Dark Souls II Is Coming to Ruin Your Day

[Stein Inge]

This... is great news!
I find it slightly worrying though, that the news of another trip into the realm of Dark Souls makes me feel all warm and fuzzy inside...

 

[burningdragoon]

I hope they come up with at least subtitle before it comes. Other than that, super stoked.

 

[Baresark]

I'm completely holding my breath on this.... They talk about driving innovation in gameplay: Demons/Dark Souls is all really great combat. I love the combat and I don't want that to change. I don't want to be without backstabs, or parrys or any such thing. The truth is, I fear their "innovation" because I don't know how they could innovate on a product that I already love. It's rare but, if they were to to transpose the current setup to a whole new setting with new items to find and bosses to battle, then the game would still be fantastic. I almost like to think of this how lovers of Diablo style RPG's think of that genre. They want new maps and new loot and new weapons/armor. They don't care about the combat being "new and innovative". I thought the MH games were Ok, but but combat was shit in them. I'm kind of afraid they will change the combat, despite combat being the majority of the game. We'll see what happens. When push comes to shove I'll still have Demons/Dark Souls to turn back to.

 

[OldNewNewOld]

Maybe discernible characterization, so people can't berate me for killing a random giant wolf with a sword without shedding a tear because it's apparently a tragic character in the arcane and incomprehensible backstory.

Maybe a map. Making it so there's some hint that new things are in old areas. Making exploration fun, in other words.

Yeah because reading item descriptions and just looking around is too hard, god my head hurts so much because I wasn't spoonfed every information.

Oh, and how is it exploration if you have a map hinting you where to explore. That's just hand holding for the basic cod-bro "OOH DID YOU KNOW THERE'S SHINY NEW STUFF FOR YOU HERE ? GO GET IT CHAMP".

That's the kind of thing I hope they don't listen to. Sadly, seems like they're going to do just that and it's likely we might have a watered down "souls" game that pleases to a mass that isn't interested in the actual challenge in the first place, just another rpg they can drone through.

I'm reading every item description and I still have no clue what's with Sif. The only thing I know is that he is guarding the grave of the A guys (have bad memory for names, feels bad ). I know that from the big cat. I haven't beaten it and form the internet I found out it's a tragic character for some reason. But then again, it attacks me, so it wanted to die.

About the map hinting. He said maybe map hinting. There could be other hints. I like how the guy in the Firelink Shrine gives you occasionally some hints. There could be more hints from NPC character. If there is something new in an old place, some NPC character could say something like "I was walking there and there and I hear a strange/loud noise coming from the aqueduct leading to Undead Burg. It could sometimes be a trap and sometimes a real secret to make it less like a "must see no matter what" and people would be more careful. And it shouldn't tell you the precise location. Just a hint towards the area. The Aqueduct leads to the Undead Burg and the lower undead burg. So the hint wasn't really precise and you have a huge area to explore.

 

[CAMDAWG]

Yeah, I take back the chat thing, you're totally right. But if there were a splitscreen, wouldn't you talk to the couch partner? I'm not sure you'd still use gestures. I'm fine with it the way it is, though.

Yeah, you're probably right, but I'm okay with a close friend swearing his tits off at me on the couch, but not so much a random over the internet. And yeah, a couch partner might effect how well the atmosphere hits you, but these are relatively easy problems to avoid. I'd just do my first playthrough like a loner, probably late at night with all the lights off.

It's on Amazon right now, with a release date of Dec 31 2013 which looks pretty placeholder to me. To be honest the thing that shocked me the most about the trailer was that it had only been about a year. Either this is a very early announcement just to start a slow-burn of excitement or someone at Namco discovered crack smoking and is going for annual Dark Souls releases.

Dear god you've given me nightmares. The gap between Demon's and Dark Souls was ~three years, so hopefully they've either used some cash from dark souls' success to grow themselves a bit, or they've reassigned some people from armored core (because I think they would've been working on it at the same time as dark souls?). To be honest, I was kind of hoping they'd make some more dlc before announcing a sequel, partly because it might give them a bit more time to get early stuff done maybe get some extra enemy concepts down, and partly because I really liked AOTA.

I hope Namco is just fronting the money for the million+ sales practically guaranteed if it's un-fucked with. From usually has a policy of making the games it wants to make, even resorting to paying for it themselves if they have to. In Japan there's way less of these demands that it have easy modes, maps, quest markers, exposition dumps, and so on. That's their #1 bread and butter market, so I doubt we have anything to worry about in that regard if Dark Souls' surprise success in the west hasn't warped their minds.

Yep, I agree with all that. I mean, nobody goes and makes as many mech shooters as From have if they didn't make the games they wanted to, instead of chasing after bigger "mainstream" markets. The key thing I'll be looking for is whether or not From publish it themselves in Japan again. I think we can be confident there is no fuckery involved if From aren't fully reliant on a big publisher.

There's some interesting math to be done about "homogenization" (regardless of if it's happening to Dark Souls).

There's about 140 million consoles out there, 360 and PS3 combined. Skyrim, a wild success, sold about 10 million. That means about 14% of the user base liked it, and 86% enjoyed other things. Call of Duty, the sales monster that games like Resident Evil and Dead Space seem to be chasing, sells about 20 million each time. 72% of the market doesn't want the most popular thing, or things like it. If every other game company hypothetically (very, very, I know what this is) converted to a "design by metrics, make it more like COD so we can get those sales" philosophy, 72% of gamers wouldn't have anywhere to spend their money and be fully satisfied. Cutting out about 3/4 of potential markets and niches just isn't smart, industry-wide. Food for thought, I guess.

Hmm. That's quite interesting. I did think that a much larger proportion of the market bought the COD's and skyrim. Although I think it's a little incorrect to say that all the people who don't buy it don't want that product. There might be money issues, used game sales, a simple preference for battlefield or something else similar, and I wouldn't think many people who own an xbox and a ps3 would buy the same game for both consoles. I don't imagine they'd change the numbers TOO much, but it's just something to bear in mind.

It's going to be considerably easier than either of the previous installments.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/erikkain/2012/12/08/dark-souls-2-and-the-fine-line-between-challenge-and-accessibility/

I'm not sure that the source article from the directors is implying that. A while ago there was an article where Miyazaki himself was apparently discussing an easy mode and how to make the game more approachable. It was later discovered that it was a translation error and that the author was trying to make it sound more like that. Japanese is a language of many implied terms, and direct, literal translations rarely come out as intended. It's better to translate the intention of the statement based on context, and something like "we don't want mechanics to be hidden, and we'd like it to be easier and approachable within the game itself" is open to interpretation. In any language it's pretty open to interpretation given the little that we do know. I'll try to find the JP source directly, and if I see otherwise I'll edit it here. I'm not saying "you're wrong", just that we don't really have enough to go on to say that the whole game will be easier and will require less thinking/planning/strategy.

Given that the difficulty is one of the key features of the souls games, and the backlash when miyazaki said something that only MIGHT have been interpreted as making the game easier, I doubt it'll happen. I think a similar difficulty again, simply with a ton of new enemies (and only one of those butt-stomping demon bosses) with new attack patterns to deal with, would make me very happy. I'd also be happy to keep a similar humanity-bonfire system (maybe altered slightly to keep things fresh), rather than the reduced health stuff from demon's souls.

 

[MasterOfHisOwnDomain]

I want: more traps, more pain, more dragons.

... Not necessarily in that order.

 

[William Dickbringer]

so if dark souls 1 was harder than demon souls then how does dark souls 2 get harder....oh god permadeath

It's going to be considerably easier than either of the previous installments.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/erikkain/2012/12/08/dark-souls-2-and-the-fine-line-between-challenge-and-accessibility/

game directors new to the Souls series, Tomohiro Shibuya and Yui Tanimura, who have taken the reins from Hidetaka Miyazaki.

they intend to mould Dark Souls II into a more approachable form

?I personally am the sort of person who likes to be more direct than subtle,? he tells us. ?[Dark Souls II] will be more straightforward and more understandable.?

This looks like the downfall of the Souls series to me--but that being said, "straightforward" and "accessible" do not necessarily mean "easier" (though they usually do when it comes to game journalism.) I don't think it's worth getting excited over yet---too easy for it to be the ruination of the franchise atm.

Let's not worry yet maybe they mean give a little more directions from the beginning where do you go? Grave yard wrecks your shit and lower lorodo ghosts can't be harmed so only reason you go to the undead burg is cause you stand a chance against the enemies (unless you decide to go at first)

 

[CAMDAWG]

A WiiU version.

Having looked upon suggestions that a wiiu tablet-control-thingy could be used for minimaps, or inventory screens and stuff with derision, I have to say, I think that it'd be an excellent fit for dark souls, especially if they keep the whole attitude of "pause buttons? pffft. Those are for wusses". I can't count the number of times I've been killed because I can't see a thing while swapping gear.

I still don't want a pause button though.

 

[OldNewNewOld]

A WiiU version.

Having looked upon suggestions that a wiiu tablet-control-thingy could be used for minimaps, or inventory screens and stuff with derision, I have to say, I think that it'd be an excellent fit for dark souls, especially if they keep the whole attitude of "pause buttons? pffft. Those are for wusses". I can't count the number of times I've been killed because I can't see a thing while swapping gear.

I still don't want a pause button though.

I also like the idea of no pausing the game, but there were some stations where I wanted it. A lot of times I had to answer my phone or door while in middle of a boss fight. I had no other choice but to die.

Maybe a pause button that will completely stop the game and darken the screen. You can't access the inventory. A real "pause" and not a pause with a inventory menu. And the tablet was also why I want a WiiU version. The inventory management in real time is great for games like this.

And imagine some additional content not related to the gameplay that can be done. Imagine a tour trough the world like with the WiiU Panorama View app. How awesome it would be to view the world as if you were in it. It would unlock new regions as you clear them to prevent you from seeing what is where before you're even there.

I always want to a tour trough the DS world, but with all the enemies it's hard to do that.



EDIT:
Here is a petition for a WiiU version.

http://www.change.org/petitions/dark-souls-ii-for-the-nintendo-wiiu
Seems like the majority of votes is because people want inventory management on the second screen and because of Miiverse, which is actually a good idea. You get the standard DS communication and when people are stuck they could go on Miiverse and find solutions. You could post more detailed help and it would be completely optional unlike the DS message system.

 

[DrunkOnEstus]

Yeah, you're probably right, but I'm okay with a close friend swearing his tits off at me on the couch, but not so much a random over the internet. And yeah, a couch partner might effect how well the atmosphere hits you, but these are relatively easy problems to avoid. I'd just do my first playthrough like a loner, probably late at night with all the lights off.

That's a solid idea. My wife has told me that she'd be willing to tackle the game if I could be there "in front" and buffering the crazier stuff and explaining things along the way. From clearly embraces multiplayer and camaraderie, so I don't see why two people couldn't escape a hellish world together. There doesn't have to be co-op doors, boost ledges, and other stupid things like playing RE5, just the same thing you can do for each boss extended to the whole world.

Dear god you've given me nightmares. The gap between Demon's and Dark Souls was ~three years, so hopefully they've either used some cash from dark souls' success to grow themselves a bit, or they've reassigned some people from armored core (because I think they would've been working on it at the same time as dark souls?). To be honest, I was kind of hoping they'd make some more dlc before announcing a sequel, partly because it might give them a bit more time to get early stuff done maybe get some extra enemy concepts down, and partly because I really liked AOTA.

I have a feeling the team(s) have gotten bigger, which considering their design philosophies would probably be to optimize the tech and make things technologically smoother. Dark Souls ran on an engine Sony gives away for free to devs under contract for a game on the system. I'm amazed that legally and technologically they were able to port it to the 360/PC, though if I remember right Namco did the 360 port themselves for US because 12 people in Japan have a 360. Anyway I think they should embrace the MMO-ish thing. Release more frequent DLCs or even an expansion pack down the line. I've seen many people play it as their MMO, with 9 characters SL 100-200 on NG+++++ or whatever. If people can continue to play the vanilla game, I imagine even more would if there was more to see and do more often. AOTA was awesome probably because they worked for ~1 year on it. Again, potentially bigger team could help with this.

Hmm. That's quite interesting. I did think that a much larger proportion of the market bought the COD's and skyrim. Although I think it's a little incorrect to say that all the people who don't buy it don't want that product. There might be money issues, used game sales, a simple preference for battlefield or something else similar, and I wouldn't think many people who own an xbox and a ps3 would buy the same game for both consoles. I don't imagine they'd change the numbers TOO much, but it's just something to bear in mind.

Even with that considered, the number of people outside the "ideal publisher moneymaker" sphere of thought can't be lower than 40-50%? And this isn't counting people buying 2 games for 2 systems, but 20 million COD sales to both 360 and PS3 users. If it was right in half (which I'm sure it's not), it would still be 10 million COD sales to 70 million 360 users. The biggest thing to shoot for to maximize sales would only sell to 1/7 of your install base. I know that's a huge portion and good for them for capturing it, but to me it still makes the point that it's crazy to alienate your fans in the huge bases of the 6/7 like horror fans (change RE and Dead Space) or your RPG fans (DA2, dearth of JRPGs this gen). The way I see it, if somebody loves fast-paced, linear, scripted shooting games, they've found their favorite and are entrenched in the multiplayer and aren't apt to walk away from it to play a "me-too" game that pissed off its previous fans in order to entice them. Homefront, Medal of Honor, new Ghost Recon, etc didn't do well and were practically embarrassments, so I don't see what the point is. It's like all the MMOs trying to knock WoW off of the throne by being WoW in a different world. There's a giant market that would jump into a new experience, and from step one doesn't want something like WoW or they'd be playing it.

Given that the difficulty is one of the key features of the souls games, and the backlash when miyazaki said something that only MIGHT have been interpreted as making the game easier, I doubt it'll happen. I think a similar difficulty again, simply with a ton of new enemies (and only one of those butt-stomping demon bosses) with new attack patterns to deal with, would make me very happy. I'd also be happy to keep a similar humanity-bonfire system (maybe altered slightly to keep things fresh), rather than the reduced health stuff from demon's souls.

I hear you about that. The Souls games are also spiritually carrying the torch of the King's Field games. If how they handled those sequels, Dark Souls as a sequel, and the Armored Cores are anything to go by, something would have to have seriously changed structurally and philosophically for them to decide to piss away 15 or so years of strictly adhering to the isolationist hardcore dungeon exploration formula.

 

[Zefar]

I'd like to see a voiced guy because otherwise you could just replace the character with a cardboard box and have the same feel to it.

I've started to hate silent heroes more and more because they do it in a way that annoys me. There is no connection to them. I don't feel anything for my hero and he just becomes a vessel of destruction, doing whatever the hell he wants.

There is also this where I can't really roleplay the guy because you have so few options and whatever you want to say can't be done.

Skyrim works without a voice due to all the conversations options, but Dark Souls was just so lackluster with it's story part that they could delete the entire thing and nothing of value would be lost. I had more fun farming enemies and upgrade my weapons than listening to the story. Hell several hours into the game the first time I played it I had absolutely NO IDEA what was going on. I talked to everyone I saw but they gave nothing of value.
So that was a game that didn't want you be in the story at all.

If they want us to learn about the world they need to add stuff that can actually teach you about the world. Dark Souls did not do a good job on that. It's only in the DLC that they actually decide to tell you more about various things.

 

[ciancon]

My thoughts while watching this:

"Surely this is just a fan-made trailer...Huh, this is pretty well put together...No, surely not...Oh my god YEEEESSSSSSS!!!!!"

My week has been made. Now to see if I can manage to beat this one without having to look up the wiki!

 

[Quazimofo]

so if dark souls 1 was harder than demon souls then how does dark souls 2 get harder....oh god permadeath

Perhaps a permadeath hard mode, but permadeath on regular ass normal mode? thats just too much. too too much.

But yeah, looking forward to this. Now i just need to kill the 4 kings so i can beat the game for the first fucking time.

 

[Bors Mistral]

So, this was an ingame footage trailer from the PC version? Sweet!

Seriously though, I'm glad the saga of Dark Souls continues. Keep players dying relentlessly.

 

[Artemis923]

I would love another Dark Souls, but to see it become streamlined and holding players by the balls would break my heart.

Fuck maps. If you like the game enough, you'll pay attention and memorize everything.

Fuck linear storytelling. That shit is bland, and you can get it anywhere else.

Developers/publishers need to realize that dumbing games down won't help them sell any better. All it does is alienate your core audience...and the bro-crowd you're trying to reach won't even bat an eye at these games because they're not CoD.

 

[Smolderin]

And now my entire year is dead and gone...well at least when it comes out. Thanks From Software...thanks.

 

[CAMDAWG]

That's a solid idea. My wife has told me that she'd be willing to tackle the game if I could be there "in front" and buffering the crazier stuff and explaining things along the way. From clearly embraces multiplayer and camaraderie, so I don't see why two people couldn't escape a hellish world together. There doesn't have to be co-op doors, boost ledges, and other stupid things like playing RE5, just the same thing you can do for each boss extended to the whole world.

Yeah, co-op specific hurdles would just be irritating. Really, if they just made it so that one player was a white phantom, using another character from the main players save files, or a set npc like solaire or someone, it'd be fine. I'm currently trying to get my younger brother to play it, seeing as he has played literally no game other than cod4 for the last 3.5 years, and even then it was only mw2. I've got him to play uncharted, and he seemed to like that, so I'm just trying to get him closer and closer... I'm thinking mass effect next, because it's still fairly shooter-y, but will introduce him to some rpg elements.

I have a feeling the team(s) have gotten bigger, which considering their design philosophies would probably be to optimize the tech and make things technologically smoother. Dark Souls ran on an engine Sony gives away for free to devs under contract for a game on the system. I'm amazed that legally and technologically they were able to port it to the 360/PC, though if I remember right Namco did the 360 port themselves for US because 12 people in Japan have a 360. Anyway I think they should embrace the MMO-ish thing. Release more frequent DLCs or even an expansion pack down the line. I've seen many people play it as their MMO, with 9 characters SL 100-200 on NG+++++ or whatever. If people can continue to play the vanilla game, I imagine even more would if there was more to see and do more often. AOTA was awesome probably because they worked for ~1 year on it. Again, potentially bigger team could help with this.

I think I'd prefer to see larger, infrequent expansions rather than smaller, more frequent ones, simply because it will spread out the players a bit. For example, when AOTA was released, you were being invaded at every opportunity in oolacile because there were so many players there. And while I like fighting invaders, and love handing their arses to them, it's better when it's infrequent and unexpected, rather than something you plan for. Also, for a while after it was released, almost every single player you meet in pvp was using the dark sorceries, which got a bit tedious and monotonous. If they released, say, 4 times as much content as AOTA at the same time (which I know is a huge amount of content by today's dlc standards), everything would be a bit more spread out and would keep things fresh.

Even with that considered, the number of people outside the "ideal publisher moneymaker" sphere of thought can't be lower than 40-50%? And this isn't counting people buying 2 games for 2 systems, but 20 million COD sales to both 360 and PS3 users. If it was right in half (which I'm sure it's not), it would still be 10 million COD sales to 70 million 360 users. The biggest thing to shoot for to maximize sales would only sell to 1/7 of your install base. I know that's a huge portion and good for them for capturing it, but to me it still makes the point that it's crazy to alienate your fans in the huge bases of the 6/7 like horror fans (change RE and Dead Space) or your RPG fans (DA2, dearth of JRPGs this gen). The way I see it, if somebody loves fast-paced, linear, scripted shooting games, they've found their favorite and are entrenched in the multiplayer and aren't apt to walk away from it to play a "me-too" game that pissed off its previous fans in order to entice them. Homefront, Medal of Honor, new Ghost Recon, etc didn't do well and were practically embarrassments, so I don't see what the point is. It's like all the MMOs trying to knock WoW off of the throne by being WoW in a different world. There's a giant market that would jump into a new experience, and from step one doesn't want something like WoW or they'd be playing it.

I'm not entirely sure that DA2's failure was that it tried to appeal to a broader audience, but rather just because it was shit compared to the first one. I did like the fully voiced protagonist, but the set armor types for all your buddies, and the reusing of areas, and the massive time jumps kinda ruined it. But I don't feel like that was because EA were trying to get a wider market. I also didn't like the flashy combat animations so much, they always just seemed to get in the way of seeing what was happening.

I do get what you're saying about the shooters though. Again, talking about my brother, he played cod4, decided it was for him, and he hasn't played another game. I bought him bad company 2 for 15 bucks or something for his birthday last year, he played it for all of 30 minutes maybe, then decided he didn't like it, and was back to cod4. That being said, he doesn't feel the need, or desire, to play the more recent installments, so he's not really part of the annual-release-hype-mega-sales type demographic.