Understanding Dark Souls difficulty

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5
 

Windcaler:

Arina Love:

Windcaler:

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!

except sense of accomplishment is subjective and same scale don't really apply to everyone. i for one get same sense of accomplishment in every game i play be it easy or hard.
Who said you can't fail on easy? You just have to have bigger tolerance for mistakes that's all.
it's called smart difficulty design.
So no it's not artistic choice it's mechanics choice to ease development of a game.

easy mode doesn't cheapens anything it's just becomes "i beat dark souls on hard." and why you even care if someone beat the game on other conditions than you? Sorry but that just reeks of elitism.

Arina Love:

Windcaler:

Arina Love:

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!

except sense of accomplishment is subjective and same scale don't really apply to everyone. i for one get same sense of accomplishment in every game i play be it easy or hard.
Who said you can't fail on easy? You just have to have bigger tolerance for mistakes that's all.
it's called smart difficulty design.
So no it's not artistic choice it's mechanics choice to ease development of a game.

easy mode doesn't cheapens anything it's just becomes "i beat dark souls on hard." and why you even care if someone beat the game on other conditions than you? Sorry but that just reeks of elitism.

To start Im not an elitist at all. I want everyone to play the game and enjoy it but I want them to rise up to my level of play instead of cheapening my accomplishments through an easy mode that goes against the very goals of the game. An elitist would simply tell you to suck it up and learn to play. They wouldnt engage you in intelligent debate as Im trying to

TrevHead actually made that point for me so Ill quote him at the very bottom so you can read what he wrote. For the record I agree with him, I am more of a purist. I want everyone to feel that sense of accomplishment and join our community. At no point have I said you shouldnt play the game but I have said things like "maybe its just not for you". More often then not I try to encourage people to raise their level of play.

Now you can call the difficulty level a mechanical choice, and it is in a way but that doesnt stop it from being an artistic choice as well. While you feel the same sense of accomplishment from an easy mode others dont, and I dont. Furthermore we do care because we feel it cheapens our own accomplishments and makes the game worse. You can say that an easy mode wouldnt matter but it does, as I said the meaning of an individuals accomplishments is relative to human achievement. You might not care, and thats fine, but you need to realize that not all players feel the same way. To answer your question, I care because if dark souls were to have an easy mode added I believe the experience would be lessened making the game objectively and subjectively worse. The stated goals of the game is to develop a feeling of accomplishment and discovery but for the third time this requires the chance of failure. An easy mode by definition is one that allows anyone to succeed and it goes against the very stated goals of the game. To feel like you accomplished something you have to have the chance to fail.

That said, I posed two questions that you have not answered thus far. Those being 1. Do gamers have the right to tell a developer to jeopardize and even change their artistic vision for a game? and 2. Knowing the stated goals of the game can you explain to me how dark souls unforgiving difficulty is not an artistic choice?

and now TrevHead's quote. This has helped me come to the conclusion that we need some new terminology to talk about modern gaming.

TrevHead:
I would say that everyone atleast watch that video because it makes the point better than any of us guys can.

The devs made this game with an artistic / gameplay focus, where every element comes together to make a near perfect game for those ppl who like this sort of thing. I would show a YT video that makes this point about Darksouls where the guy in the video mentions a German word meaning all the elements work together perfectly (i'm hoping someone else can link it).

Personally I think ppl are confusing elitism and gamers who are purists. An elitist would say that they don't want casuals stinking up the place, a purist would say yes please play this great game but within the confines of what the developer intended. The problem is that it's quite hard for purists to bring their arguments across when others automatically chalk them down as elitists. So in the end many purists just revert to saying get off my lawn rather than waste their time.

Purist or elitist whatever you feel DS gamers are, it doesn't mean that their own views and wants are any less than other gamers, and I don't see why one game which is catering to them should be watered down to suit others tastes, especially when their are plenty of other games to play.

Easy mode to many DS players is like EA wanting to put in capture the flag in Mirrors Edge 2 or co-op in Dead Space 3. PPl who like the originals react the same way, they aren't against co-op or capture the flag but don't want it in those 2 games because it goes against the original focus, to bring examples of other games which have co-op is mostly meaningless unless it's an exact clone, DS is unique to no direct comparisions can be applied.

If the Souls series hadn't been this big thing we wouldn't even be having this conversation, but the fact that it has proves that there is a sizable chunk of gamers who want this type of experience.

Windcaler:

Arina Love:

Windcaler:

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!

except sense of accomplishment is subjective and same scale don't really apply to everyone. i for one get same sense of accomplishment in every game i play be it easy or hard.
Who said you can't fail on easy? You just have to have bigger tolerance for mistakes that's all.
it's called smart difficulty design.
So no it's not artistic choice it's mechanics choice to ease development of a game.

easy mode doesn't cheapens anything it's just becomes "i beat dark souls on hard." and why you even care if someone beat the game on other conditions than you? Sorry but that just reeks of elitism.

To start Im not an elitist at all. I want everyone to play the game and enjoy it but I want them to rise up to my level of play instead of cheapening my accomplishments through an easy mode that goes against the very goals of the game. An elitist would simply tell you to suck it up and learn to play. They wouldnt engage you in intelligent debate as Im trying to

TrevHead actually made that point for me so Ill quote him at the very bottom so you can read what he wrote. For the record I agree with him, I am more of a purist. I want everyone to feel that sense of accomplishment and join our community. At no point have I said you shouldnt play the game but I have said things like "maybe its just not for you". More often then not I try to encourage people to raise their level of play.

Now you can call the difficulty level a mechanical choice, and it is in a way but that doesnt stop it from being an artistic choice as well. While you feel the same sense of accomplishment from an easy mode others dont, and I dont. Furthermore we do care because we feel it cheapens our own accomplishments and makes the game worse. You can say that an easy mode wouldnt matter but it does, as I said the meaning of an individuals accomplishments is relative to human achievement. You might not care, and thats fine, but you need to realize that not all players feel the same way. To answer your question, I care because if dark souls were to have an easy mode added I believe the experience would be lessened making the game objectively and subjectively worse. The stated goals of the game is to develop a feeling of accomplishment and discovery but for the third time this requires the chance of failure. An easy mode by definition is one that allows anyone to succeed and it goes against the very stated goals of the game. To feel like you accomplished something you have to have the chance to fail.

That said, I posed two questions that you have not answered thus far. Those being 1. Do gamers have the right to tell a developer to jeopardize and even change their artistic vision for a game? and 2. Knowing the stated goals of the game can you explain to me how dark souls unforgiving difficulty is not an artistic choice?

and now TrevHead's quote. This has helped me come to the conclusion that we need some new terminology to talk about modern gaming.

TrevHead:
I would say that everyone atleast watch that video because it makes the point better than any of us guys can.

The devs made this game with an artistic / gameplay focus, where every element comes together to make a near perfect game for those ppl who like this sort of thing. I would show a YT video that makes this point about Darksouls where the guy in the video mentions a German word meaning all the elements work together perfectly (i'm hoping someone else can link it).

Personally I think ppl are confusing elitism and gamers who are purists. An elitist would say that they don't want casuals stinking up the place, a purist would say yes please play this great game but within the confines of what the developer intended. The problem is that it's quite hard for purists to bring their arguments across when others automatically chalk them down as elitists. So in the end many purists just revert to saying get off my lawn rather than waste their time.

Purist or elitist whatever you feel DS gamers are, it doesn't mean that their own views and wants are any less than other gamers, and I don't see why one game which is catering to them should be watered down to suit others tastes, especially when their are plenty of other games to play.

Easy mode to many DS players is like EA wanting to put in capture the flag in Mirrors Edge 2 or co-op in Dead Space 3. PPl who like the originals react the same way, they aren't against co-op or capture the flag but don't want it in those 2 games because it goes against the original focus, to bring examples of other games which have co-op is mostly meaningless unless it's an exact clone, DS is unique to no direct comparisions can be applied.

If the Souls series hadn't been this big thing we wouldn't even be having this conversation, but the fact that it has proves that there is a sizable chunk of gamers who want this type of experience.

well i don't want to be at you "level" i'm comfortable at my own. i don't really care about your accomplishments and what you been through to achieve them nor do i care for some sort of "steet cred" for making it to the end.
as i said before easy difficulty not equals easy win. If done right it provides interesting game play with greater margin for errors.

See, the thing about Dark Souls is that, in terms of the combat itself, it's already a fairly easy game. Most trash mobs in the game can be killed in 1 or 2 hits without any risk of taking damage provided you know what their weaknesses are, and when it's safe to attack them. Pretty much the same thing can be said about the bosses too (although to a lesser extent), there are generally fairly simple procedures that can take them out, procedures that any old cack-handed player can perform easily enough provided they bother to give it a little practice.

The real difficulty in Dark Souls, the thing that separates Dark Souls from other games, is that it's very easy to die. Very easy. Just as pretty much all trash can be taken out quickly and easily if you know how, the trash also has the potential to take you out in short order too, if don't bother to work out how to prevent it. This means that when you're still learning a dungeon, meeting new types of enemies and bosses, it's pretty much an inevitability that you'll die. Not because you weren't quick enough on the trigger or failed to pull of that perfect combo you needed, but because you simply weren't prepared. This is the difficult part of the game, and it's also the part of the game that really shines. Once you've figured out how to kill an enemy or navigate your way through an area, that particular part of the game will be easy for you. You just have to figure it out.

I don't want an easy-mode in Dark Souls for the same reason i don't want Orwell or Huxley (if they were still alive) to paraphrase their books so a 12-year-old could read them. They'd just be gutting all the intricacy and depth out of their art and leaving it a hollow shell of what it once was, wasting time they could spend doing what they do well, that is, writing great novels, developing great games, using whatever tools they decide are necessary, be that complex vocabulary that makes it difficult to read for 12 year-olds, or difficulty that makes the game difficult to plow through on your first attempt without a moments thought.

Brave New World is great because of it's use of extremely clever and somewhat complicated (for want of a better word) vocabulary (amongst other reasons), Dark Souls is great because of it's use of difficulty (amongst other reasons). With the vocabulary of the average 12 year old, Brave New World would be nothing more than an average storybook, with a difficulty the average 12 year old could crack on their first run through without dying once, Dark Souls would be nothing more than an average RPG.

Not everything needs to be accessible for everyone.

Personally i'd be perfectly ok with an easy-mode, provided it comes in a completely separate game, is called something else and generally stays the fuck away from the game itself. If it comes as part of the Souls game itself, that means developers have had to account and balance the game itself for it to some extent, and that is the last thing i want.

Arina Love:
sniped

well i don't want to be at you "level" i'm comfortable at my own. i don't really care about your accomplishments and what you been through to achieve them nor do i care for some sort of "steet cred" for making it to the end.
as i said before easy difficulty not equals easy win. If done right it provides interesting game play with greater margin for errors.

Its fine if you dont want to raise yourself up to be a better player and beat Dark souls. Thats your choice. I also never said you had to care about my accomplishments, I still care and thats all that really matters.

However I disagree with you on a fundemnetal level. From the early days of gaming easy modes have been in our games and they have always been the mode that anyone can complete. In 27 years of gaming I do not recall a single game where easy mode enhanced the gameplay for me but I do have to admit that is subjective at best. I think this is just a case where we are going to have to agree to disagree.

However Im still a bit confused. Why do you want to play dark souls if you already know the difficulty level is one that you're uncomfortable with?

Windcaler:

Arina Love:
sniped

well i don't want to be at you "level" i'm comfortable at my own. i don't really care about your accomplishments and what you been through to achieve them nor do i care for some sort of "steet cred" for making it to the end.
as i said before easy difficulty not equals easy win. If done right it provides interesting game play with greater margin for errors.

Its fine if you dont want to raise yourself up to be a better player and beat Dark souls. Thats your choice. I also never said you had to care about my accomplishments, I still care and thats all that really matters.

However I disagree with you on a fundemnetal level. From the early days of gaming easy modes have been in our games and they have always been the mode that anyone can complete. In 27 years of gaming I do not recall a single game where easy mode enhanced the gameplay for me but I do have to admit that is subjective at best. I think this is just a case where we are going to have to agree to disagree.

However Im still a bit confused. Why do you want to play dark souls if you already know the difficulty level is one that you're uncomfortable with?

I want to play it because i played it at my friend's for about 2 hours and it was good concept and i liked gameplay but i didn't like the difficulty. So if they gonna patch in easier mode i will buy it.
Same as Catherine i really liked concept but i was not buying it because how hard was Japanese version before patches were introduced. After patches i bought it and was able to enjoy it immensely.

Arina Love:

Windcaler:

Arina Love:
sniped

well i don't want to be at you "level" i'm comfortable at my own. i don't really care about your accomplishments and what you been through to achieve them nor do i care for some sort of "steet cred" for making it to the end.
as i said before easy difficulty not equals easy win. If done right it provides interesting game play with greater margin for errors.

Its fine if you dont want to raise yourself up to be a better player and beat Dark souls. Thats your choice. I also never said you had to care about my accomplishments, I still care and thats all that really matters.

However I disagree with you on a fundemnetal level. From the early days of gaming easy modes have been in our games and they have always been the mode that anyone can complete. In 27 years of gaming I do not recall a single game where easy mode enhanced the gameplay for me but I do have to admit that is subjective at best. I think this is just a case where we are going to have to agree to disagree.

However Im still a bit confused. Why do you want to play dark souls if you already know the difficulty level is one that you're uncomfortable with?

I want to play it because i played it at my friend's for about 2 hours and it was good concept and i liked gameplay but i didn't like the difficulty. So if they gonna patch in easier mode i will buy it.
Same as Catherine i really liked concept but i was not buying it because how hard was Japanese version before patches were introduced. After patches i bought it and was able to enjoy it immensely.

Thats actually pretty common. A lot of people I know used to hate dark souls because it was so hard but most of them kept trying till they succeeded and now they love the game. I dont think easy mode is the answer for you, I think you just need to play it again and stick with it. Whether you do that or not is up to you though

RomanceIsDead:

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...

I agree. I'm one of them, always go for easy - although I must confess that after playing Dark Souls I'm feeling more adventurous and trying games on higher difficult settings.

But the problem is that Dark Souls is a different game in which to enjoy you must have an specific mindset, an easy or hard mode has nothing to do with it. To me asking for an easy mode for dark Souls sounds like someone asking for a mode in Diablo in which you get no loot. You are just removing one of the core concepts of the game which is integrate its difficulty with ingame elements and not confine easy or hard to a button.

And I obviously don't have the numbers, but I would risk to say that Dark Souls has a much higher level of completion. Once again, I don't finish most of my games (I actually dropped kingdoms of Amalur because I found it too safe, too by the numbers and boring), but I'm on my fourth complete run through Dark Souls.

What is important to understand is that we are talking about a game that it is everything but standard, you can't apply the same tired notions to everything in the market. If no game pushes the limits of our zone of comfort we will be actually promoting the lack of creativity and boldness.

Arina Love:

Easy mode will not hurt anybody, you will still have same hard experience but there will be expanded appeal of a game.

I guess we should really put things in perspective here. Nobody is getting hurt. If the game gets an easy mode or if the game continues to be as it is, life goes on.

You want the developer to put time and effort developing a mode for you. And believe me, a close to worthwhile easy mode to Dark Souls would require time and effort. That's selfish.

I want from soft to focus all their guns in improving what they already have. That's also selfish.

So we are tied here. Now let's see if you can come up with the other ten or so arguments that are also against an easy mode so we can match the discussion again.

As a matter a fact, forget that, letīs suppose that we remain tied in arguments, I would still stay on the side of the "no easy mode", simply because there's already a plethora of easy games on the market and just one Souls series. I will have to stick with the innovative, bold and uncompromising artistic view of Dark Souls.

Dark Souls being successful as it is is good for gaming in general. It might not be your cup of tea, but it proves that a game can be successful without having to complete the marketing check boxes.

Time for a recap!

Most people that favor an easy mode have the following arguments:
1. I don't like elitists gamers. I want an easy mode to aggravate them;
2. It won't change the game experience for people that want it tough;
3. It will expand the appeal of the game.

My take on the issues:
1. This is actually quite an honest reaction. Also, very personal. I have nothing to add here but I would like to remind that not everyone that plays the game is a snob elitist gamer.

2. This is a little maybe. Multiplayer would have to be separated and unless From changes the dynamics of the gameplay a little this could go backwards, with a lot of people simply hating the game, simply because there won't be a reason to do a lot of stuff in the game (secrets that are there to make the game easier). It will also divert resources and the end result as a whole could suffer.

3. It will broader the appeal of the game... Well, I don't know. If something go wrong and things can easily go wrong when you are out of your element (see Dark Souls PC port), From risks not gaining new fans AND losing the ones they already have. Specially because I think there is a twisted expectation of what this "easy mode " would be, because people defending the easy mode are actually just wanting to go through the content faster, since the game already provides numerous "easy routes".

Let me be pretty blunt here: there are not many things that are as easy as to defeat the gargoyles with two NPCs and an upgraded sword covered with resin.

Or summon a certain knight and a certain which and seat while they kill the bosses for you. Nothing is more easy than doing nothing.

Yes, some very few boss fights might be tricky, but by the time you get there you are already hopeless hooked.

I find all this discussion actually surreal because Dark Souls is simply not that difficult. I'm on easy mode on the new Tekken game and I cannot clear Arcade mode - that's how bad ass gamer I am.

An easy mode for Dark Souls would screw with the online part considerably. Someone playing through on easy mode would find it rather jarring when I show up with that "dodge this" aoe spell and my crystal spears.

Windcaler:

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.

And that's the problem right there. People are setting up this false dichotomy that it must either be "pure" or so simple my mom could play it.

That's a load of crap, and I hope most of the people setting that line up know it.

Zachary Amaranth:

Windcaler:

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.

And that's the problem right there. People are setting up this false dichotomy that it must either be "pure" or so simple my mom could play it.

That's a load of crap, and I hope most of the people setting that line up know it.

That is my definition of an easy mode and I think its accurate. You had your chance to define what an easy mode meant to you. You also had a chance to define what hand holding meant for you and when you didnt do either I called you out on it. You still havnt answered either question and you continue to post messages that are meant to inflame people who dont agree with you.

You have not added any intelligent counter points to this debate yet, all you've done is post inflammatory messages in an attempt to troll people who dont agree with you. I welcome intelligent and well thought out discussion from those who want an easy mode, dont want an easy mode, and are unsure of what they want. So if you want to add intelligent points of view to the discussion please do but your trolling isnt helping your side of the argument

Zachary Amaranth:

Windcaler:

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.

And that's the problem right there. People are setting up this false dichotomy that it must either be "pure" or so simple my mom could play it.

That's a load of crap, and I hope most of the people setting that line up know it.

My mom already could play it if she bothered to spend 20 minutes or so figuring out when to keep her shield up, when to dodge and when it's safe to open up when she meets a new enemy. Dark Souls really is not that difficult when you take your time with it. The reason people say it's difficult is because all the enemies are fairly varied and all the enemies have the potential to kill you if you aren't careful. Meaning you're probably going to die the first time you encounter a new boss/mob, often quite a number of times, meaning you can't just roflstomp your way through without paying attention, meaning there's an atmosphere to exploring and progressing through the game, knowing you could die at any minute if you take your eye off the ball.

Reduce the numbers on enemies (which is the only way i can see of making the game easier without changing it quite a lot) and you just break the game completely, the length of the game is balanced around the fact that you're going to die, often, if you never/rarely die the game is going to take no time at all, the combat style is based around the fact that you and your enemies are fairly evenly matched (in terms of raw numbers), if enemies are no longer a threat fighting them won't be fun anymore, and the exploration and depth of the game is based on gritting your teeth and pushing through the mobs that could kill you any moment because you might find a sweet weapon down this alleyway, or that bonfire you desperately need, or that vendor.. etc etc.

The game is built around it's difficulty level, the difficulty level is what makes the game good. Why the fuck do people want an easy-mode in full knowledge that an easy-mode is going to be crap? You're essentially asking for a crap-mode. You're demanding developers create a crap version of their game specifically for you.

Zachary Amaranth:

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.

And how is that?

Name me one Boss that is easily defeated by looking up the info, apart from Ceaseless Discharge.

Casual Shinji:

Zachary Amaranth:

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.

And how is that?

Name me one Boss that is easily defeated by looking up the info, apart from Ceaseless Discharge.

Most/all of them. If you want one particular example, I couldn't beat Capra Demon until I knew I could run up the stairs, hide in the corner and wait for him to fall off.
And let me continue.
Iron Golem is easily defeated by making him fall. You have to know he's going to fall.
A large part of the difficulty in the Bed of Chaos fight goes away if you know to quit and reload, if you know you can jump into it, and if you know you can use ranged attacks on the left orb.
Information is what kills Gaping Dragon - knowing when to attack and what to attack. There's no dodging or blocking in that fight - just running around and hitting.
Gwyn is weak to parries - know that, fight's much easier.
You can summon Beatrice for Moonlight Butterfly and she can easily solo it, you only have to chug potions now and then.
And so on. A lot of bosses just require you to know what to do.

But the entire game is built on the idea of information as a difficulty barrier. Your remark is very, very strange considering the online features and how deeply set they are within the game, how easily you can finish it on your 2nd playthrough, and the fact that there's ways to play the game that are incredibly easy... if only you knew about them. Invisible walls, mimics and loyd's talismans, backstabs, the Rusted Iron Ring and entire Asylum revisit etc etc. The actual combat difficulty can be figured out easily for normal enemies and all bosses telegraph their attacks very strongly.

Arina Love:

except sense of accomplishment is subjective and same scale don't really apply to everyone. i for one get same sense of accomplishment in every game i play be it easy or hard.

You may think you do, but I severely doubt it. Sense of accomplishment is proportional to amount of effort invested. If you don't have the patience to practice a game until you learn it, that's fine, but don't tell me you're just as happy when you successfully finish deriving a complex function as you are doing 2+2.

poiumty:

Casual Shinji:

Zachary Amaranth:

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

And how is that?

Name me one Boss that is easily defeated by looking up the info, apart from Ceaseless Discharge.

Most/all of them. If you want one particular example, I couldn't beat Capra Demon until I knew I could run up the stairs, hide in the corner and wait for him to fall off.
And let me continue.
Iron Golem is easily defeated by making him fall. You have to know he's going to fall.
A large part of the difficulty in the Bed of Chaos fight goes away if you know to quit and reload, if you know you can jump into it, and if you know you can use ranged attacks on the left orb.
Information is what kills Gaping Dragon - knowing when to attack and what to attack. There's no dodging or blocking in that fight - just running around and hitting.
Gwyn is weak to parries - know that, fight's much easier.
You can summon Beatrice for Moonlight Butterfly and she can easily solo it, you only have to chug potions now and then.
And so on. A lot of bosses just require you to know what to do.

Yes, you need to know what to do, but that doesn't immediately make it easy.

With the Capra Demon you still need to have the skill to avoid his attacks and his dogs in order to get to the stairs. With the Bed of Chaos you still need to time your jumping while fire and tentacles are flying around trying to knock you off, to get to the lower branch. And even then make sure you have enough fire protection so you don't get fried while making your way to his heart.

And parrying Gwyn? That's easier said then done.

You can also easily defeat Nito if you have the help from those two guards, but you'll have to defeat them yourself first. Knowing how to kill off the skeletons for good doesn't immediately make it easy, because you still have to get past them to get to those lantern guys.

None of this information makes enemies/Bosses do less damage, or increase your own attack power, simply by knowing it.

poiumty:

Arina Love:

except sense of accomplishment is subjective and same scale don't really apply to everyone. i for one get same sense of accomplishment in every game i play be it easy or hard.

You may think you do, but I severely doubt it. Sense of accomplishment is proportional to amount of effort invested. If you don't have the patience to practice a game until you learn it, that's fine, but don't tell me you're just as happy when you successfully finish deriving a complex function as you are doing 2+2.

If this is true then Dark Souls has a hell of a lot of "filler". The game is, what, 80 hours? Longer? And you say that the reward is in the observation of things, using surroundings, patience, etc.. but when you do figure out the key to defeating that enemy you still have to carry it out. What's the point? You know how to kill him and yet you have to dance around him with the controller, and do it every time you encounter him. This is what I call the "grind" and turns me off these kinds of games. If the intellectual rewards are so great, let me move on after mastering them, and not applying them hundreds of times in incredibly tedious ways to satisfy the demands of poor game design.

Casual Shinji:
Yes, you need to know what to do, but that doesn't immediately make it easy.

With the Capra Demon you still need to have the skill to avoid his attacks and his dogs in order to get to the stairs. With the Bed of Chaos you still need to time your jumping while fire and tentacles are flying around trying to knock you off, to get to the lower branch. And even then make sure you have enough fire protection so you don't get fried while making your way to his heart.

And parrying Gwyn? That's easier said then done.

You can also easily defeat Nito if you have the help from those two guards, but you'll have to defeat them yourself first. Knowing how to kill off the skeletons for good doesn't immediately make it easy, because you still have to get past them to get to those lantern guys.

None of this information makes enemies/Bosses do less damage, or increase your own attack power, simply by knowing it.

Oh yes it does make it easy. I would not have beaten Gaping Dragon in one try if I didn't check the wiki.
You don't need "skill" to avoid capra demon if you know which way to run (to his right, around and up the stairs) in the first seconds. That has nothing to do with reaction time, just knowledge.
I barely avoided any fire on Bed of Chaos, and I blocked all of its hand swings. No dodges. Yes you need to time the jump but the fight is undoubtedly easier. There's a route you can take from the first to second orb where you'll be safe from all attacks even as you're stationary trying to peg it with arrows. Chaos storm doesn't kill you with enough hp, chug a potion and you'll be fine.
Parrying Gwyn isn't inherently harder than any other monster, because the timing window is based on your shield and not his strikes. He does strike faster but that's hardly a matter of reaction time.
I don't know about Nito and the two guards. As for the skeletons, it avoids the entire gimmick the dungeon is based around.

Bosses doing less damage is irelevant - ultimately, you kill them in less tries. Knowledge skips past most of the learning phase, and most bosses will be killable the first time through if you watched someone do it or memorized how the boss attacks beforehand.
You don't have to 1shot the boss for the game to be easy - killing him in a single try much faster (because you can maximize your DPS time and know what he's weak to) also counts for making the game easier.

Sorry for the double post, but edits don't send notifications.

Blood Brain Barrier:

If this is true then Dark Souls has a hell of a lot of "filler". The game is, what, 80 hours? Longer? And you say that the reward is in the observation of things, using surroundings, patience, etc.. but when you do figure out the key to defeating that enemy you still have to carry it out. What's the point? You know how to kill him and yet you have to dance around him with the controller, and do it every time you encounter him. This is what I call the "grind" and turns me off these kinds of games. If the intellectual rewards are so great, let me move on after mastering them, and not applying them hundreds of times in incredibly tedious ways to satisfy the demands of poor game design.

The game isn't 80 hours of grind. In fact it's a pretty short game. People spend 80 hours on it because they're slow to learn or because they take their time to do things. Usually, you go through a level very slowly, checking for traps, secret areas, ambushes and so forth. Sometimes you die, and go back (which is faster because now you know where to go and what to expect). A second playthrough is less than half the duration of the first, because you know stuff - that's where the game's length comes from, not from the insane amount of time you spend in combat or whatever.

And I assure you, there's very little grind. Monsters are placed pretty rarely (an example: the dungeon Sen's Fortress has a grand total of ~15 monsters you really have to fight to finish it) and killing monsters over and over for drops is only if you've screwed something up - the game does have drops scattered around that you can find with a 100% probability, and with a little exploration they're most of what you need to upgrade your weapon. As for grinding for stats, there's really no need to. It is possible to finish the game at level 1.

poiumty:
Sorry for the double post, but edits don't send notifications.

Blood Brain Barrier:

If this is true then Dark Souls has a hell of a lot of "filler". The game is, what, 80 hours? Longer? And you say that the reward is in the observation of things, using surroundings, patience, etc.. but when you do figure out the key to defeating that enemy you still have to carry it out. What's the point? You know how to kill him and yet you have to dance around him with the controller, and do it every time you encounter him. This is what I call the "grind" and turns me off these kinds of games. If the intellectual rewards are so great, let me move on after mastering them, and not applying them hundreds of times in incredibly tedious ways to satisfy the demands of poor game design.

The game isn't 80 hours of grind. In fact it's a pretty short game. People spend 80 hours on it because they're slow to learn or because they take their time to do things. Usually, you go through a level very slowly, checking for traps, secret areas, ambushes and so forth. Sometimes you die, and go back (which is faster because now you know where to go and what to expect). A second playthrough is less than half the duration of the first, because you know stuff - that's where the game's length comes from, not from the insane amount of time you spend in combat or whatever.

And I assure you, there's very little grind. Monsters are placed pretty rarely (an example: the dungeon Sen's Fortress has a grand total of ~15 monsters you really have to fight to finish it) and killing monsters over and over for drops is only if you've screwed something up - the game does have drops scattered around that you can find with a 100% probability, and with a little exploration they're most of what you need to upgrade your weapon. As for grinding for stats, there's really no need to. It is possible to finish the game at level 1.

You must have a higher tolerance than me. The first big monster I came across in the dungeon with some sort of giant hammer, I realised I had to dodge and attack. But that tactic took off a tiny slice of health and the game expected me to do it about 20 times more to be able to kill him. Why? It was at that point I said 'f*ck this' and asked my friend if he had something less repetitive that I could play. Not because I'm lazy or impatient. Hell I play tedious, painfully hard adventure games most of the time because I enjoy it.

Blood Brain Barrier:

You must have a higher tolerance than me. The first big monster I came across in the dungeon with some sort of giant hammer, I realised I had to dodge and attack. But that tactic took off a tiny slice of health and the game expected me to do it about 20 times more to be able to kill him. Why? It was at that point I said 'f*ck this' and asked my friend if he had something less repetitive that I could play. Not because I'm lazy or impatient. Hell I play tedious, painfully hard adventure games most of the time because I enjoy it.

:)

If you read the sign on the ground you would have noticed you're supposed to run away. You can't beat him like that.

During the actual fight he starts with about 60% hp due to you plunging on his head, then dies in about 5-6 hits because you get a much better weapon.

There is no boss in the game whose health you have to whittle away like that. If that happens, something is wrong and you should check for it asap.

Apart from telling him where to go and the controls, I let my brother play Dark Souls saying how hard it was.

He's 10 BTW... The little git got all the way to the Taurus Demon without dying and it proceeded to smash him into the ground.

I was amazed and he rubbed it in my face :-(

It goes to show that with a bit of observation skills it's not a difficult game, it's just that modern day gamers are experiencing easier more hand holding gameplay a la COD series. They expect it to be easy and that's why Dark Souls punishes them for it.

I'm not calling out noobs or anything like that (it killed me a dozen times in a few hours) you just have to tap into a more old school way of thinking.

poiumty:

Blood Brain Barrier:

You must have a higher tolerance than me. The first big monster I came across in the dungeon with some sort of giant hammer, I realised I had to dodge and attack. But that tactic took off a tiny slice of health and the game expected me to do it about 20 times more to be able to kill him. Why? It was at that point I said 'f*ck this' and asked my friend if he had something less repetitive that I could play. Not because I'm lazy or impatient. Hell I play tedious, painfully hard adventure games most of the time because I enjoy it.

:)

If you read the sign on the ground you would have noticed you're supposed to run away. You can't beat him like that.

During the actual fight he starts with about 60% hp due to you plunging on his head, then dies in about 5-6 hits because you get a much better weapon.

There is no boss in the game whose health you have to whittle away like that. If that happens, something is wrong and you should check for it asap.

Welcome to the club. As I said on a few posts ago, I actually killed the bastard and gave up on the game, thinking that a monster with this much health was a terrible idea.

Then I realize I was the one to blame and came back to the game. Fourth playthrough and still having fun. I made a point to just watch videos from the areas I already cleared though.

I was playing the new tekken tag and thinking about this discussion. I actually gave up on the game because I cannot beat arcade mode on easy to watch the end movies.

I got frustrated because I really wasn't expecting that since I beat Tekken six all right just mashing buttons and learning a total of two moves per character.

That's how I like my fighting games: randomly mashing buttons to see something awesome happens with beautiful end movies.

Then I asked myself: do I really want that Tekken Tag 2 get an even easier mode?

And the answer is a resounding YES, I DO. So, I empathize with people wanting an easier Dark Souls.

BUT, and that's a big BUT, I also realize that I'm completely wrong, because as it is, Tekken is the kind of game that incentives the player to learn the moves (yeah, even noobs). Tekken Tag is not more difficult than DOA4 in easy mode, it just requires something that I'm not in the mood to do: take one character and learn a few of his moves (I want to play the whole roster). If I do that , I bet I can breeze through arcade with fewer restarts than in DOA 4.

That kind of game is necessary because it taps in another layer beyond instant gratification. It is nice that we have this option: more technical and also more flashy fighting games. It is good for the industry and it is good for us, gamers.

So, I... hm... will just have to wait for DOA 5.

poiumty:

Casual Shinji:

Zachary Amaranth:

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

And how is that?

Name me one Boss that is easily defeated by looking up the info, apart from Ceaseless Discharge.

Most/all of them. If you want one particular example, I couldn't beat Capra Demon until I knew I could run up the stairs, hide in the corner and wait for him to fall off.
And let me continue.
Iron Golem is easily defeated by making him fall. You have to know he's going to fall.
A large part of the difficulty in the Bed of Chaos fight goes away if you know to quit and reload, if you know you can jump into it, and if you know you can use ranged attacks on the left orb.
Information is what kills Gaping Dragon - knowing when to attack and what to attack. There's no dodging or blocking in that fight - just running around and hitting.
Gwyn is weak to parries - know that, fight's much easier.
You can summon Beatrice for Moonlight Butterfly and she can easily solo it, you only have to chug potions now and then.
And so on. A lot of bosses just require you to know what to do.

But the entire game is built on the idea of information as a difficulty barrier. Your remark is very, very strange considering the online features and how deeply set they are within the game, how easily you can finish it on your 2nd playthrough, and the fact that there's ways to play the game that are incredibly easy... if only you knew about them. Invisible walls, mimics and loyd's talismans, backstabs, the Rusted Iron Ring and entire Asylum revisit etc etc. The actual combat difficulty can be figured out easily for normal enemies and all bosses telegraph their attacks very strongly.

Arina Love:

except sense of accomplishment is subjective and same scale don't really apply to everyone. i for one get same sense of accomplishment in every game i play be it easy or hard.

You may think you do, but I severely doubt it. Sense of accomplishment is proportional to amount of effort invested. If you don't have the patience to practice a game until you learn it, that's fine, but don't tell me you're just as happy when you successfully finish deriving a complex function as you are doing 2+2.

in fact i will get even more satisfaction from easy things than from hard things filled with frustration. if i'm facing with complex function and solved it all i would think is "eff that and good riddance and i'm not going to do that again", no sense of accomplishment whatsoever only frustration.
So yeah in case you didn't know all people are different.

Arina Love:

Windcaler:

Arina Love:
sniped

well i don't want to be at you "level" i'm comfortable at my own. i don't really care about your accomplishments and what you been through to achieve them nor do i care for some sort of "steet cred" for making it to the end.
as i said before easy difficulty not equals easy win. If done right it provides interesting game play with greater margin for errors.

Its fine if you dont want to raise yourself up to be a better player and beat Dark souls. Thats your choice. I also never said you had to care about my accomplishments, I still care and thats all that really matters.

However I disagree with you on a fundemnetal level. From the early days of gaming easy modes have been in our games and they have always been the mode that anyone can complete. In 27 years of gaming I do not recall a single game where easy mode enhanced the gameplay for me but I do have to admit that is subjective at best. I think this is just a case where we are going to have to agree to disagree.

However Im still a bit confused. Why do you want to play dark souls if you already know the difficulty level is one that you're uncomfortable with?

I want to play it because i played it at my friend's for about 2 hours and it was good concept and i liked gameplay but i didn't like the difficulty. So if they gonna patch in easier mode i will buy it.
Same as Catherine i really liked concept but i was not buying it because how hard was Japanese version before patches were introduced. After patches i bought it and was able to enjoy it immensely.

But they DID patch Dark Souls and made it easier. They changed enemy mob placements, increased souls gained from killing bosses and enemies alike, increased item drops, nerfed a few aspects of PVP, reduced enemy agro, among other things.

zinho73:
I was playing the new tekken tag and thinking about this discussion. I actually gave up on the game because I cannot beat arcade mode on easy to watch the end movies.

I got frustrated because I really wasn't expecting that since I beat Tekken six all right just mashing buttons and learning a total of two moves per character.

That's how I like my fighting games: randomly mashing buttons to see something awesome happens with beautiful end movies.

Then I asked myself: do I really want that Tekken Tag 2 get an even easier mode?

And the answer is a resounding YES, I DO. So, I empathize with people wanting an easier Dark Souls.

BUT, and that's a big BUT, I also realize that I'm completely wrong, because as it is, Tekken is the kind of game that incentives the player to learn the moves (yeah, even noobs). Tekken Tag is not more difficult than DOA4 in easy mode, it just requires something that I'm not in the mood to do: take one character and learn a few of his moves (I want to play the whole roster). If I do that , I bet I can breeze through arcade with fewer restarts than in DOA 4.

That kind of game is necessary because it taps in another layer beyond instant gratification. It is nice that we have this option: more technical and also more flashy fighting games. It is good for the industry and it is good for us, gamers.

So, I... hm... will just have to wait for DOA 5.

This is why the play time for the best fighting games isn't measured in hours or days, it's measured in years. And I'd imagine that there will still be playing Dark Souls years from now too. You can't just put them on easy and blast through an unsatisfying play, or just button mash your way to victory against even half capable opponents and then get bored of the game. There is so much to be said for a rewarding engrossing experience that takes a little time, patience and dedication.

Alright, only really read the first thread of the page, so if someone made this example earlier, I apologize, but seriously though..

If you think all games should have an easy mode, would you also say that all movies should have a PG13 version? Should all literary works have the story retold in simpler language? Should all poetry come with explanations or interpretations of the work?

The difficulty and vagueness of Demons and Dark Souls is inherent to the experience. Video games has the potential to be the most immersive medium for creating experiences, atmosphere, setting moods and widen the players world view, morality and humanity, and everything a game-developer adds or keeps out of their creation are tools that fill very specific functions.

An argument that was made in the video linked earlier (argument made by someone else) was that, and I'm paraphrasing, "who are developers to tell gamers what's fun". What I'm saying is that more people need to understand that games _does not have to be fun_. A game can be so much more than the simple joy of viewing life bars shorten. If an average player isn't in to that, that's fine, stick to what you love and more power to you. But not every experience needs to be catered to you. Just take a look at Spec Ops: The Line, a game that has literally turned every other war game on it's head in an effort to comment on the average gamers lust for violence.
I'd explain it in my own words, but since Extra Credits has already made such an admirable job, I'll just link to their take instead:
http://penny-arcade.com/patv/episode/spec-ops-the-line-part-1
http://penny-arcade.com/patv/episode/spec-ops-the-line-part-2

The point is, while I still admire Dark Souls to be one of the best gaming experiences I've had, I wouldn't label it as a "fun" experience. Most of the time spent in the game I was scared shitless. But the sense of accomplishment, the sense of discovery while viewing the _VERY_ brutal design of the world and most importantly, the patience and caution I learned to employ to be able to view all that is _key_ to what makes dark souls great.

My 2 cents, anyway. Melt them down and spend them on 4 cents if you like.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5

Reply to Thread

This thread is locked