Demon's Souls
- Thread starter Yahtzee Croshaw
- Start date
The best way to get Atkinson's attention is by being polite, using facts, and voicing disagreement towards his policies. The best you're going to get out of spamming his inbox or by sending hundreds of rude e-mails is him changing his e-mail, and the worst that could happen is him deciding that since all of these people were jerks about it, then he can just dismiss everyone's opinion since they're all probably not worth listening to.
Just be smart about it, and it could work.
Also, on the game. Yeah, I hear you. I wish it were different, but I just don't have an infinite amount of time to play games or watch movies or, well, anything. That doesn't mean I don't love new gaming experiences or that I don't love a challenge, but it does mean I just don't have the time nor patience for some things. It's one thing for me to "waste time" by experiencing a new medium or challenging myself by playing through on a harder difficulty setting or something, and it's another thing entirely to "waste time" by doing the same thing over and over because that's just how the game rolls.
Just be smart about it, and it could work.
Also, on the game. Yeah, I hear you. I wish it were different, but I just don't have an infinite amount of time to play games or watch movies or, well, anything. That doesn't mean I don't love new gaming experiences or that I don't love a challenge, but it does mean I just don't have the time nor patience for some things. It's one thing for me to "waste time" by experiencing a new medium or challenging myself by playing through on a harder difficulty setting or something, and it's another thing entirely to "waste time" by doing the same thing over and over because that's just how the game rolls.
A whiny one at that.axleblaze said:Interesting article...
You're still a pussy though.
'whaa, monster hit me once and i died, and I had to start all over again!!!! whaaaa' - damn straight. doesn't that remind you of another game..like Super Mario Bros? This game is waaaaaay more forgiving then that one ever was.
Every item you pick up or buy is still with you after you 'die', as well as any leveling up you do. Also, some doors you unlock stay open forever, creating a permanent shortcut.
Ya'll have been molly-coddled too much. Now get off my lawn.
Oh mr. game-hater, i hope you like bizzare perverted porn, cause i'm gonan find all sorts of sites in which i can sue your email.
Also, who here thinks, given explanation that /b/ would hate him or would the still go not yout personal army... been waiting for a chance to "use" the massive force of group-stupidity that is 4-chan.
Also, who here thinks, given explanation that /b/ would hate him or would the still go not yout personal army... been waiting for a chance to "use" the massive force of group-stupidity that is 4-chan.
This idea that creating an "easy" instant win mode has no effect on the "very hard" difficulty setting is a joke. Difficulty across any one game has a range. If you make an instant you win mode, the hardest setting gets easier. Why? Because it has to be very hard, but not impossible, for the person who is capable of gaining enjoyment on very easy.
Look at the hardest settings in major recent blockbuster titles.
Very Hard in Fallout 3 was not hard for anyone who has been playing games for a long time. I would have called it normal. It was fine, but hardly much of a challenge.
Same problem with Nightmare on Dragon Age. Its ok, I enjoy it. But it is by no means very hard. If you have played Bioware role playing games before I cannot imagine using anything other than Nightmare.
I would have no problem with easy mode or a chapter skip option or even automatic mode if it did not effect the highest level of difficulty. But it always does. Games on any difficulty setting on the whole are easier now.
The highest difficulty settings should be going the other way. As more people get more experienced, games need to have settings to challenge those people.
Look at the hardest settings in major recent blockbuster titles.
Very Hard in Fallout 3 was not hard for anyone who has been playing games for a long time. I would have called it normal. It was fine, but hardly much of a challenge.
Same problem with Nightmare on Dragon Age. Its ok, I enjoy it. But it is by no means very hard. If you have played Bioware role playing games before I cannot imagine using anything other than Nightmare.
I would have no problem with easy mode or a chapter skip option or even automatic mode if it did not effect the highest level of difficulty. But it always does. Games on any difficulty setting on the whole are easier now.
The highest difficulty settings should be going the other way. As more people get more experienced, games need to have settings to challenge those people.
rofl. Ah, egocentrism. when you mix two (or more) different kinds, the explosion rivals what I imagine matter/antimatter interaction must be like.
FWIW, I've noticed that my level of tolerance is about 10-15 minutes between save points. Any more than that and a failure results in a substantial impact on the time I can allot to my personal recreation on any given day... and that time is very precious to me.
While I don't necessarily prefer the 'no-punishment-for-dying' game mechanic (BioShock, for example), I find it far more tolerable than the overly harsh punishment variety. Why? Because I'll still try to not die-- but maybe that's just me. Never even once did I do a berzerker charge on a Big Daddy in BioShock over and over next to a VitaChamber because, while I knew I could've, I wouldn't have felt like I really succeeded in beating the game if I had used that sleazy tactic.
That is called self-control, and I much prefer it over games that take the choice away from you and inflict a substantial time penalty-- particularly those that have 'unavoidable insta-kill' mechanics in them... it's very simple: out of my day, I get about 2 hours to have fun. 30 minutes between checkpoints means that if I screw up 3 times, I have spent 2 hours being frustrated, and no time left for relaxation or entertainment.
I'm sorry; that's just not recreation to me, and it's not the sort of gamble I like to engage in.
All that being said, I'll probably take a spin at DS over at my friend's house. He really enjoys it, and he usually isn't quite as good a gamer as I am, so maybe Yahtzee is being a bit hyperbolic... (but that doesn't mean his point completely lacks validity however.)
FWIW, I've noticed that my level of tolerance is about 10-15 minutes between save points. Any more than that and a failure results in a substantial impact on the time I can allot to my personal recreation on any given day... and that time is very precious to me.
While I don't necessarily prefer the 'no-punishment-for-dying' game mechanic (BioShock, for example), I find it far more tolerable than the overly harsh punishment variety. Why? Because I'll still try to not die-- but maybe that's just me. Never even once did I do a berzerker charge on a Big Daddy in BioShock over and over next to a VitaChamber because, while I knew I could've, I wouldn't have felt like I really succeeded in beating the game if I had used that sleazy tactic.
That is called self-control, and I much prefer it over games that take the choice away from you and inflict a substantial time penalty-- particularly those that have 'unavoidable insta-kill' mechanics in them... it's very simple: out of my day, I get about 2 hours to have fun. 30 minutes between checkpoints means that if I screw up 3 times, I have spent 2 hours being frustrated, and no time left for relaxation or entertainment.
I'm sorry; that's just not recreation to me, and it's not the sort of gamble I like to engage in.
All that being said, I'll probably take a spin at DS over at my friend's house. He really enjoys it, and he usually isn't quite as good a gamer as I am, so maybe Yahtzee is being a bit hyperbolic... (but that doesn't mean his point completely lacks validity however.)
Dr who series 4, episode: the stolen earth, after following the tandoka trail to a dead end at the medusa cascade.randomrob said:
now isnt it custamary to hand out cookies at this time?
Where in my original posting did I say he was wrong? Where did I give you the impression? If you read it, you would not have found any of those words? Here is my original post:Simriel said:
Please point out where I used the words "You are wrong! this game is brilliant!"
I can't handle criticism? Okay, let's go with that because it really does not matter what you think. I hear a lot worse from my peers in my chosen profession. It looks to me that you cannot handle criticism either because you overreacted when I posted my rebuttal.
Does anyone else who doesn't even live in Australia want to send Atkinson a verbal thrashing after reading this article?
Oh my God, all I want to say, is thank you for saying 'Frankenstein's monster' instead of 'Frankenstein', I don't usually get too seriously nerd-ragey over stuff, but when people call the monster 'Frankenstein', I flip my shit pretty bad, irrationally so.
So thank you, Yahtzee, thank you for not being an uncultured cretin.
So thank you, Yahtzee, thank you for not being an uncultured cretin.
But Splosion Man has checkpoints. It might be difficult but a death results in only being kicked back a few minutes as opposed to a few hours.Anarex said:
And as for Bioshock, you can select a difficulty as well as turn off vita chambers. Also his main point about the checkpoints in that game was that A) there were so many of them and B) they made the game non threatening and that's something I agree with to an extent. When I first started the game I did not know that I could walk past the Big Daddy and kill a different one later for the little sister. I thought there were 3 per level and I had to kill all 3. As it turns out I killed one, then another one showed up, followed immediately by another one. I fought all three in the same spot, back to back, without ever leaving for say, ammo.
That meant I died and a whole lot at that. But it wasn't a problem because I respawned 2 feet away. The result of this was that I killed a Big Daddy with a wrench and half a bar of plasmid power per respawn. The Big Daddy which is supposed to be a big scary threat was completely non menacing, just really tedious.
That's the thing about checkpoints is that there has to be just the right balance. If the game is obnoxiously difficult and is meant to be so then there had better be frequent checkpoints. If a game isn't all that challenging and the only punishment for dying is I have to walk back into that next room then nothing is threatening in the slightest.
I like a game that challenges me. I want a game to kick my ass three ways til sunday. Should I overcome the challenge however then I'm done. I beat it, I move on, that's all. If I die on the next challenge then I should do that one over, not both.
The final boss of God of War kicked my ass (specifically the segment where Kratos has to protect his family). I had to do it an obscene amount of times (those damn sword wielding Kratos kill the family in like 2 hits tops) but I finally beat it and felt accomplished. God of War was a challenging game in a lot of ways but it never really got frustrating (there were maybe two or three instances of me going "EVIL DESIGNERS! EVIL!" but I never say, threw a controller) and that's a balance that developers really need to find.
Demon's Souls doesn't do that at all. Demon's Souls creates a huge challenge and if you fuck up 10 seconds from the end of an hour long stretch of gameplay, your ass has to do it over. That's not fun, its irritating.
yeah, it's just too bad he might not be able to play Silent Hill at all, I mean, there is a high chance he won't like it anyway, but seeing as I feel the same way about horror games as Yahtzee does, it would be a real shame if he didn't at least get to play it.
Actually other reviewers and word of mouth both only seem to be saying positives about the game aside from repetition in the monster sections and its brevity.flabslapper said:
Then again this is Yahtzee so the norm doesn't necessarily apply to him, but that's why we watch him rant so it works out I guess.
Also I love horror games. Best. Genre. Ever.
That graph is entertaining and all, but there are far too many independant variables to take into account for that to be serious. For example, we were experiencing huge economic growth from the mid-late 90's until just a few years ago.Mertruve said:Hey, a link was found!
OT: I think Yahtzee's article here only makes me think that he doesn't get the game, regardless of what he says. The game is about an immersive environment, a sense of fear of dying, and ultimately, feeling very good about yourself after you take down that boss you've been trying to kill for hours.
Oh really? I have the PS3 version. I wouldn't know.Anarex said:
Well you can on PS3 so I guess if you want Bioshock Hard Edition then get it on PS3.
Hmmm, well one problem with the idea of including a "difficulty select" in Demon's Souls is that when you get down to it, the game really isn't all that difficult in of itself. The monsters are substantially weaker than the character for the most part, excepting of course bosses, and in many cases it comes down to the simple RPG staple of matching weapon type to opponent type. Say using blunt weapons on skeletons in time-honored Dungeons And Dragons tradition. World "4" which is the big farming/level up area is frequently screamed about as being "too tough" because of how hard things potentially hit, but that's only when people go in with the standard swords and spears. Walking in with say a club, or the morning star conveinently placed fairly close to the entrance of "World 5" turns that from being knuckle clenchingly hard, into almost a joke.
I can't see how making the character stronger and the enemies weaker would really change much, because typically when you die it's due to a trap, or gimmick. You remove a lot of that stuff or just let people walk through it unhurt, and well... I think it would ruin the game.
I see Demon's Souls as being sort of like an RPG version of the old game "Shinobi" and it's various cousins ("Rolling Thunder", etc...). You die, and you need to replay the level. There ARE checkpoints but they are spaced out a bit, but largely because the game itself is not all that big when you get down to it. The game is sort of an RPG homage to those old school games.
Like many RPGs the game is designed to take dozens of hours to complete (and longer for people like me who are cursed with slow reflexs, given that this is an action RPG). A lot of that is intented to be both replaing, and also trial and error as you experiment with differant weapons from various worlds in differant situations.
I'm not disagreeing that this is not a game for casuals, and it's not the kind of game that you can get the full experience of in a quick weekly review period. You definatly seem to understand the intention of it being "hard". I just think your wrong about being able to add a difficulty selector to it. I really have no idea how that would work without making the game into a mere shadow of itself where you would just walk from one end of the world to the other because I just can't see a middle ground here given the way things are set up.
I can't see how making the character stronger and the enemies weaker would really change much, because typically when you die it's due to a trap, or gimmick. You remove a lot of that stuff or just let people walk through it unhurt, and well... I think it would ruin the game.
I see Demon's Souls as being sort of like an RPG version of the old game "Shinobi" and it's various cousins ("Rolling Thunder", etc...). You die, and you need to replay the level. There ARE checkpoints but they are spaced out a bit, but largely because the game itself is not all that big when you get down to it. The game is sort of an RPG homage to those old school games.
Like many RPGs the game is designed to take dozens of hours to complete (and longer for people like me who are cursed with slow reflexs, given that this is an action RPG). A lot of that is intented to be both replaing, and also trial and error as you experiment with differant weapons from various worlds in differant situations.
I'm not disagreeing that this is not a game for casuals, and it's not the kind of game that you can get the full experience of in a quick weekly review period. You definatly seem to understand the intention of it being "hard". I just think your wrong about being able to add a difficulty selector to it. I really have no idea how that would work without making the game into a mere shadow of itself where you would just walk from one end of the world to the other because I just can't see a middle ground here given the way things are set up.
