.

and well the whole easy mode is so that he will be able to experience the same things as you and the same challenge as you, but adjusted accordingly to his skill level

But what skill of his is the easy mode compensating for? Planning? Spacial awareness? Observational skills? If the easy mode you would like is not aimed at these then one would not do well in the game either way. Your friend may be selling himself short on what are or are not his capabilities.

reflexes speed or pattern recognition speed (basically you improve the reaction time window, and dont make it so unforgiving if he fails)

Korten12:

sonofliber:

you dont seem to grasp the concept of differents perception, here:

you:
cappra deamon with 2 dogs: holy damn that was an awesome fight so hard, man i feel next boss is going to screw me.

my fried :
cappra deamon with no dogs: holy damn that was an awesome fight so hard, man i feel next boss is going to screw me.

see, both had the same experience, for each of you the challenge was the same, but the challenge itself had to change to adapt to both your skill sets, the feeling of you are screw because they are more powerful remains the same, the difference is at what skill set each challenge is focus to.

and well you dont like the whole you keep your souls, its the same as normal then (if you change what i said before you woudnt need the latter)

No, it's not the same. See, Cappra demon is the only boss that has just small enemies that attack you. What about smough and ornstein? Two bosses that fight you both at the same time and when you kill one of them the other get's more powerful? How do you change that? By making you fight them one on one making them very simple to kill without having to worry about the other?

Cappra demon is one example that only works but other bosses don't work like that because they don't have small enemies that they can simply remove.

VyceVictus:

Authorial Intent?
Some would say that loses relevance as soon as the work is out to the public. Is Starship Troopers a satire, an action movie, or a comedy? Though the director meant one thing, the movie audience is completely free to interpret it as another. (and even in that case the movie director was free to make his own interpretation from the original author's intent). But this is the way of art, it cannot exist without both author and audience. And art by it's nature is free to be interpreted, along with or in spite of authorial intent. Its one thing to know what the author intends, but that doesnt automatically prevent you from other interpretations. Dark Souls is beauty in ugliness, ugliness in beauty. Even if thats not one of the authors thematic intents, anyone is perfectly fee to derive that from the text (the contents of the game) itself.

Here is the problem with your example. When you watch Starship Troopers you're on the same foot as everyone else. Your not watching the movie and yourself involved in it. Your a passive viewer and you watch the scenes play out the same as everyone else does and takes in a different experience.

In Dark Souls, people who play it as it is currently make have different experiences but will ultimately come with some very similar conclusions as to the meaning, and such. But if you suddenly change this, no longer is everyone on equal footing than they will come out with a different experience because they weren't the same. It's hard to compare experiences when they happened nothing alike.

When you read a book, you read it the same as everyone else. No one is given an advantage or disadvantage and thus that is what allows them to experience it differently. But changing that, will radically come out with an experience that is not intended. Starship troopers can be interperated in many different ways because everyone experiences it the same way but comes out with different results.

Changing the difficulty you no longer don't just experience it differently but you also interperate it in a way not intended thus you lose any real meaning it may have had.

again my friend, smough and ornstein for example, mm...., a bigger delay between attacks, reduction of stagering time, reduccion of aod damage, you have to analise what are the key strengths of the bosses are, and apply the correct reduction to them, so you dont actually change the core feeling of the fight(usually from my perspective, is an increse on the available window reaction time, and a reduction of the penalty if you miss it)

VyceVictus:
Difficulty is not a genre, RPG is.

I am not saying that difficulty is a genre (there is an entire challenge gaming genre/community you may be unaware of, but that is beside the point). I am saying difficulty is a defining characteristic of Dark Souls in the same way that shooting from a first person view is a defining characteristic of First Person Shooters.

Assists or modifications dont stop it from being an RPG. I mentioned earlier about the change of Ghost Recon to Advanced Fighter and from Resident Evil to RE4. In those regards, though core mechanics changed, it didnt stop those games from being the core of what they really were (tactical shooter and survival horror respectively). Even if I were advocating such a drastic change (which I'm not), so long as it's an RPG the core would be the same. But all that aside, there are many other ways beyond a blunt easy mode stat conversion that could increase accessibility without altering the core challenge or fundamental mechanics. Moreover, there are a number of ways the mechanics could be improved and still be as challenging as ever. Even after all my criticisms, I want to make it clear that I still think it's a great game. Even if I dont feel the need to get fully into NG++++ or doesn't mean I dont enjoy it.

I don't know anything about Resident Evil, but you are dead wrong about Ghost Recon. However, that doesn't really matter, because none of that is comparable to Dark Souls. That is more like just a typical example of dumbing things down, like you said. What I'm trying to tell you is that taking the difficulty out of Dark Souls is like taking the guns out of Ghost Recon. What would you even do without the guns? Just run through the levels? Maybe you can still melee guys, I guess? That is exactly the level of cognitive dissonance you present me with when talking about putting easy mode in Dark Souls. It absolutely does not compute, and the more I think about it the less sense it makes.

You are wrong to say the core of Dark Souls is the same as long as it is an RPG. This implies to me that Dark Souls is not significantly different then other RPGs in any meaningful way. If that's what you believe, I think we have found the problem. If that were true, of course I would want an easy mode in it. But I assure you it ain't so. Dark Souls isn't an RPG that happens to be hard. It's a DIFFICULTY game that happens to be an RPG.

As for alternative ways to increase accessibility, we would just have to talk about specific examples. I think the game should make efforts to try to make new players understand what Dark Souls is, and what it expects of them, and how to begin searching for ways to succeed, before they quit out of frustration. I want everyone to play it at the current level of difficulty. Make it so that even impatient gamers, even if they end up walking away, will at least know what they are walking away from. I also feel there are some things that should be fleshed out more and others that should be streamlined.

I like the tone we're getting to now, I'm sorry I was so defensive before.

Korten12:

sonofliber:

you dont seem to grasp the concept of differents perception, here:

you:
cappra deamon with 2 dogs: holy damn that was an awesome fight so hard, man i feel next boss is going to screw me.

my fried :
cappra deamon with no dogs: holy damn that was an awesome fight so hard, man i feel next boss is going to screw me.

see, both had the same experience, for each of you the challenge was the same, but the challenge itself had to change to adapt to both your skill sets, the feeling of you are screw because they are more powerful remains the same, the difference is at what skill set each challenge is focus to.

and well you dont like the whole you keep your souls, its the same as normal then (if you change what i said before you woudnt need the latter)

No, it's not the same. See, Cappra demon is the only boss that has just small enemies that attack you. What about smough and ornstein? Two bosses that fight you both at the same time and when you kill one of them the other get's more powerful? How do you change that? By making you fight them one on one making them very simple to kill without having to worry about the other?

Cappra demon is one example that only works but other bosses don't work like that because they don't have small enemies that they can simply remove.

VyceVictus:

Authorial Intent?
Some would say that loses relevance as soon as the work is out to the public. Is Starship Troopers a satire, an action movie, or a comedy? Though the director meant one thing, the movie audience is completely free to interpret it as another. (and even in that case the movie director was free to make his own interpretation from the original author's intent). But this is the way of art, it cannot exist without both author and audience. And art by it's nature is free to be interpreted, along with or in spite of authorial intent. Its one thing to know what the author intends, but that doesnt automatically prevent you from other interpretations. Dark Souls is beauty in ugliness, ugliness in beauty. Even if thats not one of the authors thematic intents, anyone is perfectly fee to derive that from the text (the contents of the game) itself.

Here is the problem with your example. When you watch Starship Troopers you're on the same foot as everyone else. Your not watching the movie and yourself involved in it. Your a passive viewer and you watch the scenes play out the same as everyone else does and takes in a different experience.

In Dark Souls, people who play it as it is currently make have different experiences but will ultimately come with some very similar conclusions as to the meaning, and such. But if you suddenly change this, no longer is everyone on equal footing than they will come out with a different experience because they weren't the same. It's hard to compare experiences when they happened nothing alike.

When you read a book, you read it the same as everyone else. No one is given an advantage or disadvantage and thus that is what allows them to experience it differently. But changing that, will radically come out with an experience that is not intended. Starship troopers can be interperated in many different ways because everyone experiences it the same way but comes out with different results.

Changing the difficulty you no longer don't just experience it differently but you also interperate it in a way not intended thus you lose any real meaning it may have had.

Not everyone experienced that the same way (some read the book first, some fought in war). You dont know what different meaning the experience has for different people, how could you? Why is your meaning the real one? I doubt everybody who played through it like you did got the same vision of a book glued together with difficulty. Just because you didn't experience something the way someone intended doesn't mean you cant get meaning behind the experience. Sonofblier just described his experience, and neither you, Hidetaka Miyazaki, or anyone else can take away whatever "meaning" he and his friend got out of it.

VyceVictus:

Not everyone experienced that the same way (some read the book first, some fought in war). You dont know what different meaning the experience has for different people, how could you? Why is your meaning the real one? I doubt everybody who played through it like you did got the same vision of a book glued together with difficulty. Just because you didn't experience something the way someone intended doesn't mean you cant get meaning behind the experience. Sonofblier just described his experience, and neither you, Hidetaka Miyazaki, or anyone else can take away whatever "meaning" he and his friend got out of it.

I love how I state: "Multiple Meanings" somehow equals to "...your meaning the real one?" Implying that there is one meaning to the story.

Also now your bringing external factors (such as reading the book before the movie), in to play and that isn't what this argument has been about at all. Now your just adding more and more factors to try and make a point. You also ignore this huge point:

How can they experience it differently when the gameplay through which the story is told, is changed. No longer is the gameplay the same and the story is changed. Therefore your not only experiencing it differently but not even getting one of the many experiences that your supposed to get.

sonofliber:

again my friend, smough and ornstein for example, mm...., a bigger delay between attacks, reduction of stagering time, reduccion of aod damage, you have to analise what are the key strengths of the bosses are, and apply the correct reduction (usually from my perspective, is an increse on the available window reaction time, and a reduction of the penalty if you miss it)

Or you know, summon friends or strangers? I like how that's removed from all the equations for you guys. What's the point in an easy mode when you can summon the many players who are willing to help and even have NPCs that can be summoned without an internet connection. What make it easier when you already have assets built in the game to help you?

That's the whole reason for the multiplayer as it is. To help others. The whole story behind it was that Miyazaki got stuck in a snow storm with his car and random strangers came by and helped him despite them not needing to. Hence the idea for the multiplayer was born. To have those around you help you because they can and will. They made the experience of trying to get a car out of a pinch much easier and you don't need another mode to make this happen because it's already in the game.

Korten12:

VyceVictus:

Not everyone experienced that the same way (some read the book first, some fought in war). You dont know what different meaning the experience has for different people, how could you? Why is your meaning the real one? I doubt everybody who played through it like you did got the same vision of a book glued together with difficulty. Just because you didn't experience something the way someone intended doesn't mean you cant get meaning behind the experience. Sonofblier just described his experience, and neither you, Hidetaka Miyazaki, or anyone else can take away whatever "meaning" he and his friend got out of it.

I love how I state: "Multiple Meanings" somehow equals to "...your meaning the real one?" Implying that there is one meaning to the story.

Also now your bringing external factors (such as reading the book before the movie), in to play and that isn't what this argument has been about at all. Now your just adding more and more factors to try and make a point. You also ignore this huge point:

How can they experience it differently when the gameplay through which the story is told, is changed. No longer is the gameplay the same and the story is changed. Therefore your not only experiencing it differently but not even getting one of the many experiences that your supposed to get.

sonofliber:

again my friend, smough and ornstein for example, mm...., a bigger delay between attacks, reduction of stagering time, reduccion of aod damage, you have to analise what are the key strengths of the bosses are, and apply the correct reduction (usually from my perspective, is an increse on the available window reaction time, and a reduction of the penalty if you miss it)

Or you know, summon friends or strangers? I like how that's removed from all the equations for you guys. What's the point in an easy mode when you can summon the many players who are willing to help and even have NPCs that can be summoned without an internet connection. What make it easier when you already have assets built in the game to help you?

That's the whole reason for the multiplayer as it is. To help others. The whole story behind it was that Miyazki got stuck in a snow storm with his car and random strangers came by and helped him despite them not needing to. Hence the idea for the multiplayer was born. To have those around you help you because they can and will. They made the experincing of trying to get a car out of a pinch much easier and you don't need another mode to make this happen because it's already in the game.

well i kind of was expecting to remove the whole online aspect of the game from easy mode, so people woudnt complain, WAAAAA HE HAS AN ADVANTAGE, WAAAA HE IS SMURFING, and that stuff, but if you want you can add random summonings and invasions from a random generated base of characters, to help you on bosses or invade you at random

Jimothy Sterling:
I don't have time for arguments this week, unfortunately, but let me just address some things briefly before flying off into the night. Once I've said this, I'm done on the topic for now, though I may need to do a new video after the holidays for those who spectacularly missed the point of the video:

The difference between an optional easy mode and the homogenization of videogames is as simple as the difference between Ninja Gaiden Black's "Ninja Dog" mode and Ninja Gaiden 3. One game had an optional extra mode for people who didn't want brutal challenge, and one tore the default experience apart.

Easy modes aren't a new concept, people. Capcom had some of the most hardcore action games around, and they actually offered you an easier mode if you had your ass kicked one too many times. Nobody complained about that. Nobody believes the core Devil May Cry 3 experience was ravaged by multiple difficulties. And frankly, it's pretty insulting to Dark Souls if you think ALL it has to offer the world is difficulty.

As for my attitude in this video ... uh ... welcome to the Jimquisition? Apparently it's okay for me to have this attitude when it's people you don't agree with -- not so now. Should I reshoot the video in a non-condescending "easy mode" format for you?

Jimothy, you magnificent bastard. I've enjoyed your show for some time, but only now do I feel compelled to register here to make a comment. I know that you are not likely to read it yourself, but I'd like to respond to this post and toss my two cents into this absurd argument. (After writing what was on my mind, it seems that it came out closer to $37 than two cents HOPE YOU GUYS LIKE WALLS OF TEXT)

I will preface this by saying that Demon's Souls and Dark Souls are my two favorite games this generation. I absolutely adore these games, and despite their flaws, they offer something unique and wonderful to the gaming community. I would love for more people to play these games and enjoy them as much as I do. And if people would be more likely to play the games, should an "Easy Mode" suddenly exist for them, it would be fine with me. It would detract nothing, in my opinion, to have that option, given that it would have no effect on the existing game as it has already been played by myself and others.

Having said that, allow me to explain why I become concerned upon hearing the words "more accessible," in relation to Dark Souls. It has nothing to do with Dark Souls, as many people in this thread seem to be arguing over, and absolutely everything to do with the recently announced Dark Souls II. The first game already exists, and nothing can change how much enjoyment I have derived from being pummeled to death by its assortment of monstrosities. If the developers, for some reason, were to patch in an easy mode into the game, to draw in more players, that would be fantastic (although it will never happen). But the second Dark Souls is currently in production, and none of us have any clue what may or may not be done to increase "accessibility," and this is the source of my concern. I want Dark Souls II to improve on Dark Souls I in the same ways that Dark Souls improved upon Demon's Souls. I do not want it to go the way of Ninja Gaiden 3. This isn't the cause for a massive dramastorm, but it IS something that I am quite passionate about.

The adaptations made when transitioning from Demon's Souls to Dark Souls were numerous, but ultimately led to a better game. The estus flasks vs. healing grass was a huge improvement, since you never had to farm healing again, and it prevented you from building up a stock of hundreds of healing items to trivialize the game (In Demon's Souls, you were likely to end up with more healing grass than you could carry by the end of the game, in Dark Souls, you can farm humanity, but you definitely have to go out of your way, and it's entirely unnecessary). Having bonfires instead of archstones was another great improvement, because it worked as a replacement for having to teleport to the Nexus (loading screen), then talk to the Maiden in Black to level up, talk to Stockpile Thomas to move your inventory around, talk to Blacksmith Ed to repair your stuff, and teleport back again (loading screen). In Dark Souls you could do all of that from one menu, with no loading screens, and heal, and refill your flasks. Also, the carry weight restriction was removed, meaning you would no longer permanently lose that massive tower shield, because you were carrying around three extra arrows.

These changes simplified the game, and streamlined its mechanics. They were good changes. Nobody, to the best of my knowledge, has complained that there was no more carry burden. Or world tendency. I love Demon's Souls, but world tendency was an awful mechanic. What will the changes from Dark Souls I to Dark Souls II look like?

There are several aspects that people have mentioned that affect difficulty, such as the lack of checkpoints, loss of souls on death, and a lack of direction given by the game as a whole. These mechanics are very important to the game, and creating tension, and a feeling of risk that isn't present in other games. If players want an easy mode to change these things, that's fine. However, I feel like such large changes to gameplay like that would not simply be contained within easy mode. I feel like the more likely scenario is that such changes would be made to the core game, not reliant on any difficulty setting. And the thought of this is extremely disheartening to me, because that would most certainly be the homogenizing of the one series that I appreciate the most for being different than other games that don't hold my interest so much anymore.

From managed to make these changes between Demon's and Dark without making the game significantly easier. Dark Souls was not a great deal more accessible than Demon's Souls. Many aspects of the game remain obfuscated, nothing is particularly more forgiving, and the player is still expected to die repeatedly. This is due to its excellent level and boss design (Lost Izalith and Bed of Chaos excluded). The game is crafted with only one difficulty in mind: Punishing. Punishing is different from hard, and whether or not the game is hard has been argued extensively, but it will certainly punish a player's mistakes, and punish them hard. This, for me and many others, is one of the major draws of this game, making it fun to play, and combining with the world, lore, and art to make a cohesive experience.

But, this is where some people get left behind. Some players are unable to overcome the difficulty for any reason. I've been playing games my entire life, not everyone else has, I acknowledge that, and I don't begrudge anyone for it. Including the option to reduce the difficulty should allow these players to complete this game that they wouldn't otherwise be able to complete. I support the idea that people should be able to play the game how they want to. But in the case of Dark Souls, what would it take to implement the variable difficulty, and what effect could an easy mode possibly have on the game as I play it?

If From were to patch Dark Souls, and add in this easy mode, would it simply be a reduction in HP/damage for all of the baddies? Many ardent fans of the game have argued that this would not work, for many reasons, and I agree. It would take much more work than just adjusting those values, to properly scale down the difficulty of the entire game. Take, for example, the archers in Anor Londo (http://youtu.be/x8FQ1DUp35Y?t=10m). For just about everyone, the first time, these guys are a huge obstacle. If you reduce their hp and their damage, they will still murder you again and again until you figure out what to do. What do you do for these guys? You could, I suppose, greatly reduce their knockback, or you could change their AI to make them fire slower, take their sword out sooner, or not use a shield at all. Or you could just remove the archer on the right entirely. All of these could, in theory, be done. But this is rebalancing a very specific part of that level, after it's already been balanced for normal, and modifications of that sort would certainly take more time and effort than a simple HP tweak. And there are many more adjustments of the same sort they would have to make in many other areas, as well. This could be a lot of effort to rebalance the game for an easier difficulty, and applying this to creating a new game, this leads to the argument of taking resources away from other aspects of the game to make an easy mode.

That situation, however, would only apply if they created the entire game, from the ground up, for a single difficulty, and then went back at the end and adjusted it down. Obviously, this would be the "Easy mode patch for Dark Souls" idea. But my concern is Dark Souls II, for which they have possibly been considering accessibility from the outset. They might approach such a scenario differently. For example, worried about alienating players, they might reduce the difficulty by making the ledges larger, or perhaps giving the player a safety net to fall onto, a ledge below to land on if they get knocked off by the arrow. They might alter the level design so that the archers can't get as good of an angle on you, or maybe place them higher up, so that you don't need to fight one to progress. They're REALLY not likely to make those changes in a patch, but while building a level from scratch, nothing is set in stone. And if they're concerned about the difficulty pushing players away, they might make decisions based on level design to make it more forgiving. Such decisions would carry over to all difficulties, and reduce the impact of level design on the overall challenge of the game.

And this is my primary concern. Level design. It cannot be simply adjusted by dividing it in two. They are not going to make two different levels for two different difficulties, so any reduction in outright difficulty with regards to level design will affect those who play it on easy, and those who play it on hard.

Now of course, this is all just a huge pile of speculation, based on rumors of interviews that have likely been mistranslated. This is not me saying "I know this is going to happen, my favorite series is ruined forever!" I'm saying that I hope it doesn't play out that way. For all I know, From Software is creating the most challenging and rewarding game ever, and that once they're done, they'll go back and redo the entire thing for an easier difficulty level, and it will be amazing and all gamers everywhere will enjoy it. But this is not the image in my mind after I hear the words "more accessible" being tossed around in articles about Dark Souls II. The image I'm seeing is Ninja Gaiden 3. They had the first game, and it was hard. They added a lower difficulty in the re-release, and all was well. The second game was similar. Then, from what I can tell from the reviews, they tried to change small aspects of the core gameplay to make it "more accessible," and all of the reviews seem to suggest that the charm of the original was lost.

This is the analogy that you used Jim, and it is exactly what I don't want to happen to Dark Souls. So in response to why would it bother me if they included an optional feature that wouldn't affect my gameplay at all, I say that it wouldn't bother me, so long as it ACTUALLY doesn't affect my gameplay at all. With regards to the already released Dark Souls, it should not matter one bit to anyone if they patched in an easy mode. For Dark Souls II, I hope that From Software finds some magical solution to make everyone happy, I really do. But you will forgive those of us who acknowledge that there is a precedent in the gaming industry, as we have all come to know it over the years, of trying to broaden the appeal of a game series, only to have the final product suffer for it. Hearing those magic marketing words sends up huge red flags for people getting their hopes up for a sequel.

In the end, I'm still hopeful about Dark Souls II. If it doesn't live up to my expectations, I suppose I'll be a bit disappointed, won't I? It won't be the end of the world, though, I'll still buy it and enjoy it. But games as a whole are magnificent, and I'd like to see them living up to their full potential.

If only Dark Souls II could be so grossly incandescent.

SO! How can we make Dark Souls II more accessible to newer players without reducing the experience for experienced players? I suggest that we keep the difficulty as it is entirely, but if the player dies too many times in one area, a summon sign will appear for Soluigi, who will then murder everything for you and accompany you to the boss battle, and then praise the sun a whole lot.

sonofliber:

well i kind of was expecting to remove the whole online aspect of the game from easy mode, so people woudnt complain, WAAAAA HE HAS AN ADVANTAGE, WAAAA HE IS SMURFING, and that stuff, but if you want you can add random summonings and invasions from a random generated base of characters, to help you on bosses or invade you at random

My point is that, why have an easy mode, when you have those around you who are willing to help. Random strangers and NPCs whom are just sitting there wanting to be summoned to help you along your journey.

sonofliber:

BioRex:

sonofliber:
Your friend may be enjoying himself, but if he is playing the game with a trainer, he doesn't know what the game is, never mind if it "works". No one is saying you can't appreciate the game's aesthetics, but that's like looking at screen shots from a film. You wouldn't be truly engaging it's content.

and well the whole easy mode is so that he will be able to experience the same things as you and the same challenge as you, but adjusted accordingly to his skill level

But what skill of his is the easy mode compensating for? Planning? Spacial awareness? Observational skills? If the easy mode you would like is not aimed at these then one would not do well in the game either way. Your friend may be selling himself short on what are or are not his capabilities.

reflexes speed or pattern recognition speed (basically you improve the reaction time window, and dont make it so unforgiving if he fails)

You keep mentioning speed, exactly how fast do you think this game is? Asides from traps, which by definition need to be fast, the game is not all that fast. While some parts are fast to be sure either those are later into the game or have a trick to them that make the speed meaningless. I mean the hydra part was pretty fast if one is trying to dodge the blasts, but when you figure out that you can block the water blasts and the attacks of the thing the speed difference is not that important. While I can sympathize making a dumb mistake and losing stuff it's something of a game mechanic, it's meant to be unforgiving but fair. Rarely does the game cheat, a bit of experimentation can turn a situation where one is losing all the time into a cakewalk. Like when i fought Pikachu and Snorlax I lost a ton of times, when I finally one everything just clicked. I was dodging all their attacks, not by some act of insane reflexes, more like an understanding of what was coming. I dodged attacks not because I saw them, often I didn't see them preparing an attack because I was focused on the other, but from my experience I knew that an attack was probably going to come. What I'm saying is, its not by some great speed that I won, it was from experience, thats something you can't simple replicate expect by experiencing it for yourself.

Rooster Cogburn:

VyceVictus:
Difficulty is not a genre, RPG is.

I am not saying that difficulty is a genre (there is an entire challenge gaming genre/community you may be unaware of, but that is beside the point). I am saying difficulty is a defining characteristic of Dark Souls in the same way that shooting from a first person view is a defining characteristic of First Person Shooters.

Assists or modifications dont stop it from being an RPG. I mentioned earlier about the change of Ghost Recon to Advanced Fighter and from Resident Evil to RE4. In those regards, though core mechanics changed, it didnt stop those games from being the core of what they really were (tactical shooter and survival horror respectively). Even if I were advocating such a drastic change (which I'm not), so long as it's an RPG the core would be the same. But all that aside, there are many other ways beyond a blunt easy mode stat conversion that could increase accessibility without altering the core challenge or fundamental mechanics. Moreover, there are a number of ways the mechanics could be improved and still be as challenging as ever. Even after all my criticisms, I want to make it clear that I still think it's a great game. Even if I dont feel the need to get fully into NG++++ or doesn't mean I dont enjoy it.

I don't know anything about Resident Evil, but you are dead wrong about Ghost Recon. However, that doesn't really matter, because none of that is comparable to Dark Souls. That is more like just a typical example of dumbing things down, like you said. What I'm trying to tell you is that taking the difficulty out of Dark Souls is like taking the guns out of Ghost Recon. What would you even do without the guns? Just run through the levels? Maybe you can still melee guys, I guess? That is exactly the level of cognitive dissonance you present me with when talking about putting easy mode in Dark Souls. It absolutely does not compute, and the more I think about it the less sense it makes.

You are wrong to say the core of Dark Souls is the same as long as it is an RPG. This implies to me that Dark Souls is not significantly different then other RPGs in any meaningful way. If that's what you believe, I think we have found the problem. If that were true, of course I would want an easy mode in it. But I assure you it ain't so. Dark Souls isn't an RPG that happens to be hard. It's a DIFFICULTY game that happens to be an RPG.

As for alternative ways to increase accessibility, we would just have to talk about specific examples. I think the game should make efforts to try to make new players understand what Dark Souls is, and what it expects of them, and how to begin searching for ways to succeed, before they quit out of frustration. I want everyone to play it at the current level of difficulty. Make it so that even impatient gamers, even if they end up walking away, will at least know what they are walking away from. I also feel there are some things that should be fleshed out more and others that should be streamlined.

I like the tone we're getting to now, I'm sorry I was so defensive before.

This seems like saying Bionic commando is a difficulty game that happens to be a platformer or Ikaruga is a difficulty game that happens to be a shooter. Which one could certainly argue. But then there are core mechanics that definitively classify them; DS with its stats, items, weapons, and experience is no different. It still is an RPG at the end of the day. taking the difficulty out of Darks souls (again not what Im advocating, Im advocating the right to optional accessibility) is not the same thing as taking out the bullets in a bullet hell game. If you took out the Difficulty, it would still be an rpg. If you took out the bullets, it would be....the flash game "Loneliness"
But in general, there could be any multitude of ways, fixing the manual, streamlining some mechanics, anything, that could be done to up the experience accessibility without ruining the core challenge or just plopping in a watered down "easy mode". Iam very curious to see what they have in store for the sequel.

BioRex:

sonofliber:

BioRex:

But what skill of his is the easy mode compensating for? Planning? Spacial awareness? Observational skills? If the easy mode you would like is not aimed at these then one would not do well in the game either way. Your friend may be selling himself short on what are or are not his capabilities.

reflexes speed or pattern recognition speed (basically you improve the reaction time window, and dont make it so unforgiving if he fails)

You keep mentioning speed, exactly how fast do you think this game is? Asides from traps, which by definition need to be fast, the game is not all that fast. While some parts are fast to be sure either those are later into the game or have a trick to them that make the speed meaningless. I mean the hydra part was pretty fast if one is trying to dodge the blasts, but when you figure out that you can block the water blasts and the attacks of the thing the speed difference is not that important. While I can sympathize making a dumb mistake and losing stuff it's something of a game mechanic, it's meant to be unforgiving but fair. Rarely does the game cheat, a bit of experimentation can turn a situation where one is losing all the time into a cakewalk. Like when i fought Pikachu and Snorlax I lost a ton of times, when I finally one everything just clicked. I was dodging all their attacks, not by some act of insane reflexes, more like an understanding of what was coming. I dodged attacks not because I saw them, often I didn't see them preparing an attack because I was focused on the other, but from my experience I knew that an attack was probably going to come. What I'm saying is, its not by some great speed that I won, it was from experience, thats something you can't simple replicate expect by experiencing it for yourself.

make the enemy start its attack and an x amount of time until he unleashes it, or hell make it so that they glow for a second when they start they attack (so if you have trouble finding a pattern you have a visual aid), there are a lot of ways, you just need to think of one that suits the ocation.

again this mode is not for you, is for people with less skill than you

Korten12:
[quote="sonofliber" post="6.395777.16100843"]
well i kind of was expecting to remove the whole online aspect of the game from easy mode, so people woudnt complain, WAAAAA HE HAS AN ADVANTAGE, WAAAA HE IS SMURFING, and that stuff, but if you want you can add random summonings and invasions from a random generated base of characters, to help you on bosses or invade you at random

My point is that, why have an easy mode, when you have those around you who are willing to help. Random strangers and NPCs whom are just sitting there wanting to be summoned to help you along your journey.

and what if in 3 years when someone boughts the game and is stuck with the 2 knights in anon lando, and he cant get help because very few people still play the game?

sonofliber:

and what if in 3 years when someone boughts the game and is stuck with the 2 knights in anon lando, and he cant get help because very few people still play the game?

Demon's Souls is over 3 years old now and you can still play with people. It has that type of community, of people who continue to play years after it's old and the sequel has come out.

Also like I mentioned, NPC summons never go away. They will be with the game even after the servers have been turned off many years from now.

Korten12:

sonofliber:

and what if in 3 years when someone boughts the game and is stuck with the 2 knights in anon lando, and he cant get help because very few people still play the game?

Demon's Souls is over 3 years old now and you can still play with people. It has that type of community, of people who continue to play years after it's old and the sequel has come out.

Also like I mentioned, NPC summons never go away. They will be with the game even after the servers have been turned off many years from now.

well its kind of there because DS2 hasnt come out yet, and also remember that npc arent available for every fight

Korten12:

girzwald:

Plunkies:
Seems like an easy mode would defeat the whole point of Dark Souls. The difficulty is the atmosphere, it makes you afraid of what's around the corner, it makes you cautious and thoughtful of your next move, and it makes it satisfying when you finally succeed. If you can herp derp button mash your way through the entire game it loses what makes it unique in the first place.

I'm not necessarily against an easy mode, but I hope it's properly balanced in a way that doesn't destroy the heart of the game for those that choose to use it.

Deadspace manages that exact same atmosphere without being soul crushingly difficult.

Hardly, in Dark Souls you're given powerful weaponry, plus considering it's not hard and it's also a different atmopshere. In Dead Space its about being alone in a horrorific setting. Whereas Dark Souls is about being alone BUT also about being an ant among giants, looking down upon you as you must stand up despite the difference.

In Dead Space that doesn't exist, because your character isn't an ant fighting, he has an arsenal of weapons and considering in the second game he is no longer afraid takes away any tension of whats around the other corner. Even in the first game though since it's linear doesn't give that effect because you can expect whats going to happen and if you die. No sweat you spawn a bit back with all of your stuff, and you know what to expect the second time.

Your statements are contradictory.

So, in dark souls you are given powerful weaponry, but that doesn't take away from the sense of vulnerability or tension.
But in deadspace, you have an arsenal of weapons, and that takes away the sense of vulnerability and tension.

And in darksouls, you are an "ant" amongst giants. When a lot of things aren't really that much bigger than you. But some things are.
But in deadspace, enemies who feel no fear, barely react to pain and many are much bigger and stronger than you, you are not an ant amongst giants.

Got it.

So, dark souls draw, is that its "scary" because if you die, you get royally screwed from all your time investment you had. Wow, thats kinda pathetic. I'm starting to be against an easy mode for dark souls now. No, not because I'm against more options or that people should be able to enjoy more games. But sounds more and more like dark souls is a craptastic game that would be boring, unengaging, and short if it wasn't so hard and unforgiving. And that people should be as encouraged to NOT play it as much as possible. So that a game with nothing to offer but extreme difficulty could hopefully die off.

sonofliber:

BioRex:

sonofliber:

But what skill of his is the easy mode compensating for? Planning? Spacial awareness? Observational skills? If the easy mode you would like is not aimed at these then one would not do well in the game either way. Your friend may be selling himself short on what are or are not his capabilities.

reflexes speed or pattern recognition speed (basically you improve the reaction time window, and dont make it so unforgiving if he fails)

You keep mentioning speed, exactly how fast do you think this game is? Asides from traps, which by definition need to be fast, the game is not all that fast. While some parts are fast to be sure either those are later into the game or have a trick to them that make the speed meaningless. I mean the hydra part was pretty fast if one is trying to dodge the blasts, but when you figure out that you can block the water blasts and the attacks of the thing the speed difference is not that important. While I can sympathize making a dumb mistake and losing stuff it's something of a game mechanic, it's meant to be unforgiving but fair. Rarely does the game cheat, a bit of experimentation can turn a situation where one is losing all the time into a cakewalk. Like when i fought Pikachu and Snorlax I lost a ton of times, when I finally one everything just clicked. I was dodging all their attacks, not by some act of insane reflexes, more like an understanding of what was coming. I dodged attacks not because I saw them, often I didn't see them preparing an attack because I was focused on the other, but from my experience I knew that an attack was probably going to come. What I'm saying is, its not by some great speed that I won, it was from experience, thats something you can't simple replicate expect by experiencing it for yourself.

make the enemy start its attack and an x amount of time until he unleashes it, or hell make it so that they glow for a second when they start they attack (so if you have trouble finding a pattern you have a visual aid), there are a lot of ways, you just need to think of one that suits the ocation.

again this mode is not for you, is for people with less skill than you

[quote="Korten12" post="6.395777.16100856"][quote="sonofliber" post="6.395777.16100843"]

Again the point I was making was that the game is not all that fast, slowing down more is almost redundant, also the enemies have plenty of tells. Honestly exactly how far would you be willing to go and accodate people who are putting forth the effort to learn the tells, and I say that because I really think too many people think themselves incapable of beating this game when it is within their power. Where is the line that we say, no you have to better yourself, because honestly that line to have disappeared in many games these days.

sonofliber:

Korten12:

sonofliber:

and what if in 3 years when someone boughts the game and is stuck with the 2 knights in anon lando, and he cant get help because very few people still play the game?

Demon's Souls is over 3 years old now and you can still play with people. It has that type of community, of people who continue to play years after it's old and the sequel has come out.

Also like I mentioned, NPC summons never go away. They will be with the game even after the servers have been turned off many years from now.

well its kind of there because DS2 hasnt come out yet, and also remember that npc arent available for every fight

Not every, but most, but even still after DS2 comes out people will still play it because they won't be exactly the same. Demon's Souls had a more punishing death, different levels than DS1, and the unique and challenging world tendency. So there is still reason to go back and try it out.

Similar with DS1. DS2 will most likely have it's own unique mechanic to the game as Dark Souls has wit humanity and the covenant system. Dark Souls 2 will have mechanic's that make sense for the story. Yes, each of the games have similar combat, tone, and similar systems. But there are subtle changes that will keep the Soul's community thriving.

Yes, if someone buys the game ten years from now, maybe it will be dead unless we have emulators or the newest systems allow to play all of the previous games. I do think that maybe, yes now there is a dillema because most likely there will be no one and not all npcs can be summoned.

http://www.gamefront.com/dark-souls-npc-ally-locations/

Although based on this there is only some fights with no NPCs are Capra, Seath, Nito, Bed of Chaos, and lastly Sif.

Of which Bed of Chaos you actually kind of have to die. No literally since when you actually get to his body you 1 hit him. The others all have little tricks to making the fight a whole lot easier.

 Pages PREV 1 . . . 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 . . . 30 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