Dark Souls II Director: Accessible Does Not Mean Easy

[Earnest Cavalli]

Dark Souls II Director: Accessible Does Not Mean Easy

Dark Souls II is more accessible than its predecessors, but it is by no means an easy game, claims director Yui Tanimura.

The Demon's Souls/Dark Souls franchise has long been praised for being utterly, soul-crushingly difficult. The game seems to delight in crushing players' hopes, and it's this unerring commitment to old school-style difficulty that has won the series a rabidly dedicated fanbase.

Still, the series has always been confounding to newcomers, and many are turned off by its insistence on forcing players to figure out most things out for themselves. With the upcoming Dark Souls II however, director Yui Tanimura promises a more accessible game which has left many fans worried that the series' trademark difficulty might be reduced for the imminent sequel. That's simply not the case, Tanimura claims.

"The reason why we used the word accessible was not to say that the game is going to be easier by any means," Tanimura tells Game Informer in a recent interview. "We're maintaining the difficulty and we think the challenges are required."

"What we meant was, there are certain aspects of the game where it didn't really have a direct connection to the sense of satisfaction of overcoming. There were things that were a little bit time consuming or a little bit tedious that we wanted to streamline - sort of carve away all the fat so we could really deliver the lean pure expression of what Dark Souls tries to communicate, which is the sense of satisfaction of overcoming."

"In terms of accessibility, what we meant was a more streamlined experience to deliver the more pure essence of Dark Souls," Tanimura adds.

Normally when developers attempt to reiterate their earlier comments to reassure fans, it comes off as pandering, but in this case I think Tanimura earns the benefit our collective doubt. He's absolutely right about Dark Souls being focused on giving players seemingly insurmountable goals which offer a huge burst of satisfaction on completion, and as long as Dark Souls II continues that trend we shouldn't have anything to worry about. Making the game more readily accessible to players should be seen as a positive, as it could potentially attract even more fans to the series who would otherwise give it a pass.

We'll reserve final judgement until such a time as we can sit down for a few dozen hours with Dark Souls II, but Tanimura seems to know what he's doing. Don't worry boys and girls, your frustratingly difficult, highly anticipated sequel is probably going to be just fine.

Source: Game Informer [http://www.gameinformer.com/games/dark_souls_ii/b/ps3/archive/2013/06/24/dark-souls-ii-39-s-new-director-talks-accessibility-and-has-never-broken-a-controller-in-frustration.aspx]

Permalink

 

[LysanderNemoinis]

I, for one, am happy about this. I'm the first to cry foul when a developer dumbs down their game down to be more "accessible," but the ability for me to play Dark Souls II is a welcome one. Because I honestly suck at these games, and they frustrate me to the point that despite renting both and liking them...until I play it, an easier difficulty or a more gradual learning curve sounds good to me. I still want the game to be as soul-crushingly hard for the fans as the previous games our, but an optional difficulty mode or something would be great.

 

[ClockworkUniverse]

Ah, it sounds like they probably just mean stuff like actually telling you what stats do that the first two games were legitimately really bad at. I'd be all for that.

 

[Fractral]

So they might actually bother to explain what poise is this time? It took me ~20 hours of gameplay to work out the connection it had to how my character suddenly wasn't instantly stunlocked when I put on silver knight armor. Still, good news. I'll probably pick this one up around launch date provided the PC port isn't a pile of shit.

 

[Falterfire]

Best of luck to him conveying this to the fans. If I've learned anything from dealing with fans in other games, it's that every kind of difficulty is held sacred by a certain segment of the fanbase. If you had a game where you had to click through eight menus to do a basic attack, some fans would still complain the sequel was making the game too easy and dumbing it down for the masses if they cut it down to one menu instead.

 

[Tanakh]

"The reason why we used the word accessible was not to say that the game is going to be easier by any means," Tanimura tells Game Informer in a recent interview. "We're maintaining the difficulty and we think the challenges are required."

"What we meant was, there are certain aspects of the game where it didn't really have a direct connection to the sense of satisfaction of overcoming. There were things that were a little bit time consuming or a little bit tedious that we wanted to streamline - sort of carve away all the fat so we could really deliver the lean pure expression of what Dark Souls tries to communicate, which is the sense of satisfaction of overcoming."

"In terms of accessibility, what we meant was a more streamlined experience to deliver the more pure essence of Dark Souls," Tanimura adds.

Sounds terrible, and I was really looking forward this, not being disappointed by previous statements. Good intentions and an impressively bad idea, anyone with sense of game design will tell you the little bits that were time consuming and mild are necessary in a game like Dark Souls.

Since he is using a fat/muscle example, I would say he has an amazing marbled Wagyu steak and is craving the fat with a knife before cooking it, I for one are prepared to be disappointed by an insipid, small, boring meal.

 

[RedEyesBlackGamer]

"The reason why we used the word accessible was not to say that the game is going to be easier by any means," Tanimura tells Game Informer in a recent interview. "We're maintaining the difficulty and we think the challenges are required."

"What we meant was, there are certain aspects of the game where it didn't really have a direct connection to the sense of satisfaction of overcoming. There were things that were a little bit time consuming or a little bit tedious that we wanted to streamline - sort of carve away all the fat so we could really deliver the lean pure expression of what Dark Souls tries to communicate, which is the sense of satisfaction of overcoming."

"In terms of accessibility, what we meant was a more streamlined experience to deliver the more pure essence of Dark Souls," Tanimura adds.

Sounds terrible, and I was really looking forward this, not being disappointed by previous statements. Good intentions and an impressively bad idea, anyone with sense of game design will tell you the little bits that were time consuming and mild are necessary in a game like Dark Souls.

Since he is using a fat/muscle example, I would say he has an amazing marbled Wagyu steak and is craving the fat with a knife before cooking it, I for one are prepared to be disappointed by an insipid, small, boring meal.

Really, they don't need to streamline anything. Just having a proper explanation for things like poise, attunement, and the exact benefits of humanity would solve the confusion. The game didn't have fat to cut off, it had mechanics that are never explained in-game.

 

[bartholen_v1legacy]

Hope they make a decent PC version this time. I really want to play these games, but I don't particularly enjoy having an hour of game progress being made pointless when some dickhead surprise skeleton stunlocks me and hurls me off a cliff.

 

[DTWolfwood]

I guess asking for them to get rid of the input lag would a no eh? :/

 

[gigastar]

I still remember all those threads we had on our forums about how Dark Souls was not hard and was badly designed. And all those advice threads at around the same time too.

Hope we get a second round of the latter kind of thread.

 

[Tanakh]

I guess asking for them to get rid of the input lag would a no eh? :/

That would be nice, no input lag and a multiplayer system not build around shit are the two things I want.

Thought to be fair you have plenty of frames to react to almost all, so the input lag was manageable, and the co-op system made sense in a world covered in fog and confusion.

Really, they don't need to streamline anything. Just having a proper explanation for things like poise, attunement, and the exact benefits of humanity would solve the confusion. The game didn't have fat to cut off, it had mechanics that are never explained in-game.

I was fine with the explanations given, but I guess an in game codex or even a more explicit tutorial that forces you to use the combat mechanics would make sense (i would feel in kindergarten again, but so be it). The problem is that what he said can't be read as that AT FREAKING ALL, i am surprised posters got that vibe from "There were things that were a little bit time consuming or a little bit tedious that we wanted to streamline", that sounds like less grinding/more savepoints, or less mob density, or fixed drops, literally can't see how it can read as more explanations.

 

[RedEyesBlackGamer]

I guess asking for them to get rid of the input lag would a no eh? :/

That would be nice, no input lag and a multiplayer system not build around shit are the two things I want.

Thought to be fair you have plenty of frames to react to almost all, so the input lag was manageable, and the co-op system made sense in a world covered in fog and confusion.

Really, they don't need to streamline anything. Just having a proper explanation for things like poise, attunement, and the exact benefits of humanity would solve the confusion. The game didn't have fat to cut off, it had mechanics that are never explained in-game.

I was fine with the explanations given, but I guess an in game codex or even a more explicit tutorial that forces you to use the combat mechanics would make sense (i would feel in kindergarten again, but so be it). The problem is that what he said can't be read as that AT FREAKING ALL, i am surprised posters got that vibe from "There were things that were a little bit time consuming or a little bit tedious that we wanted to streamline", that sounds like less grinding/more savepoints, or less mob density, or fixed drops, literally can't see how it can read as more explanations.

I was just disagreeing with him. That wasn't my interpretation of his comments.

 

[TiberiusEsuriens]

All Dark Souls 1 needed to be more accessible was to actually describe in menus what things did. What are the clear base stats? What do they do? What is weapon speed? What are damage types? How do they fit together? The games give you bits and pieces of these things, but no clear picture. The problem I have with RPGs and these hybrid action games isn't the soul crushing difficulty, but character creation/building. Some do it well, others not so much.

If I have to stop playing and use the internet just to start the game (wiki/character creation) then I think that's a clear indicator of inaccessibility, and fixing that would in no way affect the actually gameplay. Make it easy to learn, impossible to master. If mechanics are needlessly hard to understand, we aren't really fighting the monsters in the game, we're fighting the game designers.

 

[Tanakh]

I was just disagreeing with him. That wasn't my interpretation of his comments.

Yeah, I know. Didn't meant that you said those things, just quoted because I was answering to you.

Still, I am not clear we need as much info as some people want (again, not you). I remember having a hard time the first time around, then after reading the mechanics my second run was a joke, so easy when min/maxing properly it was too boring and quitted that toon.

 

[cikame]

But can i connect with my friend who is a hardened Dark Souls veteran, to help and guide me through the game having fun times along the way?

I honestly don't mind attacking a hard game, just don't force me get trolled by strangers in a game which is clearly better played online, except you can't even talk to your flipping friends in xbox party chat when you are.

 

[RedEyesBlackGamer]

All Dark Souls 1 needed to be more accessible was to actually describe in menus what things did. What are the clear base stats? What do they do? What is weapon speed? What are damage types? How do they fit together? The games give you bits and pieces of these things, but no clear picture. The problem I have with RPGs and these hybrid action games isn't the soul crushing difficulty, but character creation/building. Some do it well, others not so much.

If I have to stop playing and use the internet just to start the game (wiki/character creation) then I think that's a clear indicator of inaccessibility, and fixing that would in no way affect the actually gameplay. Make it easy to learn, impossible to master. If mechanics are needlessly hard to understand, we aren't really fighting the monsters in the game, we're fighting the game designers.

Yes because pressing start bringing up the status page then pressing back/select is way too hard for most gamers.....This will be a watered down pile of shit if they cater to the modern day gamer who can't even be bothered to read what is on the screen. Maybe they should of put a two hour long tutorial in there and held everyone's hand all the way through the game with hints at all times. Such as (press Rb to attack) (use b to run) (read the fucking manual) (use souls to level up) (don't be a pleb and only boost str at the start). Yeah makes the game so much better or much more annoying?

It is my favorite game of this generation, but it could be real freaking obtuse at times.

 

[Robyrt]

Tanimura is absolutely right, and his statement makes me glad to hear that the new director understands what really matters in Dark Souls.

If you seriously think that a game can only be satisfyingly difficult if they never tell you how to jump or slide down ladders, or expect you to read the wiki in order to experience their heart-wrenching side quests or their fancy new multiplayer features, you don't know anything about modern game design. What's the difference between a direct hit, a critical hit and a counter hit? All of these systems exist in Dark Souls, and none of them appear in the in-game help or the manual, just in cryptic hints in item descriptions.

Or take an easier example. The Internet is full of smart, seasoned gamers like Day[9] who missed the equip burden/poise system. This is the single most relevant information about your armor, yet it does not appear on the main item comparison screen or really anywhere except the impenetrable stat dump on the Status tab. Surprise! You are stuck not being able to run or roll, and you have no idea why, or how much armor you can wear safely. I hope you like using Google on your smart phone, because you'll never figure it out otherwise!

 

[WWmelb]

I'm just going to have faith that they will do the right thing with DS2. From have given me no reason not to trust them, DS2 will be a day 1 puchase, probably on PS3/4 and PC.

They have earned my trust, but if they break or squander that trust now, then i will re-evaluate them as a must have dev.

Their comments have worried me about the games direction, however, they are the creators, it is their property and they will do what they think is best.

If i wind up not liking it as much, well, it happens. I'm not going to go on a rant possibly a year before the games release saying it will be shit without having played it.

I mean, for one, the gameplay LOOKS amazing, and LOOKS like dark souls, and that's all we have to go off at the moment. And that is a good start.