Demon's Souls
- Thread starter Yahtzee Croshaw
- Start date
I think the crux of the argument is: "how difficult is too difficult"?
See, some people die, lose half an hour and go "Awww man, this game sucks what a waste of my time." While some people die, lose half an hour and go "Well, I better not die again."
One may see the sparse use of checkpoints (and, btw, they ARE there. You may not respawn where you die, but you CAN open shortcuts so you die you don't have to go through the whole stage again) as a deterrement. As making the game too hard for the sake of making the game too hard. One may also see it as an incentive, to get better at the game.
Demon's Souls is scary. It's quiet, moody, desolate. You're alone and death stalks at every corner. But you're only scared if that death MEANS something.
Every encounter can lead to your death. But every encounter can also, just as easily, lead to your taking 0 damage. If you respawn five minutes earlier, death becomes MEANINGLESS. The game loses its fear, cuz all you have to do is rush headlong and use trial and error to win.
But if you respawn a HALF hour ago, you don't WANT to depend on trial and error, because that's a waste of time. The game then forces you into being careful. Survival through paranoia. You block at every turn, dodge roll at the slightless noises, so on so forth.
Demon's Souls challenge is intrisically tied into its world. Its ambiance, its immersion, is all tied into its challenge. Make the game easier and you lose all that makes the game good...
See, some people die, lose half an hour and go "Awww man, this game sucks what a waste of my time." While some people die, lose half an hour and go "Well, I better not die again."
One may see the sparse use of checkpoints (and, btw, they ARE there. You may not respawn where you die, but you CAN open shortcuts so you die you don't have to go through the whole stage again) as a deterrement. As making the game too hard for the sake of making the game too hard. One may also see it as an incentive, to get better at the game.
Demon's Souls is scary. It's quiet, moody, desolate. You're alone and death stalks at every corner. But you're only scared if that death MEANS something.
Every encounter can lead to your death. But every encounter can also, just as easily, lead to your taking 0 damage. If you respawn five minutes earlier, death becomes MEANINGLESS. The game loses its fear, cuz all you have to do is rush headlong and use trial and error to win.
But if you respawn a HALF hour ago, you don't WANT to depend on trial and error, because that's a waste of time. The game then forces you into being careful. Survival through paranoia. You block at every turn, dodge roll at the slightless noises, so on so forth.
Demon's Souls challenge is intrisically tied into its world. Its ambiance, its immersion, is all tied into its challenge. Make the game easier and you lose all that makes the game good...
Atkin's email?
Why do I get the feeling Yahtzee's spiteful fanboys/girls are going to use that?
Oh...
Why do I get the feeling Yahtzee's spiteful fanboys/girls are going to use that?
Oh...
Okay, I'll agree with that partially. For you, it is a bigger problem than many other jobless/student gamers who don't have to crank out a review a week and don't have the money for lots of games.Yahtzee Croshaw said:
The time wasted isn't entirely wasted, though. Unlike grinding or really bad game design, it's used to help keep the game suspenseful in a way that mostly only roguelikes have accomplished before. Does the suspense fail when you accidentally fall to your death in a level you've pretty much mastered and just want to get something specific in that level? A little bit, but the blame is firmly on you at that point and not on the game suddenly teleporting in instant death pits.
Time isn't the sole problem, games aren't meant to be a grind. If you're telling a story to someone, and you make a mistake in that story, do you repeat the last half hour of what you just said or correct it and move on? You do get an extra long story that's extremely accurate and the person listening will understand it with a great depth, assuming you haven't bored them to death in the meantime or they just up and left. Which is what I normally do with these kind of games.Ryuk2 said:
Pointlessly killing the character then sending them back half an hour isn't difficulty, it's pointlessly trying to figure out what the game designer meant for you to do when there's no clue on that. Mirror's Edge had that problem, great game, pretty as hell, but you spend half of it in trial and error attempts to figure out what the game designer wants you to do. It's not fun or enjoyable, it's frustrating.
Maybe you have so much free time that if a game doesn't pointlessly occupy an extra 90 hours of your life it's of no interest to you. That's not really most of us.
The best thing about Atkinson and the recent AvP classification is the sheer irony:
The game will be rated 18+ everywhere else, but in Australia (where 18's aren't allowed because they're too violent according to that nob) it's been given a 15+ so that it may be sold.
I mean "DUH!" you f*cking moron.
The game will be rated 18+ everywhere else, but in Australia (where 18's aren't allowed because they're too violent according to that nob) it's been given a 15+ so that it may be sold.
I mean "DUH!" you f*cking moron.
TO THE BATCAVE SPAMMER! I feel horrible that i just said that. And that I'm still going to email him even though i live half way round the world. LEt's all email him one sentence:williebaz said:
"You suck arse."
Hey Yahtzee, I'm not Australian, but I've been quite upset over the fact the Australian ratings board refuses to admit the R18+ rating. So I decided to write my own little e-mail with the address you provided:
Dear Mr. Atkinson,
For years, I have been troubled by the fact the Australian ratings board has not instituted a similar MA+ rating as exists in UK. It seems unfair to censor an artist's material in order to grant it classification in Australia for this is an infringement on the right to freedom of the speech. I understand your position that some of these more violent games are able to impact children's behavior, but this is a misconception. Several journals from around the world (The Harvard Medical School Center for Medical Health, The Journal of Adolescent Health, and The British Medical Journal) have shown no conclusive link between video game usage and violent activity. People who still claim that video games incite violence have been widely discredited in the United States, such as Jack Thompson (though mostly due to frivolous lawsuits against video game developers). Ultimately, the decision to purchase a violent video game should rest with the parents of children who play them. I hope you reconsider your position on admitting the R18 rating to the Australian Ratings Board and thank you for your time.
Sincerely,
Christopher Jaramillo
Dear Mr. Atkinson,
For years, I have been troubled by the fact the Australian ratings board has not instituted a similar MA+ rating as exists in UK. It seems unfair to censor an artist's material in order to grant it classification in Australia for this is an infringement on the right to freedom of the speech. I understand your position that some of these more violent games are able to impact children's behavior, but this is a misconception. Several journals from around the world (The Harvard Medical School Center for Medical Health, The Journal of Adolescent Health, and The British Medical Journal) have shown no conclusive link between video game usage and violent activity. People who still claim that video games incite violence have been widely discredited in the United States, such as Jack Thompson (though mostly due to frivolous lawsuits against video game developers). Ultimately, the decision to purchase a violent video game should rest with the parents of children who play them. I hope you reconsider your position on admitting the R18 rating to the Australian Ratings Board and thank you for your time.
Sincerely,
Christopher Jaramillo
I think the key mistake you made was "when there's no clue on that". There are PLENTY of clues.robrob said:
And therein lies the problem. You assume none of those deaths were avoidable, but every time Yatzhee died, he died on a fairly easily avoidable part of the game.
He died on tutotial boss, but that's optional so it matters not.
He died on the first boss, but only because he waited until MID BATTLE to change equipment, when he was given warning OUTSIDE of battle that fire helps. Hardly the game's fault.
He died on the SECOND "long bridge with fire breathing dragon" portion of the game, and there are also a ton of signs and blood stains on the ground that warn a cautious, attentive player.
He died by dogs because... No idea. Dogs are easy to kill. I guess he didn't block or dodge properly?
His last death is the only "hard" one, and the enemies are clearly visible BEFORE you make the run if one were to pain attention (although, admitedly, hard to avoid).
The game throws few surprises at you, even fewer unavoidable. Especially if one uses the online mode...
Ouch, Micheal's going to be feeling that in the morning.
Also, I wouldn't worry about the rating for silent hill, Its a 15 over here in brittania.
Also, I wouldn't worry about the rating for silent hill, Its a 15 over here in brittania.
Still no mention of the fact you thought dodging in this game was a step backwards, and not a roll to the side which it is?
And that a pile of burning bodies was an obvious sign of danger which would make a normal player raise their shield?
I'm sorry but that last review was a pile of uninformed crap. Your reviews usually have a hint of truth behind the humour but that last one was the worst representation of Demon's Souls I've ever seen.
It's even funnier how you try to disguise it by pretending that the people pointing out your unresearched and poorly drawn out misinformitites are said by kids.
You also said you didn't think it was hard but then your review clearly moaned because you got killed because you were barging in playing it like it was Dragon Age too many times. WTF?
And that a pile of burning bodies was an obvious sign of danger which would make a normal player raise their shield?
I'm sorry but that last review was a pile of uninformed crap. Your reviews usually have a hint of truth behind the humour but that last one was the worst representation of Demon's Souls I've ever seen.
It's even funnier how you try to disguise it by pretending that the people pointing out your unresearched and poorly drawn out misinformitites are said by kids.
You also said you didn't think it was hard but then your review clearly moaned because you got killed because you were barging in playing it like it was Dragon Age too many times. WTF?
oh shi- he posted e-mail!
Angry post from an angry Brit is being writen after i finish this comment >
As for the challenging gameplay, i love hard games. It gives more satisfication (is that a word? It is now.) to the player & it helps pass more time than the average "pick-up & go" games.
Angry post from an angry Brit is being writen after i finish this comment >
As for the challenging gameplay, i love hard games. It gives more satisfication (is that a word? It is now.) to the player & it helps pass more time than the average "pick-up & go" games.