Namco Denies Dark Souls Difficulty Comment

[Andy Chalk]

Namco Denies Dark Souls Difficulty Comment

Dark Souls Director Hidetaka Miyazaki was apparently mistranslated when he speculated about adding an easier difficulty level to the game.

Dark Souls Game Director Hidetaka Miyazaki expressed disappointment last week that some people may avoid the game because of its notorious difficulty. "This fact is really sad to me and I am thinking about whether I should prepare another difficulty that everyone can complete or carefully send all gamers the messages behind our difficult games," he said [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/119407-Dark-Souls-Director-Considers-an-Easier-Option].

Except that according to Dark Souls publisher Namco Bandai, he didn't actually say that at all. The company contacted Metro, which conducted the original interview, claiming that there had been a "translation mistake" and that what he actually said was, "This fact 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."

Metro acknowledged that the interview translation had been rough in spots but said that the statement in question was "pretty unambiguous" and even went so far as to state, "We're not sure whether we believe it was a translation error" or just damage control in response to the outrage of Dark Souls fans appalled by the idea of letting the less-masochistically-inclined demographic in on the fun. It's not an entirely unreasonable proposition; following the interview, many ardent Dark Souls fans leapt onto forums to argue that the difficulty is what makes it fun, and that easing up on it would compromise the entire experience.

Source: Metro [http://www.metro.co.uk/tech/games/910855-miyazaki-backtracks-over-dark-souls-difficultly-level]


Permalink

 

[Rainboq]

What there could be is some easier starting dungeons that then curve up to the normal difficulty that let them loose in the preexisting locations. There, problem solved, game is still as difficult, and now more accessible.

 

[ResonanceGames]

Why would he lie about mistranslation? Sure it could be considered damage control in some cases. but this is the second game in the series. who the fuck would all of a sudden decide they want their game to be easier after years of development?

EDIT: Development and consistency.

Not to mention the King's Field games, which weren't exactly cakewalks.

You remove the difficulty and the Souls games would lose their power. They fill a very important niche and I'm glad there's no danger of them taking a different route in the future.

 

[Trishbot]

I still have no idea why some fans are so upset at the very OPTION of an OPTIONAL easier difficulty for the people who want it. How does that "take away" anything if you can simply ignore it altogether?

Some fans are stupid.

Captcha: No brainer

 

[Twilight_guy]

There was a controversy over this? Gamers, getting upset because the developers might be adding a difficulty slider! Oh noes, people who have less 'skillz' then you can complete the game too and your cherished pathetic achievement of beating the game becomes less exclusive. Oh noes!

I think he should stick by his statement if it wasn't a mistranslation and not let the PR department appease the pettiest of fans but I can understand their actions and their desire to please their fans by keeping to their... urm... ideals.

 

[kortin]

Is he implying that these games are hard enough to warrant an additional easier difficulty?

 

[Falterfire]

I am always slightly confused by people who claim a lower difficulty somehow lessens the higher difficulties. If anything, adding lower difficulties gives devs more leeway to make the higher difficulties even harder.

See also: The people complaining that your character will have the ability to Respec in Torchlight 2. Because games are srsbsns ya'll, and if you even THINK about starting without first writing a doctoral thesis on the best build, you DESERVE your fate.

 

[gigastar]

So hes not implicating that he wants to tone down the difficulty of the game, but rather that he wants to find a way to entice players to finish the game without touching down the difficulty...

Given what we know about FROM and thier previous association with Atlus, the former is the more probable translation.

if the game is too hard you know who to call for

PRAISE THE SUN!

 

[ResonanceGames]

There was a controversy over this? Gamers, getting upset because the developers might be adding a difficulty slider! Oh noes, people who have less 'skillz' then you can complete the game too and your cherished pathetic achievement of beating the game becomes less exclusive. Oh noes!

I think he should stick by his statement if it wasn't a mistranslation and not let the PR department appease the pettiest of fans but I can understand their actions and their desire to please their fans by keeping to their... urm... ideals.

Whoa there, big straw man guy.

You obviously didn't play the game. It is entirely designed around its difficulty. What you're saying is the equivalent of "we should add the option to remove jumping from Mario because that would make it more accessible."

There was a very legitimate concern that adding an easy difficulty would lure most players over to it and give them a crappy experience that damaged the franchise. There's no fun to be had in an "easy" version of these games, just disappointment. Without the difficulty you'd be left with a middling 3rd person combat game with a decent story and atmosphere.

 

[The White Hunter]

Ehh but Dark Souls isn't THAT hard anyway if you ask me :z

Punishing would be a better way to define it, it's challenging and doesn't forgive mistakes and carelessness. It's hardly like it just kills you for shits and giggles like some older games used to. It's just challenging to force you into being a better player.

Besides, if you have that much trouble with it, you can always grind a bit and improve your stats and gear like any other RPG.

Except Skyrim. Where Orc + Warhammer + Hitting first = Victory.

 

[The White Hunter]

There was a controversy over this? Gamers, getting upset because the developers might be adding a difficulty slider! Oh noes, people who have less 'skillz' then you can complete the game too and your cherished pathetic achievement of beating the game becomes less exclusive. Oh noes!

I think he should stick by his statement if it wasn't a mistranslation and not let the PR department appease the pettiest of fans but I can understand their actions and their desire to please their fans by keeping to their... urm... ideals.

Whoa there, big straw man guy.

You obviously didn't play the game. It is entirely designed around its difficulty. What you're saying is the equivalent of "we should add the option to remove jumping from Mario because that would make it more accessible."

There was a very legitimate concern that adding an easy difficulty would lure most players over to it and give them a crappy experience that damaged the franchise. There's no fun to be had in an "easy" version of these games, just disappointment. Without the difficulty you'd be left with a middling 3rd person combat game with a decent story and atmosphere.

Yeah without the constant omnipresent fear of something several times your height suddenly crushing you beneath it's mighty boot for having the audacity to smack it's pitiful minions about the game would be a lot less satisfying.

Nothing like beating a challenging stage only to find that there's a shit ton more of it to do. And that the boss you just killed was only a baby compared to the one a few rooms away.

 

[rbstewart7263]

My god you would still have to give the "easys" and the "normies" separate servers and that costs money.

Otherwise you compromise the multiplayer i dont want lowly peasant easy difficulty people invading my game.

captha: souffle girl

Yes Ill take both. lol

 

[kyogen]

Good. I hated the idea of a difficulty slider even though I am not a good Dark Souls player. The game is very well designed, and various patches have tweaked its balance already. Impatient gamers wouldn't like the game in the long run in any case; the dark atmosphere and minimalist narrative presentation would ultimately bore them.

 

[BoogieManFL]

What about this game is difficult? I've never played it.

Difficulty is something that requires a careful touch. Too easy and it's no fun, too hard and it's frustrating.

In my opinion it's exceedingly rare when difficulty levels are done correctly. Most either make your opponent outright cheat, or simply gimps/undertunes the player or buffs enemies. Neither of those are fun to me.

When I think of games that do "hard" in a good way (for the most part) I think of Baldur's Gate 2, Castlevania Lords of Shadow, and Dwarf Fortress. Maybe Mount and Blade: Warband, but a little less so.

And games that do it in a bad way - Civ 5, Company of Heroes(almost works but the cheating is too visible when you know the game well) many/most MMO raid bosses.

 

[ResonanceGames]

What about this game is difficult? I've never played it.

Difficulty is something that requires a careful touch. Too easy and it's no fun, too hard and it's frustrating.

The game is designed with a very specific and very difficult challenge curve in mind. You can only save at specific places, and saving respawns the surrounding enemies (as does dying).

Dying also removes all of your souls, which basically act as both you currency and experience points. You can get these back only if you can make it back to the place where you died last.

In addition to that, encounters are designed to provide a wide array of challenges that force the player to pay attention and use trial and error to come up with a winning strategy. So often, you'll find an encounter where there are enemies on your level with swords and enemies above with ranged weapons, and getting past the scenario is as much a puzzle as it is a combat situation. This extends to the boss fights where you often have to be particularly creative and cautious to win.

Also, the combat itself is really tough. It's very possible to be killed by a low-level grunt if you're sloppy.

Since the difficulty is hardwired into the design so much, changing that would pretty much make it an entirely different game. You'd lose the need for strategy, and the combat is tuned in such a way that it wouldn't be fun without the constant threat of death.

 

[Phlakes]

You obviously didn't play the game. It is entirely designed around its difficulty. What you're saying is the equivalent of "we should add the option to remove jumping from Mario because that would make it more accessible."

There was a very legitimate concern that adding an easy difficulty would lure most players over to it and give them a crappy experience that damaged the franchise. There's no fun to be had in an "easy" version of these games, just disappointment. Without the difficulty you'd be left with a middling 3rd person combat game with a decent story and atmosphere.

No.

Just no.

Dark Souls doesn't need to be difficult. It's a huge part of the experience, yeah, but it would still be a functional game if it was easier.

Options don't damage franchises. That's ridiculous. Really. If someone wants to play Dark Souls but doesn't want soul crushing difficulty, then let them play Dark Souls without soul crushing difficulty, and you can keep playing it the way you want to.

 

[ResonanceGames]

You obviously didn't play the game. It is entirely designed around its difficulty. What you're saying is the equivalent of "we should add the option to remove jumping from Mario because that would make it more accessible."

There was a very legitimate concern that adding an easy difficulty would lure most players over to it and give them a crappy experience that damaged the franchise. There's no fun to be had in an "easy" version of these games, just disappointment. Without the difficulty you'd be left with a middling 3rd person combat game with a decent story and atmosphere.

No.

Just no.

Dark Souls doesn't need to be difficult. It's a huge part of the experience, yeah, but it would still be a functional game if it was easier.

Options don't damage franchises. That's ridiculous. Really. If someone wants to play Dark Souls but doesn't want soul crushing difficulty, then let them play Dark Souls without soul crushing difficulty, and you can keep playing it the way you want to.

Read what I just posted.

Functional? Yeah, obviously. Fun? Good? Relevant? No.

Usually difficulty options are a good thing. In this rare and specific case, they are not.