I like systems where you can save whenever you want, it's fun to save, then go through a nice, cathartic, wholesale slaughter spree, then drop back into my old save file and continue on with the quest or whatever I was doing. Or choosing conversations options I ordinarily wouldn't go for out of caution.
Death Mechanics and Dark Souls
- Thread starter Yahtzee Croshaw
- Start date
Heh that last paragraph reminds me of why I quit PVPing in WoW. I eventually reached this point where I stopped giving a shit. I was no longer mad when I died, or we lost, or I personally failed; I just totally stopped caring and went with it. But, then I realized I'm not having fun and I don't care about the result, why am I doing it at all? I quit a couple days later, never looking back.
If you ever want to get any joy in playing these type of games, you got to learn how to enjoy the thrill of a challenge and not just being able to plough through a game. But I guess you're not the type of gamer that's in it for the challenge, you might even hate it, hence one reason why you might hate MPs. You're just in it for the experience.
Oh and if you can't even beat the second boss...../facepalm
0o
Oh and if you can't even beat the second boss...../facepalm
0o
It's called Gamer Masochism. It's a psychological remnant from when you were a child and your video game library was small and generally consisted of awful or horribly difficult games. You had so few games, you had to beat them. You had nothing better to do like go outside or learn a language or faggy shit like that, no, you had to beat Battletoads, or Ninja Gaiden, or Blinx the Timecat, or whatever horrible game your misinformed parents got from a bin and gave you for Christmas.Zachary Amaranth said:It always amazes me, because all my friends get horribly pissed off playing MW3 or (multiplayer shooter here, I'm not just picking on COD). They scream profanities, call bull, and by and large seem to utterly hate the experience. But they buy every new shooter and spend months fixed on each.cricket chirps said:I started running into that mind breaking problem there at the end in some multiplayer games i play. It made me realise "Yahtzee is right," and so i've converted to Croshaw-ism and began shunning every multiplayer aspect in a game. Then guess what happened? I ACTUALLY enjoyed playing games morewho would have thought?
-In seriosness games are meant to be enjoyed and any game that even allows for a moment that would make you angry at it or others is not enjoyable. It's not fun to be mad, and a game that is not fun is not worth playing
And I really don't get why they punish themselves so much.
It's the same reason that people play stuff like Dark Souls, Super Meatboy or IWBTG now when they're old enough to know better; there's that damaged part of their psyche that gets some level of satisfaction from their own self imposed suffering and humiliation. Scariest part? It's getting worse and it's the reason stuff like CoD and MW are doing so well; these young men (generally) like inflict pain and misery upon themselves and others which does not bode well for the poor women who view them affectionately.
I have died a lot in dark souls, but not a great deal anymore. I'm onto new areas, I know to be careful, I'm quick to adapt to the enemies. I am not self-blowing myself here, there is a point. You cannot fight the game. You cannot get angry at losing in this game, it will drive you mad. You must learn from dark souls, grow a little, deal with the death, prepare to counter and live. Work out what type of combatant you want to play, and be ready to adapt for enemies and bosses, because they are all a bit different.
It isn't a game you try to fight, you already have enough fighting to do in game. It doesn't pamper you or let you succeed, but there are always options to get ahead.
It isn't a game you try to fight, you already have enough fighting to do in game. It doesn't pamper you or let you succeed, but there are always options to get ahead.
Exactly! Dark souls is a game with a lot that is hidden, if you rush and grab the zweihander early, level up some strength, you actually have a great weapon for a lot of the early parts of the game. Some early bosses become easy!Nomanslander said:
I honestly didn't find Dark Souls as hard as everyone says it is, sure it was hard but not a game that can break people like some people say. I did have some questions answered by a friend, but just "Oh, I just go to x, should I go this way?". I suppose each person will find something harder than another person, but all in all, I love Dark Souls and it was my 2011 GOTY. Spent 180 hours on it, about 150 hours on one character. I also love the characters you meet, and how they look, including how the bosses look (Nito most certainly looks like a badass). I liked how hidden the story was, most of it was left up to the player to figure out or even fill in. Like the endings, since there's two it's up to you to decide which ending is "good or bad".
-
-
I basically feel like that about all of WoW, kinda sad really.Sylveria said:
Oh, look at that.
You died again.
Better get back to your remains that's splattered all over that floor over there by the boss.
You're close now, and you're doing quite well against the enemies on the way.
Well, FUCK YOU! PHANTOM INVASION! HAHAHAHAHA!
I don't even know why I love this game.
You died again.
Better get back to your remains that's splattered all over that floor over there by the boss.
You're close now, and you're doing quite well against the enemies on the way.
Well, FUCK YOU! PHANTOM INVASION! HAHAHAHAHA!
I don't even know why I love this game.
I'll admit, as much as I'm enjoying Dark Souls at the moment. I do get somewhat annoyed at some points in which I have to go through hordes of minor enemies that have the potential of killing me if I mess up just to get to a boss I'm having trouble with.
Super Meat Boy is a pretty good example of not making death too big a deal. If you die, you spawn back at the start of the level literally a second later. And the levels themselves aren't too long either, so the flow of the game isn't broken.
Super Meat Boy is a pretty good example of not making death too big a deal. If you die, you spawn back at the start of the level literally a second later. And the levels themselves aren't too long either, so the flow of the game isn't broken.
If you died at the Taurus Demon more than twice, you're definitely doing it wrong. Google the fight and you'll see there's a very clever and easy way to beat it.
Regarding the online mode, it is actually not a big deal. It's the same thing as in Demon's Souls, plus some player factions that you can join, but which will most likely make no difference to you if you just want to beat the game once. I personally kept my console disconnected while playing Dark Souls, because the main thing online does is make every single boss fight a cakewalk. If you are playing on your own, every boss has some sort of strategy, but with 3 other people you just all stand there and spam heavy attack, and you WILL be tempted to summon others before new bosses due to fear of the unknown. So, in my opinion, it's better to play it offline.
Regarding the online mode, it is actually not a big deal. It's the same thing as in Demon's Souls, plus some player factions that you can join, but which will most likely make no difference to you if you just want to beat the game once. I personally kept my console disconnected while playing Dark Souls, because the main thing online does is make every single boss fight a cakewalk. If you are playing on your own, every boss has some sort of strategy, but with 3 other people you just all stand there and spam heavy attack, and you WILL be tempted to summon others before new bosses due to fear of the unknown. So, in my opinion, it's better to play it offline.
I agree with Yahtzee that Extra Lives are the primary reason life systems still exist. They're very convenient as a reward -- they always seem valuable, even if they're so abundant that they aren't really; they're not unique, so you don't have to think of something new for each one; and since life systems are essentially obsolete now, you can give out as many as you want without significantly affecting the game's difficulty.
I think another reason Mario and Sonic in particular keep the Extra Lives is that you need a motivation to collect coins or rings, since 100 of either is an extra life. Of course, rings also serve as a health system, as do coins, in the 3D games. The Galaxy games were actually on to something good, by adding Star Bits (which served as ammunition) as the basic collectible and making the health-restoring coins relatively scarce. In 3D Land, the only way they reward you for anything is extra lives and coins (which, since they don't heal you or anything, are nothing but partial extra lives) -- bouncing on multiple enemies, grabbing the flagpole, having extra time, etc. I guess in that sense, SM3DL is similar to some modern First Person Shooters, in that they lack a good way to reward the player.
I think another reason Mario and Sonic in particular keep the Extra Lives is that you need a motivation to collect coins or rings, since 100 of either is an extra life. Of course, rings also serve as a health system, as do coins, in the 3D games. The Galaxy games were actually on to something good, by adding Star Bits (which served as ammunition) as the basic collectible and making the health-restoring coins relatively scarce. In 3D Land, the only way they reward you for anything is extra lives and coins (which, since they don't heal you or anything, are nothing but partial extra lives) -- bouncing on multiple enemies, grabbing the flagpole, having extra time, etc. I guess in that sense, SM3DL is similar to some modern First Person Shooters, in that they lack a good way to reward the player.
Dark Souls had bullshit difficulty in some parts that didn't give you any chance unless you knew what was already coming. Demon's Souls was better in this regard. Example:
Demon's Souls: You get a checkpoint after a boss fight. Hmmm, there is a dragon flying overhead that bridge, maybe I should turn around and go somewhere else or try to run through it as fast I can.
Dark Souls: No checkpoint after a boss fight. You are probably out of potions and then a dragon mini boss comes out of nowhere and one-shots you. The checkpoint is AFTER the huge dragon. And the dragon always camps at the same place and the dmg it does is completely random.
There are other similar problems too like the Capra Demon boss fight or Anor Londo ramps where the outcome is decided by sheer luck.
Also, online was severely cripled with the dumb covenant system (and poor servers before updates). In Demon's Souls you had two online summoning items; co-op stone and the invasion stone which were both rather easy to acquire and getting online was easy. In Dark Souls you have 4 different invasion items, some of which are almost impossible to get without a walkthrough and the co-op item which is also very easy to miss.
Demon's Souls: You get a checkpoint after a boss fight. Hmmm, there is a dragon flying overhead that bridge, maybe I should turn around and go somewhere else or try to run through it as fast I can.
Dark Souls: No checkpoint after a boss fight. You are probably out of potions and then a dragon mini boss comes out of nowhere and one-shots you. The checkpoint is AFTER the huge dragon. And the dragon always camps at the same place and the dmg it does is completely random.
There are other similar problems too like the Capra Demon boss fight or Anor Londo ramps where the outcome is decided by sheer luck.
Also, online was severely cripled with the dumb covenant system (and poor servers before updates). In Demon's Souls you had two online summoning items; co-op stone and the invasion stone which were both rather easy to acquire and getting online was easy. In Dark Souls you have 4 different invasion items, some of which are almost impossible to get without a walkthrough and the co-op item which is also very easy to miss.
Wolfram01 said:
That's pretty appropriate, although I find it also applies to other things in games, like maze/ teleporter sections in JRPG's, where my enjoyment gets jettisoned into space.
Although I'd replace the last one with "Acceptance: I died. Oh no. I won. Hurray." It was when I realized I had that mindset that I stopped playing dark and demon's souls, I was having no fun, gained nothing for beating them, and didn't even feel any challenge because I didn't care if I won or lost. Also terrible design, but mostly the first issue.
How about that bullshit in demons souls where they hid bottomless pits behind ninety degree turns in narrow hallways? Or a guy with a pickaxe that takes away half your health behind a pile of rubble? Or how about how you were screwed on the flamelurker if you only wanted a melee character?darkmind35 said:
Not like dark souls was that much better with some bad choices that could win awards in terms of bad design, it's like the games were barely playtested, let alone balanced. The sad part is it doesn't take much to fix them, and I know they won't.
I have to say I'm surprised that I was surprised at how Rayman: Origins and SPESSMAREENE handled death.
I shouldn't be surprised because I'm used to dying in games and restarting the level, but it made me realize how generous checkpoint systems have become. Rayman made me realize again what it's like to restart a level and getting better at it until you're good enough to pass, and Spacemarine's difficulty levels very honestly said: "You'll die sometimes/frequently/all the time" or something like that.
That made me install an older game I remembered was kinda frustrating, but I played it despite having <10fps and half of that in firefights: Ghost Recon Advanced Warfighter. And now I've gotten more used to FPS and my computer can handle it without any problems, but suddenly I find my inner self bitching about the terrible AI, stupid checkpoint system and silly difficulty mechanic that basically says "You get a bit of health if you reload your last checkpoint, sooo.... go ahead and reload a checkpoint every time one is created, k?"
But Rayman: Origins reminded me that not all of these are terrible design decisions. It's how games used to be. And, somehow, that makes finishing them more rewarding and memorable as long as the frustration is overshadowed by the fun all in all.
I shouldn't be surprised because I'm used to dying in games and restarting the level, but it made me realize how generous checkpoint systems have become. Rayman made me realize again what it's like to restart a level and getting better at it until you're good enough to pass, and Spacemarine's difficulty levels very honestly said: "You'll die sometimes/frequently/all the time" or something like that.
That made me install an older game I remembered was kinda frustrating, but I played it despite having <10fps and half of that in firefights: Ghost Recon Advanced Warfighter. And now I've gotten more used to FPS and my computer can handle it without any problems, but suddenly I find my inner self bitching about the terrible AI, stupid checkpoint system and silly difficulty mechanic that basically says "You get a bit of health if you reload your last checkpoint, sooo.... go ahead and reload a checkpoint every time one is created, k?"
But Rayman: Origins reminded me that not all of these are terrible design decisions. It's how games used to be. And, somehow, that makes finishing them more rewarding and memorable as long as the frustration is overshadowed by the fun all in all.
The tomb of the giants is scary? Really? Ok, that's your opinion, I found it to be one of the worst levels in any game I've ever played, it's even worse if you were using a ranged character because you don't know where your targets are to shoot them, not to mention having some areas that lead to dead ends and hiding the way you are supposed to go is just bullshit.Teresa Lass said:
That aside, it's probably a good thing he didn't get too far, otherwise he'd run into the knight twin boss (executioner and dragonslayer), one of the worst bosses in game history, because it wasn't designed to work well with this type of gameplay, and often I'd find myself losing, not because of something I did, but because I would get stunlocked by one, then the other, and so on.
I do understand what they were going for, they were trying to tell a story through their environments and thus get you further immersed into the game, but interesting ideas don't necessarily make a great level.
On a side note, if you don't know the trick with the first boss, it's completely understandable dying to him multiple times, I didn't know it, because the game never tells you that you can do it, so he just kept knocking me off the side.
There was a similar mechanic in Hitman : Blood Money, on easy you could save as often as you wanted, normal you had seven saves more than enough to do the level but enough to stop you saving for everything, on the higher levels you had less, on the hardest difficulty you had to do it all over again.rembrandtqeinstein said:
But it doesn't really reward restraint and caution because there is no way to survive other than trial and error. The game is simply guess work.Burst6 said:
And whilst the locations are great to look at, I don't find it a payoff enough. I've seen similar locations in other games (Ico, Vagrant Story). I'm not saying the soundtrack should be thumping, but it could've at least have been something like Vagrant Story (a game that does patience and strategy right).
And I don't consider the combat tight either. Arrows that glitch through enemies yet hit you, attacks that sometimes richoches off walls, other times glitching through it, my man rolling around when I don't tell him to, attacking enemies when I'm pressing the guard button.
During that second boss on the bridge, depending on where you land after you attack from above, you're pretty much cornered and unable to escape half the time. Why can't you roll under his legs? Why isn't the bridge's area big enough to manauver around him?
The game simply choses when you live or die. The game might as well just reset the console at random and it wouldn't be any different.
I see a lot of whining about Dark Souls being "unfair" and even "broken" but really the online component with players leaving messages to one another is to make it easier for others to see traps and hidden enemies and since all your experience stays were you died and mobs doesn't magically respawn I've noticed nothing unfair about Dark Souls. If you die time and again I'd say that's just because you refuse to learn...