Demon's Souls
- Thread starter Yahtzee Croshaw
- Start date
See, I hope it isn't a minority, considering he's talking about Australian citizens and I myself living in Canada have no say. I would like to see some percentage of people for VS against the rating.SFR said:
Alrighty, let's take this one at a time.
TheDrunkNinja said:
-TheDrunkNinja said:
It seems you have absolutely no interest in the fact that my arguments were valid; rather it seems more likely that you disagree with me but cannot disprove me, so as I said above you have resorted to a thin argument which is that I am a "douchebag", conveniently enough an entirely subjective term as I am a human and in fact not a feminine hygeine product.
Coincidentally enough, so is "elitist", which in this context you seem to apply to anyone who speaks in a direct manner using proper grammar and polysyllabic vocabulary.
I assure you I am in no medical or psychological peril; I want to speak to your reasoning here, and explain to you that how someone sounds when they write, as opposed to how they speak - and there are even variances within this personal archetype - is called "voice".
My "voice" in these posts was designed specifically to be direct, as I didn't want to have to spend 4 hours defending each post. They may come off as smarmy or "elitist", but in reality they are merely direct. Simply because I do not present the opposing side of an argument I am clearly countering does not make me a "douchebag", it simply makes me someone who doesn't wish to get carapel tunnel syndrome just to state an opinion and prove a point.
I am also someone with a rather dry sense of humor, so I tend to inject sarcasm into my writing when I am particularly amused at a thin argument.
The misinterpretation on your part isn't my fault, but you may consider this portion of the post as an attempt to rectify it anyway, because I want to assure you that I am indeed not an "elitist douchebag".
As to comics -
Pictures speak a thousand words, goes the old saying. Well in this case, a comic, or those in particular that I chose, serve to directly reinforce my points.
As to your complaint about using them, I'd say that I didn't embed them - it's your choice to click on the link, so if you don't want to, then don't. It's not like I'm eating up anyone's bandwidth who doesn't actually care to see what I'm referencing.
Furthermore, I didn't realize there was a limit to the number of posts? I usually don't respond more than once to a given person unless I see a reason to, and it's not like I've spammed anyone either. I was participating in a discussion, and that's all.
Lastly, as to "pissing people off" - if presenting legitimate, well thought-out points in a direct and thoughtful manner pisses people off, I would suppose that this is their issue and not my responsibility.
Also, people seem to think when I edit a post it counts as a second one. It's not the first time I've seen someone say that, but for all my forum foraging I can't find any double or triple posts.
Coincidentally enough, so is "elitist", which in this context you seem to apply to anyone who speaks in a direct manner using proper grammar and polysyllabic vocabulary.
I assure you I am in no medical or psychological peril; I want to speak to your reasoning here, and explain to you that how someone sounds when they write, as opposed to how they speak - and there are even variances within this personal archetype - is called "voice".
My "voice" in these posts was designed specifically to be direct, as I didn't want to have to spend 4 hours defending each post. They may come off as smarmy or "elitist", but in reality they are merely direct. Simply because I do not present the opposing side of an argument I am clearly countering does not make me a "douchebag", it simply makes me someone who doesn't wish to get carapel tunnel syndrome just to state an opinion and prove a point.
I am also someone with a rather dry sense of humor, so I tend to inject sarcasm into my writing when I am particularly amused at a thin argument.
The misinterpretation on your part isn't my fault, but you may consider this portion of the post as an attempt to rectify it anyway, because I want to assure you that I am indeed not an "elitist douchebag".
As to comics -
Pictures speak a thousand words, goes the old saying. Well in this case, a comic, or those in particular that I chose, serve to directly reinforce my points.
As to your complaint about using them, I'd say that I didn't embed them - it's your choice to click on the link, so if you don't want to, then don't. It's not like I'm eating up anyone's bandwidth who doesn't actually care to see what I'm referencing.
Furthermore, I didn't realize there was a limit to the number of posts? I usually don't respond more than once to a given person unless I see a reason to, and it's not like I've spammed anyone either. I was participating in a discussion, and that's all.
Lastly, as to "pissing people off" - if presenting legitimate, well thought-out points in a direct and thoughtful manner pisses people off, I would suppose that this is their issue and not my responsibility.
Also, people seem to think when I edit a post it counts as a second one. It's not the first time I've seen someone say that, but for all my forum foraging I can't find any double or triple posts.
Ah, difficulty levels. I'm a bit of a masochist, so I tend to play hard by default. Alternatively, I did send an email to Atkinson using the address Yahtzee supplied. I felt a lot better about myself after I did. 
My email went a little somethin' like this:
Attorney-General Atkinson, sir,
I was recently alerted to your position in regards to gaining an R18+ classification for video games in Australia. Apparently, you stated that those in accord with this were simply a "vocal minority". Sir, with all due respect, I wish to add my voice to that minority.
I am a twenty-two year old female game developer who has just completed a three year bachelor's degree in this field and am convinced that you are acting quite selfishly in this regard. From your interview, you are generalising the gaming public and the collective intelligence of parents who are responsible for what their children play. Last year I was in a game boutique and overheard a parent buying a two-year-old a Nintendo DS. Surely this is an indication that it is not the children that are the determining factor of game sales, but the parents?
I do not own, nor do I play games that are particularly violent, but I believe in the industry in which I work and you, sir, should represent the people properly and allow the correct voice of the people to be heard. A computer game is no different a media form than a film - you are still using a screen with moving images. If your argument is that there is increased immersion and input from a player, I would argue that film and television is becoming increasingly interactive. You are censoring something that any responsible adult should be capable of doing themselves.
If your concern is that children will acquire the game, may I remind you that film tickets to an R18+ motion picture are not allowed to be sold to an unaccompanied minor. I would urge you to reconsider your position and amend the classification to include this condition.
I can understand that you only want what is best for your constituents, but please be aware of the hampering you are placing on a booming industry that can do so much for Australia economically. With this classification, we can not only keep game sellers in business but also maintain a healthy creative culture for Australian game developers.
Yours sincerely,
My email went a little somethin' like this:
Attorney-General Atkinson, sir,
I was recently alerted to your position in regards to gaining an R18+ classification for video games in Australia. Apparently, you stated that those in accord with this were simply a "vocal minority". Sir, with all due respect, I wish to add my voice to that minority.
I am a twenty-two year old female game developer who has just completed a three year bachelor's degree in this field and am convinced that you are acting quite selfishly in this regard. From your interview, you are generalising the gaming public and the collective intelligence of parents who are responsible for what their children play. Last year I was in a game boutique and overheard a parent buying a two-year-old a Nintendo DS. Surely this is an indication that it is not the children that are the determining factor of game sales, but the parents?
I do not own, nor do I play games that are particularly violent, but I believe in the industry in which I work and you, sir, should represent the people properly and allow the correct voice of the people to be heard. A computer game is no different a media form than a film - you are still using a screen with moving images. If your argument is that there is increased immersion and input from a player, I would argue that film and television is becoming increasingly interactive. You are censoring something that any responsible adult should be capable of doing themselves.
If your concern is that children will acquire the game, may I remind you that film tickets to an R18+ motion picture are not allowed to be sold to an unaccompanied minor. I would urge you to reconsider your position and amend the classification to include this condition.
I can understand that you only want what is best for your constituents, but please be aware of the hampering you are placing on a booming industry that can do so much for Australia economically. With this classification, we can not only keep game sellers in business but also maintain a healthy creative culture for Australian game developers.
Yours sincerely,
but demons souls takes it to far cus theres near enough no checkpoints as it is every time you die you will get angrier and concentrate less and thr game will get harderbecause of that and that every time you die the game ramps up the dificulty also in later worlds other people can come into your gamecamp at rthe end with an instas kill weapon a force you to reapeatedly start the level again which will be harder every time cayusing the person to ragequit or give up and never play it agai because when people can ljoin there will always be someoe who camps you due to the fact that all the money you collected they take when you die which they use to make themselfs stronger and then they come back and cam you againAnarex said:
i think thats a little to hard
if this was facebook, i'd be clickint the "like" buttonThe Deadpool said:
i'd also like to say, the game is never cheap. if you get your ass handed to you, your either rushing in, using the wrong tactic/equipment or you just are not at the level required yet. the games pretty open once you get passed 1-1, go elsewhere until you level.
also, the game maybe tough, but its never cheap:
-blue eyed knights can eat health, it also means that they too are vunerable for the same amout of time as you would be eating health.
-play halo3 on legendary,pump two duel wielded clips in to a brutes face and watch him kill you with three shots to the chest, thats cheap (im not saying halo3 is chheap, saying this type of mechanic for difficulty is)
I hope your visa is up to date, you could well be getting deported after that stunt. I've got a spare room in Stoke-on-Trent if you need some time to get back on your feet.Yahtzee Croshaw said:
Im with you on difficulty. Even contra had the good grace to re start you where you died and that was legendarily tough. Making you retrace your steps is just a dick move on the part of the developers.
Yeah, I thought the lack of checkpoints was ok and indeed making you play more carefully, but up to a certain point. DS crosses the line many times, and the more I played the more unbearable the game was becoming. I cleared 1-1, 1-2, 2-1, farmed 4-1 a lot, thought it was ok. Then I go to kill Flamelurker on 2-2, and he kills me many times, because, you know what, I am HUMAN and i may misstime a roll once every 5 fucking minutes and that's enough for him to kill you. And then I have to go through ALL THOSE FUCKING TUNNELS again, with the giant bugs that take 2 minutes each to kill, again, and again, and again, and again, it's mind-numbingly boring and tedious, I mean seriously. There is a line between "caution through paranoia" and "you know what, fuck this piece of shit game", and unless you have INHUMAN patience or are semi-comatose, you are bound to belong to the latter category. I like games that test my skill, not my patience, sorry if that's too Casual for some...Mr Ink 5000 said:
Most of 2-2 can be avoided. Huge shortcuts can be taken by sliding down walls. There's a series of signs leading you the right way (I should know, I put them there). Those bugs take a while to kill, but you have to kill what, 2 of them in the whole stage?Carnagath said:
And Flamelurker isn't that tough. Flame Shield (or better yet, Brushwood, but you probably don't have that yet) makes it much easier, but just dodging works. Equip lightly and stay on your feet. He's weak against magic if that helps...
Point is, The stage can be done in 5-10 minutes, and the bosss... There are people out there who can beat the boss at level 1 without getting hit. Is the game testing your skill or your patience then?
i only have one answer for that, you were not ready for flame lurkerCarnagath said:
i could recommend what to do net, but you sound like you wouldnt be interested
Well, the argument that "someone else can do it, so it's fine" is a pretty thin one in my opinion. Also unfortunately notes are not something I have access to, since the location of my PS3 makes it impossible to have it connected to the internet (insert random mom's basement joke here). Anyway, I did a couple of more tries and I'm getting there I think, I just need to refine my positioning a bit so I always have plenty of room behind me, all the times that I died were because I misstimed the exact cast animation of my Soul Arrow, which led to a delayed panicky jump when he charged, which led to me getting cornered and sodomized. Then I had to stop cause I had ran out of mana spice. And yes, the run back is still as annoying as I remembered.The Deadpool said:
A agree with Yatzee that there is a big difference between a game that is difficult and one that is just awkward. A hard game requires skill and timing, an awkward game just requires you to do that exact one trick that the designers were thinking of when they programed that bit.
To the comments about being patient in a game I say "why should I?". Patience is for putting up with things you don't want to really put up with but need to such as waiting for the bus or queing in the supermarket. Games are supposed to be something that you choose to do for the sheer fun of it.
To the comments about being patient in a game I say "why should I?". Patience is for putting up with things you don't want to really put up with but need to such as waiting for the bus or queing in the supermarket. Games are supposed to be something that you choose to do for the sheer fun of it.
It's about as valid as "someone can't do it, therefore it's not about skill"Carnagath said:
That was a direct response to the line about it being about patience and not skill. I'm not sure about that. I beat Flamelurker on my first try, no walkthrough or guide help. Meanwhile the boss in 2-3. whupped my ass quite a few times before I got the hang of it. Different people, different skill sets. But by your own admition, you died because a mistake YOU made...
Btw, don't underestimate the power of a good shield. Both Purple Flame and Brushwood are accessible to you now (although neither are exactly simple to find). They help wonderfully...
And you believe this applies to Demon's Souls because..?annoyinglizardvoice said:
Checkpoints that aren't close are like putting in golf games.WaderiAAA said:
It pisses me the fuck off everytime. I get to that damn green 3 under par and end up 5 over by the time I get the damn ball to not roll down that 80 degree decline that built that digital green on.
I could put you in a room with no idea how to defeat a boss and give them a one hit kill move that they spam that has a 90 foot wide range in a room that is only 110 feet wide for the player.The Deadpool said:
Now you don't know that pressing x b x a x b b b b c b b b b c b c b c c c c c start will kill the monster. So when it kills you it is indeed your fault. Because a mistake you made.
Does that validate the game in any way? Not really. Just means I made a ridiculously complicated game whose redeeming quality is that it is ridiculously complicated.
Demon's Souls isn't a bad game but when your selling point is being irritating you kind of miss the general point of games. A difficulty option would have been genius on their part frankly.
Would be like Resident Evil 5 only having the highest difficulty level and forcing you to play with an AI partner.
Sure it is ridiculously fucking hard and all your deaths will likely be because you aren't omniscient but does that justify the setting? I don't personally think so.
I think that is the general complaint of DS. It isn't a bad game it just misses a few key OPTIONS <--- that would have made it great.
Kind of like turning off tripping in Brawl, a simple one click option that would have made me continue on with the game beyond a month. But there wasn't an option so I now ignore that entry in the series.
god i read this, n i'd love too see some of the anti-demon's souls crowd play ghost n goblins in the 80's with finite lives and impossible odds
anyway, highly difficult does not = bad/good.
if you aint got the skill/tactics/patience/inclination to play it, then dont.
doesnt make it a bad game because you can't do it, i'm progressing thru slowly and im enjoying the game, as are plenty of others.
anyway, highly difficult does not = bad/good.
if you aint got the skill/tactics/patience/inclination to play it, then dont.
doesnt make it a bad game because you can't do it, i'm progressing thru slowly and im enjoying the game, as are plenty of others.