Understanding Dark Souls difficulty

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 NEXT
 

Ryotknife:

The Almighty Aardvark:
snip.

first you say im oversimplifying the combat, next you say you like the simple combat. I do not like simple combat, which is also why i never finished playing Fallout3 as every weapon basically feels the same and shooting things becomes extremely boring after a few hours (despite the fact that i thought that FO3 had better environment and story). Skyrim require a hell of a lot more thought with combat than demon souls ever did, especially with stealth, archery, or magic (melee not so much).

Reaction time is not the same thing as thought. I dont think a person would say that Dance Dance Central requires a lot of thought. Honestly combat in dark/demon soul is similiar to that of QTE.

The witcher 2 has a much better combat system that is both varied and difficult.

you know how i beat the tower knight in demon souls? not by learning his attack pattern and successfully dodging it, but by turning off lock on and swinging like a blindfolded kid looking for the pinata. never got hit once. wooo, look at all of the thought that required!

Sorry, written at way too early in the morning.

What I meant by simplified I meant by your number of options, so you don't have 20ish abilities to throw around in combat, it's a matter of using what abilities you have well and effectively.

Seriously though? QTE? Did you not read anything I said about positioning? Or even play the game? Considering you cite DMC as a good game for combat when it's very largely based around your ability to press a preset series of buttons in sequence. The fact that you're able to move and generally NEED to move around to avoid dying makes it very different from a quick time event. Oh, and also the fact that you need to decide for yourself when to press the buttons. Sorry, how is it similar again?

I assume that you are aware of what an exploit is? Which is what you got on the tower guardian. However if you wish to claim that isn't unique and the whole game is like that, please help all of the people having trouble with the game by telling them the solution to all of their problems is charging in and swinging repeatedly

Smertnik:

zinho73:
Why some people climb mountains? It is a mix of a personal challenge, the joy of the sport itself and the knowledge that not everyone can do it. That's the Dark Souls experience.

But you can just as well rent a helicopter to take you to the top or let someone carry you up there. That fact does not take away the accomplishment of climbing a mountain by yourself, just as the existence of lower difficulty settings doesn't diminish the "bragging rights" of higher ones.

LOL. Climbing a mountain =/= beating a videogame. When I beat Through the fire and flames on expert mode guitar hero...here comes the shocker...people who played on easy mode could still listen to me brag and understand that it took skill. What you are asking for is childish. Not just you the whole community that doesn't want an easy mode. They don't want an easy mode because they all have this mentality that games today are too easy and that its not fun if its easy..blah blah blah nobody cares bro.

You make it sound like its the olympics and we are taking the high jump bar and lowering it 2 feet and telling all the best players to compete at a height we all know they can jump. This is so not the case. There will still be the hardcore players on their hardcore community forums discussing their accomplishments. All those incoming noob players that can't pick easy mode cause you won't allow it arn't going to play the game like you given enough time. They are going to outright quit after the first few levels. In fact, easy mode will only benefit you since a greater community means more money for developers and better future games with even greater challenges.

Just cause I can't solve the 4x4 rubik's cube and I can only solve the 3x3 doesn't mean I can't appreciate your ability.

The Almighty Aardvark:

Ryotknife:

The Almighty Aardvark:
snip.

first you say im oversimplifying the combat, next you say you like the simple combat. I do not like simple combat, which is also why i never finished playing Fallout3 as every weapon basically feels the same and shooting things becomes extremely boring after a few hours (despite the fact that i thought that FO3 had better environment and story). Skyrim require a hell of a lot more thought with combat than demon souls ever did, especially with stealth, archery, or magic (melee not so much).

Reaction time is not the same thing as thought. I dont think a person would say that Dance Dance Central requires a lot of thought. Honestly combat in dark/demon soul is similiar to that of QTE.

The witcher 2 has a much better combat system that is both varied and difficult.

you know how i beat the tower knight in demon souls? not by learning his attack pattern and successfully dodging it, but by turning off lock on and swinging like a blindfolded kid looking for the pinata. never got hit once. wooo, look at all of the thought that required!

Sorry, written at way too early in the morning.

What I meant by simplified I meant by your number of options, so you don't have 20ish abilities to throw around in combat, it's a matter of using what abilities you have well and effectively.

Seriously though? QTE? Did you not read anything I said about positioning? Or even play the game? Considering you cite DMC as a good game for combat when it's very largely based around your ability to press a preset series of buttons in sequence. The fact that you're able to move and generally NEED to move around to avoid dying makes it very different from a quick time event. Oh, and also the fact that you need to decide for yourself when to press the buttons. Sorry, how is it similar again?

I assume that you are aware of what an exploit is? Which is what you got on the tower guardian. However if you wish to claim that isn't unique and the whole game is like that, please help all of the people having trouble with the game by telling them the solution to all of their problems is charging in and swinging repeatedly

refusing to use lock on....is an exploit.....

might want to rethink that one.

an exploit would be finding a glitch in the wall during the armored spider boss where you can hit the boss but the boss was incapable of hitting you with projectiles. No i did not do that.

RomanceIsDead:

Smertnik:

zinho73:
Why some people climb mountains? It is a mix of a personal challenge, the joy of the sport itself and the knowledge that not everyone can do it. That's the Dark Souls experience.

But you can just as well rent a helicopter to take you to the top or let someone carry you up there. That fact does not take away the accomplishment of climbing a mountain by yourself, just as the existence of lower difficulty settings doesn't diminish the "bragging rights" of higher ones.

LOL. Climbing a mountain =/= beating a videogame. When I beat Through the fire and flames on expert mode guitar hero...here comes the shocker...people who played on easy mode could still listen to me brag and understand that it took skill. What you are asking for is childish. Not just you the whole community that doesn't want an easy mode. They don't want an easy mode because they all have this mentality that games today are too easy and that its not fun if its easy..blah blah blah nobody cares bro.

You make it sound like its the olympics and we are taking the high jump bar and lowering it 2 feet and telling all the best players to compete at a height we all know they can jump. This is so not the case. There will still be the hardcore players on their hardcore community forums discussing their accomplishments. All those incoming noob players that can't pick easy mode cause you won't allow it arn't going to play the game like you given enough time. They are going to outright quit after the first few levels. In fact, easy mode will only benefit you since a greater community means more money for developers and better future games with even greater challenges.

Just cause I can't solve the 4x4 rubik's cube and I can only solve the 3x3 doesn't mean I can't appreciate your ability.

Climbing a mountain was used as a metaphor not a comparison.

Also, I'm not allowing or not allowing anything, I'm just saying that an easy mode is a bad idea and that the developer resources could be better used elsewhere. Plenty of easy game on the market, just one that menages its difficult using game mechanisms. I would like to keep that one.

Please, read the thread as I'm not going to post what has been said over and over again, but long story short, I don't think the community will grow with an easy mode because people that don't like the game now will probably like it even less if its easier because there will be no sense of accomplishment, no reason to explore and the game will feel short and pointless.

The difference between a Dark Souls with or without a difficulty setting would be subtle but important, like the difference between a metaphor and a direct comparison.

RomanceIsDead:

Just cause I can't solve the 4x4 rubik's cube and I can only solve the 3x3 doesn't mean I can't appreciate your ability.

Rubik's cube is actually a pretty good example that not everything needs an easy mode. There's no "easy" mode for Rubik's cube.

You play to your limit and with guides, patience and dedication you can surpass that limit.

If there were an easy version of the cube it would not have the popularity and longevity that it has now, i can guarantee you that. It became famous because it was a somewhat complex and different thing unlike other toys in the market.

As you said, to beat the cube is something that it is easily seen in any culture and in any place as a matter of some skill. Also, there would be no point in playing with the thing if anyone could solve it in five minutes - the time and money of the toy industry would be much better spent building other toys for a broader audience.

The point of the cube is to solve the puzzle;
The point of Dark Souls is to beat the difficulty (with such a variety of tools that sometimes it is simply not difficult at all).

On the subject of combat, just my two cents:

I find that it has simple mechanisms that allows somewhat complex interactions. If you wanna to keep it simple, you can. If you take advantage of the flexibility it can offer, you will be more efficient (or at least have more fun).

"I've only played the game for 20min and not bothered to learn any of the techniques or strategies or come up with any of my own so I think this game should have an easy mode that will point me to every objective so I can sleepwalk through it like practically every other game out at the moment. Why are you all telling me I don't get it? You guys are elitist wankers who must have cheated to get through the game at all because it actually teaches you NOTHING. I swing my sword and do fuck-all damage and then my guy gets tired. This is shit. Why isn't there a tutorial?"

Windcaler:

From my perspective, I agree that an easy mode cheapens the experiences and acomplishments of the game but I also agree that there's nothing wrong with asking for help. The reason why I think its ok to ask for tips or look things up is it offers assistance in the form of knowledge but it still requires a person to rise to the challenge. In this way a mode isnt being added to the game where everyone is expected to beat it, instead each individual is better armed for the encounters. Knowledge is just another weapon in the players arsenal and they have to make use of it to win

But now you are literally holding their hands in a way an easy mode can't ever do.

Zachary Amaranth:

Windcaler:

From my perspective, I agree that an easy mode cheapens the experiences and acomplishments of the game but I also agree that there's nothing wrong with asking for help. The reason why I think its ok to ask for tips or look things up is it offers assistance in the form of knowledge but it still requires a person to rise to the challenge. In this way a mode isnt being added to the game where everyone is expected to beat it, instead each individual is better armed for the encounters. Knowledge is just another weapon in the players arsenal and they have to make use of it to win

But now you are literally holding their hands in a way an easy mode can't ever do.

An easy mode is a mode of gameplay where the difficulty is reduced so much that anyone can clear it. There is no chance of failure with it and by extension no accomplishment for beating the game. I believe it also cheapens the accomplishments of those of us who beat dark souls in its current form

However arming someone with knowledge is not holding their hands. I would be holding their hands if I took the controller from them and did it myself. As I said, arming a person with knowledge requires them to make use of it. I can tell or show someone how to beat a boss or bypass an area but it still requires them to apply that knowledge to their gameplay.

Let me try to give an example (this will not be a perfect example since following a recepie is far different from adapting to a combat system in a game). Lets say I know how to make some awesome fried chicken. I give you all the information you need to know to make my awesome fried chicken. You still have to prepare the chicken, put on the right seasonings, and cook it right. So lets say you succeed in making the awesome fried chicken, now did I make it or did you make it?

While Im thinking about it, could you give us your definition of hand holding and easy modes?

Zachary Amaranth:

Windcaler:

From my perspective, I agree that an easy mode cheapens the experiences and acomplishments of the game but I also agree that there's nothing wrong with asking for help. The reason why I think its ok to ask for tips or look things up is it offers assistance in the form of knowledge but it still requires a person to rise to the challenge. In this way a mode isnt being added to the game where everyone is expected to beat it, instead each individual is better armed for the encounters. Knowledge is just another weapon in the players arsenal and they have to make use of it to win

But now you are literally holding their hands in a way an easy mode can't ever do.

One's an active attempt to improve their knowledge in order to more easily find a secret or overcome a challenge. The other is wanting a secret to be accessible to everyone as opposed to only those who seek it out, and thus not a secret, or altering a challenge so it no longer requires knowledge or investment of thought or effort.

I think something a lot of people don't just get is, there's a certain satisfaction that, for some people at least, comes from doing something that requires investment of more then just time. While you might be doing the same things, the knowledge that had you taken a very clearly marked option you could've accomplished things so much more efficiently can drain, lessen, and cheapen the feeling of accomplishment you get from doing things the hard way. For people who feel like that and like games with those sorts of strict requirements, there are very few new games like that nowadays. And when people demand an easy-mode in the Souls games, they're demanding one of the last quality series of that niche to change to suit their wants.

While I am usually for gamers having choice in how they play their games (I dislike always-online requirements, I dislike how some games like Dead Rising only support HDTVs, and I prefer good optimization for PC ports). I agree that making Dark Souls easier is not the way to go.

Dark Souls would not be memorable without the amount of time it takes to understand it. I understand there are some players who want to play the game without taking that much time, but to me adding an easy-mode is going remove more fun from the game.

lol, i love this, people still say "dont make easy mode" just because they want to brag,im sure people really respect you for winning dark souls, you know like people buying you drinks and girls giving you their phone numbers (oh wait they dont, they dont care, since either they dont have the skill or the time to win this game, they dont give a shait, so instead of them winning dark souls (giving the company more money to make bigger and better games) and you bragging about the difficulty and they understanding it (like one of the obove posters says), they answer is: so you have a lot of free time then)

Ryotknife:
Skyrim require a hell of a lot more thought with combat than demon souls ever did, especially with stealth, archery, or magic (melee not so much).

I only partially agree. Stealth may require some thought at the start but quickly becomes so overpowered that any strategy becomes unnecessary. Skyrims melee was inferior to Dark Souls melee. As i didnt play archery in either game i can't comment on that.

Magic on the other hand is superior in Skyrim.

sonofliber:
lol, i love this, people still say "dont make easy mode" just because they want to brag,im sure people really respect you for winning dark souls, you know like people buying you drinks and girls giving you their phone numbers (oh wait they dont, they dont care, since either they dont have the skill or the time to win this game, they dont give a shait, so instead of them winning dark souls (giving the company more money to make bigger and better games) and you bragging about the difficulty and they understanding it (like one of the obove posters says), they answer is: so you have a lot of free time then)

The majority fears that it wouldnt be the same game anymore and people would find it boring without the challenge. Only a very small part truly cares about the bragging factor.

sonofliber:
lol, i love this, people still say "dont make easy mode" just because they want to brag,im sure people really respect you for winning dark souls, you know like people buying you drinks and girls giving you their phone numbers (oh wait they dont, they dont care, since either they dont have the skill or the time to win this game, they dont give a shait, so instead of them winning dark souls (giving the company more money to make bigger and better games) and you bragging about the difficulty and they understanding it (like one of the obove posters says), they answer is: so you have a lot of free time then)

The bragging rights is really not what this thread is about. It had been actually frequently mentioned by the people defending the existence of an easy mode, but most of the arguments against the easy mode are not of this nature (at least in this thread).

Yeah, the bragging do exist, but it simply has zero value for many players.

Also, a lot of people do not seem to differentiate between someone proud and happy of beating a challenge from someone who is bragging about it.

Which leads me to believe that a lot of bitterness is actually on the other side of the equation.

Lovely Mixture:
While I am usually for gamers having choice in how they play their games (I dislike always-online requirements, I dislike how some games like Dead Rising only support HDTVs, and I prefer good optimization for PC ports). I agree that making Dark Souls easier is not the way to go.

Dark Souls would not be memorable without the amount of time it takes to understand it. I understand there are some players who want to play the game without taking that much time, but to me adding an easy-mode is going remove more fun from the game.

Yeah. I guess they are both different things, though.

We really should have a say in the way we consume things: pricing, availability, marketing, quality, etc. We should see this as a right.

But we should be a little bit more conscious when trying to change what the thing actually is. In that case, I think we should put a little bit more of thought in the matter because although there is nothing inherently wrong in stating opinions in order to shape the market, we have to understand that sometimes the change we crave for is not a right but a wish.

But because the concept is subjective, sometimes those things get really mixed up, though. Mass Effect 3 endings for example were viewed as something so unbelievably bad that it crossed the line between artistic vision and flat out product quality (tied to a good measure of false advertising).

But I think that in Dark Souls the artistic merit and design vision are much more clear and way easier to defend.

lapan:

Ryotknife:
Skyrim require a hell of a lot more thought with combat than demon souls ever did, especially with stealth, archery, or magic (melee not so much).

I only partially agree. Stealth may require some thought at the start but quickly becomes so overpowered that any strategy becomes unnecessary. Skyrims melee was inferior to Dark Souls melee. As i didnt play archery in either game i can't comment on that.

Magic on the other hand is superior in Skyrim.

sonofliber:
lol, i love this, people still say "dont make easy mode" just because they want to brag,im sure people really respect you for winning dark souls, you know like people buying you drinks and girls giving you their phone numbers (oh wait they dont, they dont care, since either they dont have the skill or the time to win this game, they dont give a shait, so instead of them winning dark souls (giving the company more money to make bigger and better games) and you bragging about the difficulty and they understanding it (like one of the obove posters says), they answer is: so you have a lot of free time then)

The majority fears that it wouldnt be the same game anymore and people would find it boring without the challenge. Only a very small part truly cares about the bragging factor.

I will admit...there is a large scaling problem in skyrim combat. Although typically that only takes place after you dumped a lot of hours. skyrim combat is not by any means perfect....or close to perfect.

and as a sidenote to the topic being discussed by various posters, i do not care about easy mode. Hell, i dont even mind if a soul game is released every year. I wont play them, but there are many people who enjoy them as is. I wont play horror games either because i do not see the appeal in being scared personally, doesnt mean i wanted Dead Space 3 to tone down the horror aspect (if rumors are true).

Altas has obviously created a great game series.

It just irks me when people say that the combat is complex and requires a great deal of thought.

zinho73:

Lovely Mixture:
While I am usually for gamers having choice in how they play their games (I dislike always-online requirements, I dislike how some games like Dead Rising only support HDTVs, and I prefer good optimization for PC ports). I agree that making Dark Souls easier is not the way to go.

Dark Souls would not be memorable without the amount of time it takes to understand it. I understand there are some players who want to play the game without taking that much time, but to me adding an easy-mode is going remove more fun from the game.

Yeah. I guess they are both different things, though.

We really should have a say in the way we consume things: pricing, availability, marketing, quality, etc. We should see this as a right.

But we should be a little bit more conscious when trying to change what the thing actually is. In that case, I think we should put a little bit more of thought in the matter because although there is nothing inherently wrong in stating opinions in order to shape the market, we have to understand that sometimes the change we crave for is not a right but a wish.

But because the concept is subjective, sometimes those things get really mixed up, though. Mass Effect 3 endings for example were viewed as something so unbelievably bad that it crossed the line between artistic vision and flat out product quality (tied to a good measure of false advertising).

But I think that in Dark Souls the artistic merit and design vision are much more clear and way easier to defend.

Very well said!

They are indeed different things, one is on a more technical/economic level whilst the other is more related to the actual "game part" of the game.

But I fear that people (not including me though) will argue that an easy mode should be considered for "player optimization."

But I agree

Casual Shinji:
Most of the information people look up online regarding the game is acquiring a special weapon or piece of armor; Something that requires you to offer up a Boss soul.

Apart from one Boss, there's no information that will make the game easier.

Yeah, no. I'm sorry, but I already know that much is bullshit.

Burst6:

Making the mechanics of this game easy will make the secrets useless because you don't need them.

Yes, I forgot that there are no options for Dark Souls other than cripplingly hard and cakewalk. There couldn't possibly be an "easy" mode that is only "easy" in relation to the difficulty of Dark Souls. Gamers will waltz through this game blindfolded if there is an easier option. Lo, even my grandmother will be able to beat it, because there are only too settings: LOL NOOB and pr0

I'm all for an "easy" mode if that easy mode is simply a well constructed tutorial and acts as a way to ease people into the game. I don't think the game is as hard as people like to make out anyway, so preserving that difficulty isn't all important.

Playing Civ on the latter difficulties is hard; playing Ninja Gaiden on Master Ninja mode is hard; playing Doom on Nightmare is hard. All of these are hard for difference reasons which require a different set of skills, but the difficulty in Dark Souls (while still more dificult than your typical AAA game) comes mainly from a lack of direction and the need to experiment to learn gameplay mechanics, move sets and item locations. Once you've had a good read of the manual/wiki to learn what does what, played the game a few time to learn where your time is best spent, as well as mastered the somewhat tricky control scheme, the game's a breeze.

As evidence, I'm playing through the game at the moment with the following challenge: no leveling up and no turning human (so no Co-op, invasion, kindling). So far I've only failed to retrieve my blood stain once and that was due to the game bugging out and getting stuck in the geometry, followed by death by camera angle when the game decided it wanted to show me the backside of a platform in blight town when I was trying to fight a giant.

Ryotknife:

Reaction time is not the same thing as thought. I dont think a person would say that Dance Dance Central requires a lot of thought. Honestly combat in dark/demon soul is similiar to that of QTE.

Wow, way to oversimplify things until they don't even remotely look like what you're talking about anymore.

Combat in Dark Souls is slow-paced and knowledge-based. It's less about muscle memory and more about decision-making, but that doesn't mean timing is not a factor. It's punishing because it's actually very lenient. The trick is learning enemy patterns, predicting attacks, knowing what to do. Once you're past that, the game becomes much easier.
And I can appreciate it being designed that way because it makes sense for it to be: the game has an online component which relies on other players giving you hints and pointing out traps. That's the easy mode, right there. Except the game makes you go look for it instead of just giving it to you on a plate.

But how on earth is the decision-making aspect of the combat in Dark Souls in any way, shape or form related to Dance Central or a QTE? That just sounds like the words of someone who tried to bum-rush the game and got the wrong impression.

The witcher 2 has a much better combat system that is both varied and difficult.

You mean using the same type of sword with the same moveset with the only major gameplay diversity coming out of which of the 3 talent trees you chose at the start?
Witcher 2's combat was in no way better. It was pretty good, but it had scaling problems. Dark Souls manages to remain uniform and still provide a challenge even if you have a +15 sword with magical buffs on it, which is something I can't say of Witcher 2's endgame.

*Ahem* I'm one of those people that doesn't want an "easy mode". What would the easy mode do, exactly? Decrease damage dealt by enemies? Allow you to 1shot everything you meet? (because you can 2-shot most standard enemies if you know how to play)
No, Dark Souls' difficulty doesn't come from how much damage you take, but from the fact that you didn't react to that damage and didn't know it was coming. If you want easy mode, read a guide. The game was very easy while I was using the wiki and/or watching let's plays, first playthrough attempts barely dying once or twice in most dungeons. The game doesn't need an easy mode, making it so you can take however many hits you want breaks the game in more than one way:
- less trade-off between heavy and light armor (suddenly, that slow roll is not worth it anymore)
- less reliance on co-op and online systems (LOL NOOBS I DON'T CARE IF THERE'S A TRAP AHEAD I AINT GONNA DIE ANYWAY)
- less decision-making on account to slow-paced easy combat (cheating my way into getting the drake sword and 1-shotting the entire undead burg made the combat decidedly less fun)
- less trade-off between being human or undead (making it a glorified MMO PVP flag)
- ranged attacks possibly becoming the standard way to play (Hey I got 900 arrows and only need 3 of them to kill you, why would I ever use a sword?)
- less atmosphere in the game itself, possibly a total genre shift. I used to be scared for my life and careful as hell, making the game easier removes at least some of this.
And so on.

Zachary Amaranth:

Burst6:

Making the mechanics of this game easy will make the secrets useless because you don't need them.

Yes, I forgot that there are no options for Dark Souls other than cripplingly hard and cakewalk. There couldn't possibly be an "easy" mode that is only "easy" in relation to the difficulty of Dark Souls. Gamers will waltz through this game blindfolded if there is an easier option. Lo, even my grandmother will be able to beat it, because there are only too settings: LOL NOOB and pr0

If you know the secrets, a large chunk of the difficulty is removed. Most of the fun in the game is just making things that were difficult easy for you (either by skill or knowledge). If you are trying to make the game easier than that, you are really aiming for a different type of game.

As I said, people are not interested in an easier experience(as the game is now, you can outlevel the content and murder everything in sight), they want a faster way to complete the same content, but this is simply not the design philosophy.

No handholding means, gamers who love secrets can discover new things, share ideas and talk about the game to others and build the wiki, it creates a community around the game. I'm sure most of you guys did the same at school sharing tips for 8/16bit games or Pokemon.

Having everything on the wiki or manual means someone can tailer the game to suit themselves, that includes the difficulty curve. Handholding and Difficulty curves are suited to different ppl are the biggest things that most devs tend to ignore or do right. Most just tend to go for the lowest common demoninator and put in badly thought out and balanced hard modes.

Djinn8:
I'm all for an "easy" mode if that easy mode is simply a well constructed tutorial and acts as a way to ease people into the game. I don't think the game is as hard as people like to make out anyway, so preserving that difficulty isn't all important.

This has already been said in the video but i'll elaborate on it.

Take away the zero handholding, secrets & difficulty and whats left of the game? Easy mode players would burn through the game because it's quite short and anybody wanting an RPG like experience would feel ripped of if they bought the game for full RRP. Sure they can buy it for 10 used months later but in the end it devalues the game to something not much better off than a $1 iphone game, the AAA sinpleplayer games industry is going through hard times atm because they are making a fuck ton of content for ppl to zip through quickly.

Look at Mirrors Edge, theres actually alot of content in the game but because the player runs through it quickly most gamers feel the game isn't worth full RRP, so now EA is scratching their head because they don't know what to do with it and making everygame MP or F2P, but most gamers seem to think thats ok while oldschool games get labelled as "bad game design" or "artificial difficulty"

Shmups are exactly the same thing, someone will buy a 25 CAVE shmup which they hear are good games and then creditfeed till the end and feel ripped off because they've just payed 25 for a game they feel they only got 30minutes of enjoyment out of it. Most shmup fans would stay well away from credit feeding use only 1 or 2 credits and spend weeks, months even years munching through the content till they see the ending credits.

So you want to defend its difficulty ha ?

Explain me this: An enemy is near a wall and I am on the other side of the wall.

If the enemy attacks,his weapon glitches and passes through the wall and hurts me.

If I attack,my weapon hits the wall and I hear the "glang!" sound.

The game has smart selective glitches that always happen in favor of the enemies.
That's not fair.

Stavros Dimou:
So you want to defend its difficulty ha ?

Explain me this: An enemy is near a wall and I am on the other side of the wall.

If the enemy attacks,his weapon glitches and passes through the wall and hurts me.

If I attack,my weapon hits the wall and I hear the "glang!" sound.

The game has smart selective glitches that always happen in favor of the enemies.
That's not fair.

That's not a glitch. Enemies weapons just don't bounce off walls, which is mostly to ensure you can't just lure every enemy that swings up against a wall and abuse the limitations of the AI. That said, that is something people complain about, but given how many enemies will freely jump off cliffs, including multiple bosses, it's a limitation I'm willing to accept to maintain the design philosophy.

Ive heard a lot of ideas that support not adding an easy mode at this point, many of which I agree with. However I havnt really heard any convincing arguments for the inclusion of an easy mode.

For those wanting an easy mode can you explain why from an artistic or mechanical standpoint an easy mode should be included?

Im not including the business side because I think its a fair point that making the game more accessible may create more sales and more money for the company. However this also operates on the fallacy that accessibility equals more sales, but I still think its a fair point

@Zachary Amaranth: I noticed you failed to answer my questions about the awesome fried chicken and your definitions for hand holding and easy modes. Do you not intend to answer them or did you just miss the post?

zinho73:

RomanceIsDead:

Just cause I can't solve the 4x4 rubik's cube and I can only solve the 3x3 doesn't mean I can't appreciate your ability.

Rubik's cube is actually a pretty good example that not everything needs an easy mode. There's no "easy" mode for Rubik's cube.

You play to your limit and with guides, patience and dedication you can surpass that limit.

If there were an easy version of the cube it would not have the popularity and longevity that it has now, i can guarantee you that. It became famous because it was a somewhat complex and different thing unlike other toys in the market.

As you said, to beat the cube is something that it is easily seen in any culture and in any place as a matter of some skill. Also, there would be no point in playing with the thing if anyone could solve it in five minutes - the time and money of the toy industry would be much better spent building other toys for a broader audience.

The point of the cube is to solve the puzzle;
The point of Dark Souls is to beat the difficulty (with such a variety of tools that sometimes it is simply not difficult at all).

cheesy metaphors aside I think its worth pointing out that there is a significant number of players who play on easy mode only, and what I'm saying is--yes it would make the community bigger because the majority of gamers these days are casuals...

you do realize there is some crazy statistic where like..for any given game only 5% complete the thing...

RomanceIsDead:

you do realize there is some crazy statistic where like..for any given game only 5% complete the thing...

Yeah i've seen articles with devs moaning that only a tiny % actually finish the game, their solution seems to be make the game easier however...

Is it down to the fact that the is game isn't easy enough? Or is the game so boring and long drawn out that most ppl quit to play something else? I'm honestly unsure.

Zachary Amaranth:

Burst6:

Making the mechanics of this game easy will make the secrets useless because you don't need them.

Yes, I forgot that there are no options for Dark Souls other than cripplingly hard and cakewalk. There couldn't possibly be an "easy" mode that is only "easy" in relation to the difficulty of Dark Souls. Gamers will waltz through this game blindfolded if there is an easier option. Lo, even my grandmother will be able to beat it, because there are only too settings: LOL NOOB and pr0

The sarcasm is unnecessary.

So what do you want then? Do you want a mode where you are faster have more HP and do more damage without it being too easy? Go ahead and put all your points in VIT and END, buy some heave armor, get the darkwood grain ring + havel's ring, and get a nice lightning weapon. There, you're a fast moving tank with a weapon that can match most specialized high stat weapons. You can now tank most hits without flinching or losing too much HP and flip around like a ninja. Invest some souls into pyromancy and you got some nice ranged fire damage skills.

Or do you want it easier than that? tell me, how would you make dark souls easier without it being "LOL NOOB".

i didn't buy dark souls because it's didn't have easy difficulty. More varied difficulties = more people are able to enjoy it = more people will buy it. i do not wish to rethink myself as a gamer all i want is experience of a game with difficulty i find comfortable. You don't really need to "understand" it's difficulty its ether you like it or don't. Preaching about it wouldn't sway people one way or the other or at least it's didn't showed me what so good about it.
There is absolutely no reason why Easy mode shouldn't be in Dark Souls.

Dark souls is one of my all time favourite games, I wouldn't change a thing about it. It's beautiful, in both visuals and as a game. Other games are fun and relaxing, but no other game is as rewarding and fulfilling as Dark Souls

Arina Love:
i didn't buy dark souls because it's didn't have easy difficulty. i do not wish to rethink myself as a gamer all i want is experience of a game with difficulty i find comfortable. You don't really need to "understand" it's difficulty its ether you like it or don't. Preaching about it wouldn't sway people one way or the other or at least it's didn't showed me what so good about it.
There is absolutely no reason why Easy mode shouldn't be in Dark Souls.

If you just want to experience a game that has a difficulty you are comfortable with then Dark souls probably isnt for you. There are a ton of other games with easy modes and that have the fantasy elements such as Dragon Age or anything in the elder scrolls series. Why would you come to dark souls, knowing its high difficulty and unforgiving nature, if you know its difficulty isnt something you are comfortable with?

The reason why its so unforgiving is partly because of artistic choice. Yes Im going to start banging the games are art drum because I dont think people understand that point. They're treating Dark souls as a product that should conform to their desires instead of a piece of art which has its own artistic focuses and choices. The reason why I say the difficulty is an artistic choice is because it gives players accomplishments but to have those accomplishments there also needs to be a chance of failure. Im not talking about failure as in dying in the game, Im talking about the only true and lasting failure: To put down the game and never pick it up again (or in your case never buy it in the first place).

This brings up a question that hung around the whole mass effect 3 endings debacle. In that case gamers were promised things and no one delivered so they had every right to be mad IMO. However the question remains: Do gamers have the right to tell a developer to jeopardize and even change their artistic vision for a game?

Windcaler:

Arina Love:
i didn't buy dark souls because it's didn't have easy difficulty. i do not wish to rethink myself as a gamer all i want is experience of a game with difficulty i find comfortable. You don't really need to "understand" it's difficulty its ether you like it or don't. Preaching about it wouldn't sway people one way or the other or at least it's didn't showed me what so good about it.
There is absolutely no reason why Easy mode shouldn't be in Dark Souls.

If you just want to experience a game that has a difficulty you are comfortable with then Dark souls probably isnt for you. There are a ton of other games with easy modes and that have the fantasy elements such as Dragon Age or anything in the elder scrolls series. Why would you come to dark souls, knowing its high difficulty and unforgiving nature, if you know its difficulty isnt something you are comfortable with?

The reason why its so unforgiving is partly because of artistic choice. Yes Im going to start banging the games are art drum because I dont think people understand that point. They're treating Dark souls as a product that should conform to their desires instead of a piece of art which has its own artistic focuses and choices. The reason why I say the difficulty is an artistic choice is because it gives players accomplishments but to have those accomplishments there also needs to be a chance of failure. Im not talking about failure as in dying in the game, Im talking about the only true and lasting failure: To put down the game and never pick it up again (or in your case never buy it in the first place).

This brings up a question that hung around the whole mass effect 3 endings debacle. In that case gamers were promised things and no one delivered so they had every right to be mad IMO. However the question remains: Do gamers have the right to tell a developer to jeopardize and even change their artistic vision for a game?

Sorry but i just do not see how difficulty as artistic method. i get same sense of satisfaction ether way. " To put down the game and never pick it up again" it's called wasted money and wasted customers in future. Bad for business.
If company already talking abut implementing easy mode: ether there is demand for lower difficulty or they don't sell enough because of limited appeal of a game.
Easy mode will not hurt anybody, you will still have same hard experience but there will be expanded appeal of a game.

Arina Love:

Windcaler:

Arina Love:
i didn't buy dark souls because it's didn't have easy difficulty. i do not wish to rethink myself as a gamer all i want is experience of a game with difficulty i find comfortable. You don't really need to "understand" it's difficulty its ether you like it or don't. Preaching about it wouldn't sway people one way or the other or at least it's didn't showed me what so good about it.
There is absolutely no reason why Easy mode shouldn't be in Dark Souls.

If you just want to experience a game that has a difficulty you are comfortable with then Dark souls probably isnt for you. There are a ton of other games with easy modes and that have the fantasy elements such as Dragon Age or anything in the elder scrolls series. Why would you come to dark souls, knowing its high difficulty and unforgiving nature, if you know its difficulty isnt something you are comfortable with?

The reason why its so unforgiving is partly because of artistic choice. Yes Im going to start banging the games are art drum because I dont think people understand that point. They're treating Dark souls as a product that should conform to their desires instead of a piece of art which has its own artistic focuses and choices. The reason why I say the difficulty is an artistic choice is because it gives players accomplishments but to have those accomplishments there also needs to be a chance of failure. Im not talking about failure as in dying in the game, Im talking about the only true and lasting failure: To put down the game and never pick it up again (or in your case never buy it in the first place).

This brings up a question that hung around the whole mass effect 3 endings debacle. In that case gamers were promised things and no one delivered so they had every right to be mad IMO. However the question remains: Do gamers have the right to tell a developer to jeopardize and even change their artistic vision for a game?

Sorry but i just do not see how difficulty as artistic method. i get same sense of satisfaction ether way. " To put down the game and never pick it up again" it's called wasted money and wasted customers in future. Bad for business.
If company already talking abut implementing easy mode: ether there is demand for lower difficulty or they don't sell enough because of limited appeal of a game.
Easy mode will not hurt anybody, you will still have same hard experience but there will be expanded appeal of a game.

Im sorry but you are incorrect on each count. Lets talk about the company implementing the easy mode first. Hidetaka Miyazaki, the director of Dark souls, actually never said that. This was a "Mistranslation" written by Metro. After the article was published Namco/Bandai came out and said that this was not what he was saying. Metro then implied that it was what he was saying and went so far to take responsibility for changing his mind. You can see lots of misinformation like this from various news sites. Just google Dark souls 2 confirmed or Dark souls sequel confirmed. The fact is nothing has been confirmed but it generates hits, it makes people come to their news sites, and frankly its disgusting to see this kind of Journalism going on. So lets put up what Miyazaki really said "This fact [that not everyone beats dark souls] is really sad to me and I am thinking about how to make everyone complete the game while maintaining the current difficulty and carefully send all gamers the messages behind it."

Lets talk about the artistic side. Im going to start by quoting the stated goals of the game as translated from some of the developers before the game came out. "The difficulty in dark souls is a critical part of the experience. The goal of the game is to provide a sense of accomplishment and discovery and the difficulty is an important tool to meet those ends." Think about that for a minute. "An important tool to provide a sense of accomplishment and discovery". The thing about that statement is for those accomplishments to have any weight to them there must be the chance for failure (again failure being putting down the game and never picking it up again). Knowing the stated goals of the game can you explain to me how dark souls unforgiving difficulty is not an artistic choice?

Now finally lets talk about the fallacy that an easy mode will not effect the rest of the game. Now from my perspective, an easy mode is a reduced difficulty designed in such a way that anyone can beat the game, that anyone can win. This undermines the tool that the difficulty represents. The stated goals of the game are "to provide a sense of accomplishment and discovery." but again for accomplishment to carry any weight you must have to have the chance to fail, but you cant fail in an easy mode because, by definition, everyone is supposed to be able to clear it.

On a more personal level, an easy mode even being in the game cheapens the accomplishments of the players who have beaten the game as it currently is. Dark souls is already very accessible, allowing anyone to play it. I truly believe that anyone can beat the game already if they dont give up. Eventually they will reach a point where they will adapt and overcome the challenge like I did. Eventually, as long as they dont fail, they will succeed and beat the game. At that point they can stand beside me and the rest of the souls community and say, with pride: I beat dark souls!

Now some gamers enjoy the fact that they can accomplish something that others cant. In this case their accomplishments are relative to the achievements of others so for them they care. I dont personally feel that way but its worth noting the opinion. You might not care and as a lot of people have already you may call them selfish but they obviously do care and if one could be called selfish for enjoying the fact that they could do something others cant then it could also be said that those wanting change so they can do that same thing are selfish as well. That argument is a two way street

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 NEXT

Reply to Thread

This thread is locked