Dark Souls II Director Apologizes For Calling Game "Accessible"

[DarklordKyo]

Y'know, the sad thing about this is that accessibility doesn't necessarily mean easier. Dark Souls was more accessible than Demon's Souls by default due to having more check points, doesn't mean that Dark Souls isn't balls hard like it's spiritual predecessor.

I guess you could say it might've been...

[a href=http://cow.org/csi/]Lost in Translation[/a]

Good to know, but I personally want to know how much effort they will be putting into the PC Port, even if the game was easier, the universe still seems interesting enough to me that I might get myself into the series some day.

Didn't they say that the PC release of Dark Souls2 is the base version?, and that the console versions are the ports?

Edit: For anyone who read this previously, I meant Dark Souls 2, I know that the PC release of Dark Souls was crap.

 

[Candidus]

You can stop [sic]'ing the correct English spellings now.

I'm still not convinced that the game hasn't been violated in the name of accessibility. One of their stated plans was to make it so that you could no longer (by design or by mistake) take the areas of the game in whatever order you want anymore.

Just for a start, that'd be pretty shit.

 

[Sigmund Av Volsung]

Y'know, the sad thing about this is that accessibility doesn't necessarily mean easier. Dark Souls was more accessible than Demon's Souls by default due to having more check points, doesn't mean that Dark Souls isn't balls hard like it's spiritual predecessor.

I guess you could say it might've been...

[a href=http://cow.org/csi/]Lost in Translation[/a]

Good to know, but I personally want to know how much effort they will be putting into the PC Port, even if the game was easier, the universe still seems interesting enough to me that I might get myself into the series some day.

Didn't they say that the PC release of Dark Souls is the base version?, and that the console versions are the ports?

As far as I know, the PC version is horrendous, and mostly unplayable without DSfix, whereas the console versions are decent.

They can say anything they want but it doesn't change how crap the port is, when I played my friend's copy (even after DSfix) on his PC it was still one of the worse PC ports I had ever seen.

 

[Church185]

You can stop [sic]'ing the correct English spellings now.

I'm still not convinced that the game hasn't been violated in the name of accessibility. One of their stated plans was to make it so that you could no longer (by design or by mistake) take the areas of the game in whatever order you want anymore.

Just for a start, that'd be pretty shit.

I'm pretty sure that's incorrect [http://www.digitalspy.com/gaming/news/a496115/dark-souls-2-to-offer-more-freedom-can-start-halfway-if-brave-enough.html]. In fact, I'm not sure why he is apologizing now, because this was all clarified [http://www.vg247.com/2013/07/04/dark-souls-2-accessible-my-bleeding-aunt/] months [http://www.gamespot.com/articles/dark-souls-ii-director-explains-accessibility/1100-6410673/] ago [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].

 

[Church185]

As far as I know, the PC version is horrendous, and mostly unplayable without DSfix, whereas the console versions are decent.

They can say anything they want but it doesn't change how crap the port is, when I played my friend's copy (even after DSfix) on his PC it was still one of the worse PC ports I had ever seen.

He was talking about Dark Souls II. It has been confirmed [http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2013/04/19/pc-version-of-dark-souls-ii-aint-no-port/] that the game is being built for the PC and ported to consoles. This is in response to how bad the PC port of Dark Souls was.

 

[Sigmund Av Volsung]

As far as I know, the PC version is horrendous, and mostly unplayable without DSfix, whereas the console versions are decent.

They can say anything they want but it doesn't change how crap the port is, when I played my friend's copy (even after DSfix) on his PC it was still one of the worse PC ports I had ever seen.

He was talking about Dark Souls II. It has been confirmed [http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2013/04/19/pc-version-of-dark-souls-ii-aint-no-port/] that the game is being built for the PC and ported to consoles. This is in response to how bad the PC port of Dark Souls was.

Ah, that explains things then.

Yeah, they'd better not fuck it up.

I'M WATCHING YOU FROM SOFTWARE.

Spoiler

 

[DarklordKyo]

Y'know, the sad thing about this is that accessibility doesn't necessarily mean easier. Dark Souls was more accessible than Demon's Souls by default due to having more check points, doesn't mean that Dark Souls isn't balls hard like it's spiritual predecessor.

I guess you could say it might've been...

[a href=http://cow.org/csi/]Lost in Translation[/a]

Good to know, but I personally want to know how much effort they will be putting into the PC Port, even if the game was easier, the universe still seems interesting enough to me that I might get myself into the series some day.

Didn't they say that the PC release of Dark Souls is the base version?, and that the console versions are the ports?

As far as I know, the PC version is horrendous, and mostly unplayable without DSfix, whereas the console versions are decent.

They can say anything they want but it doesn't change how crap the port is, when I played my friend's copy (even after DSfix) on his PC it was still one of the worse PC ports I had ever seen.

I meant Dark Souls 2, it was a typo.

 

[SecondPrize]

Dark Souls needed a little bit of accessibility here and there and rabid fans need a dictionary.

 

[Clovus]

snip

I disagree, I think the game gives you enough information to get by. Most people just don't bother looking for it, and then complain that it wasn't handed to them (not necessarily you).

I enjoyed the game. You really don't understand where this guy is coming from though? Sure, there were some tooltips and, yes, you could see the changes the stats made. But how could you then take that small amount of info and determine the correct combo of stats, the items you'd need, which item to upgrade, etc. to end up with a good build? I spent an insane amount of time comparing weapons and upgrades using the wiki.

Game just feels like a more modern Legend of Zelda to me. Dumped in the game with no clue where to go, so exploration and experimentation are the name of the game. I will admit that the online portion of the game definitely could have been explained better though, but it wasn't necessary to complete the game.

No one here is complaining about not knowing where to go. The complaint is just that the RPG system is badly explained. I guess I'm just dumb and impatient though, right? I mean, I can handle the complexities of Crusader Kings, or learn to play Dwarf Fortress well, but I guess I'm a big, dumb impatient baby because I went ahead and looked up stuff up in the wiki to figure out how to upgrade my equipment in a way that didn't totally waste the hard to find (or time-consuming grind for) ingredients?

I don't know, in the end there's definitely a group of people who want to take the time to find out all the numbers in the wiki by playing the game over and over. I just don't want to waste time (I play way too many games to sink that much time into one). I'll don't mind fighting the same boss over and over again (as long as it doesn't take a tricky 15 minute trek to get to them each time like that dragon in the ice area) until I figure out his patterns and stuff. I don't mind running around lost. I just hate knowing that I wasted hours on a weapon that really wasn't all that great because I wasn't sure how it's stats would change when I upgraded it.

In the end though, you get the game you want and I can still read the wiki to get over my problems. If I get the game I want, you don't get what you want and there's not way to fix that.

 

[Church185]

Spoiler

I enjoyed the game. You really don't understand where this guy is coming from though? Sure, there were some tooltips and, yes, you could see the changes the stats made. But how could you then take that small amount of info and determine the correct combo of stats, the items you'd need, which item to upgrade, etc. to end up with a good build? I spent an insane amount of time comparing weapons and upgrades using the wiki.

No one here is complaining about not knowing where to go. The complaint is just that the RPG system is badly explained. I guess I'm just dumb and impatient though, right? I mean, I can handle the complexities of Crusader Kings, or learn to play Dwarf Fortress well, but I guess I'm a big, dumb impatient baby because I went ahead and looked up stuff up in the wiki to figure out how to upgrade my equipment in a way that didn't totally waste the hard to find (or time-consuming grind for) ingredients?

I don't know, in the end there's definitely a group of people who want to take the time to find out all the numbers in the wiki by playing the game over and over. I just don't want to waste time (I play way too many games to sink that much time into one). I'll don't mind fighting the same boss over and over again (as long as it doesn't take a tricky 15 minute trek to get to them each time like that dragon in the ice area) until I figure out his patterns and stuff. I don't mind running around lost. I just hate knowing that I wasted hours on a weapon that really wasn't all that great because I wasn't sure how it's stats would change when I upgraded it.

In the end though, you get the game you want and I can still read the wiki to get over my problems. If I get the game I want, you don't get what you want and there's not way to fix that.

I think you may be arguing with a straw man here. I never said there was anything wrong with looking at a guide. I simply said there is enough information in the game to get by. No other RPG goes out of it's way to tell you were the best gear or weapons are. On the topic of weapons, there is no strict "best weapon". It is best to find something you like the moveset of and upgrade that to suit your stats. Any weapon can be forged to suit any build. There is no "correct" combo of stats that you will need.

 

[Something Amyss]

"In an effort to reach out to our hard-core fans we have implemented a controller made of razor-blades so that only the truly dedicated are able to even play Dark Souls 2."

Also, we have arranged for a developer to kick you in the groin on every death. They planned to make it optional, but hte fans were annoyed that someone might not get the true experience.

 

[major_chaos]

The fact that he seriously needed to apologize for calling the game *GASP* accessible kinda reinforces my negative opinion of hardcore Souls fans. I understand the desire for challenge (64 hours in dark souls) but the obsession with having the game be as obtuse and unhelpful as possible doesn't make sense to me. Nor does the instance that failure be "punished". I'm OK with the game killing you for making mistakes, but I have seen people argue that the path between a boss and a bondfire needs to be as long and arduous as possible to "punish" or "penalize" you for failing to win the first time, and that just strikes me as a bizarre level of self-flagellation.

 

[Church185]

Also, we have arranged for a developer to kick you in the groin on every death. They planned to make it optional, but hte fans were annoyed that someone might not get the true experience.

So do you get your own personal dev or do you have to share? Is Miyazaki going to keep count and kick me once for every death when he shows up at my house?

 

[AzrealMaximillion]

He shouldn't need to apologize to a bunch of fandom based rage when the game hasn't been played in its entirety by people yet.

 

[Zeriah]

I loved Dark Souls, the only problems I had with it were a few UI ones:

I'd like to be able to see stat comparisons of weapons and armor to what you have equipped at shops.
I'd like to be able to see what the stats of an item are when upgraded (very difficult to tell if a new item will be better than your upgraded equipment when it is still level 1).
I'd like the Covenants to be expanded upon in both explanation and effect. I played through almost all of my first play through simply joining the next covenant I came across, never really knowing what they actually did. Even after knowing what they did, I really just leveled the Chaos one for the Pyromancies.

There's probably a lot more of these kind of problems, so hopefully changes to these are what they are referring to.

 

[Sarge034]

I think they are taking it too far. There is a difference between making the game hard and not holding your hand and what they choose to do. I literally spent 2.5 hours in Dark Souls trying to figure out how to parry with the shit information they give you. They put in a full stat enemy to practice with so if you didn't do it right you got fucked up. I still have yet to successfully parry. The upgrading system needs more information displayed. As it is the only way to know if a level 1 weapon will be better than an upgraded weapon you have is to spend resources to blindly upgrade it, or look online. These are the same problems I have with Minecraft.

Making a hard game is fine, making a game hard by simply being unintuitive is fucking stupid.

 

[Grimh]

I have played the Dark Souls 2 beta.
While it was just a few hours I've gotta say I'm not that worried.
But then again I never really was.

 

[Karadalis]

Seems that apologizing for stuff is the new japanese game Dev thing. Every couple of months another Dev is apologizing for something.

The thing is many people feared that after its surprise success and massive media coverage, that from software would take the EA kind of "accesible"... you know.. from Dragon Age origins to Dragon age 2 kinda accesible.

In that regard the Dev used the exact wrong words at the exact wrong time.

We here in the west all know what happens when a beloved game is made more "accesible"

Usually that means taking away most gameplay elements that made the original such a good game in the first place.

Thought if it warranted an apology instead of a clarification (wich i think they delivered)... yeah.. in my eyes that was unnecesary..

Actually they made the game quite a bit more challanging in some regards... for example your endurance doesnt regenerate as fast anymore and you have to fight alot more tactical because youre not immune to damage anymore when you execute backstab or parry attacks. Also they said that you will now most often face packs of enemies and cant just simply take one at a time anymore.

Doesnt sound to me like they watered down the game.

 

[Branindain]

The only issue I have with the original Dark Soul's game play is that it doesn't explain at all what the stats do. That was a big problem not only because there were so many, but because the first character or two was almost guaranteed to be a waste due to vitally mis-allocated points. Smashing your head into problems is fun and all, but having to restart characters multiple times because you built them incorrectly is just frustrating. Hopefully DS2 will let me fight the game's monsters for once and not just the mechanics.

There's a big difference between not explaining things too thoroughly and being purposely over ambiguous, so if there was anything that they did to make things more 'accessible' I hope it is stat tooltips, in any tiny shape or form.

I really don't get this. When you are allocating points into stats it shows EXACTLY what effect those will have on every aspect of your character before you accept. It tells you how much more damage you'll do with your equipped weapon, how much more you can carry, how much more health you get... All before confirming the investment.

Every weapon clearly states what stats are required to use it and has a rough estimate of how effective certain stats are at improving the damage it does. A majority of the stats are standard RPG stats anyway. Strength, Dex, Int... Granted Resistance was useless and shouldn't exist but apart from that it all seemed very straightforward to me.

---

Dark souls 2 looks very promising to me, I'm now on feature blackout because I want the blindest possible first experience. Seems fitting to the series to be honest. From what I have heard of the beta (the vaguest of things) it sounds like it'll be just as unforgiving as the first, for which I am grateful.

To be fair, while I agree with what you're saying, I did still mess up a character because I didn't realise the Res stat was going to suffer from massively diminishing returns and become a wasted investment. I'm with you though, I'm on feature blackout too and it's tough because my son keeps watching YouTube footage of the game and wanting to tell me about it. We play the same games but our attitudes to them are so different...

 

[hazydawn]

I disagree, I think the game gives you enough information to get by. Most people just don't bother looking for it, and then complain that it wasn't handed to them (not necessarily you). Game just feels like a more modern Legend of Zelda to me. Dumped in the game with no clue where to go, so exploration and experimentation are the name of the game. I will admit that the online portion of the game definitely could have been explained better though, but it wasn't necessary to complete the game.

I think the idea of explaining a large portion of the game with item descriptions is bad.
There should be other ways to communicate that info. Like books and notes lying around or extra dialogue with NPCs.
And I think at the end of the game the player should actually have a little bit better understanding of the world than Dark Souls offered.