Demon's Souls

[Fuhjem]

But we are legion.
We do not forgive,
and we do not forget.
These ghosts will haunt you, Mr. Atkinson.

This part makes you seem psychopathic. I would cut it. unless of course you want Atkinson to add more fuel to the fire and claim a gamer/ satanic link.

From the Wiki:
"Legion, the demon of Gadarenes, appears frequently as a character in popular culture. The Christian New Testament gospels of Mark, Luke and Matthew describe an incident in which Jesus meets a man, or men, possessed by demons who, when asked what their name is, respond:

Mark 5:9 "My name is Legion, for we are many."

Me = Not Aware of this.

Should fix that.

 

[Fuhjem]

This more appropriate?

Dear Mr. Atkinson,

While you may believe that gamers and game enthusiasts alike are just a small minority composed of small, helpless children; the real world is quite the contrary.
In the real world, gamers count for around 70% of the worlds population. That 70% counts for human beings of ages from 5 to 33. Thirty-Three years old is not a child, and should be treated as an adult.
A percentage, as you hopefully know, is nothing more than a fancy fraction. 49/100 would be a minority. 50/100 would be an equilibrium. 51/100 is a majority. We account for 70/100. That is MUCH, much more than what is the bare minimum for a majority.

Now I don't know much about how math works in Australia, I'm from another country, but in reality 70% is a very large Majority and you should listen to that majority.
We know of your false promises to allow games an 18+ rating after re-elections. We do not believe them.
Australian gamers, who make up MUCH more of your population than you may think, will not let you be re-elected.

Now, please, enjoy the hot steaming load in your inbox.

 

[Chunko]

I'm going to spam micheal atkinson now.

[email protected]

I'd be amazed if he didn't have a filter or possibly someone to sort through all the hatemail. Even though he's a douche, he doesn't have unlimited time.

Do you guys think that this is a good letter for Mr. Atkinson?

Dear Mr. Atkinson,

While you may believe that gamers and game enthusiasts alike are just a small minority composed of small, helpless children; the real world is quite the contrary.
In the real world, gamers count for around 70% of the Australias population. That 70% counts for human beings of ages from 5 to 33. Thirty-Three years old is not a child, and should be treated as an adult.
A percentage, as you hopefully know, is nothing more than a fancy fraction. 49/100 would be a minority. 50/100 would be an equilibrium. 51/100 is a majority. We account for 70/100. That is MUCH, much more than what is the bare minimum for a majority.

Now I don't know much about how math works in Australia, I'm from another country, but in reality 70% is a very large Majority and you should listen to that majority.
We know of your false promises to allow games an 18+ rating after re-elections. We do not believe them.
But we are legion.
We do not forgive,
and we do not forget.
These ghosts will haunt you, Mr. Atkinson.

Now, please, enjoy the hot steaming load in your inbox.

Tell me what you think.

Change 'worlds population' to Australias, 70% of the worlds population do not play videogames, that's an outrageous claim (the majority of the worlds population are, in fact, living in poverty). I'd probably cut the anonymus part tool, enough people have been threatening him and it's acheived nothing.

I doubt he has a filter for this, how could he tell what's spam and what's not.

 

[Chunko]

Just an idea, what if we forwarded all of our spam to him.

 

[Chunko]

I tried a different approach

Pretty much every government in the world think so (including my own Norwegian government). Maybe you should reconsider too?

Sincerely yours,
Vivendel

I just lied and said I was Australian.

 

[Dys]

I'm going to spam micheal atkinson now.

[email protected]

I'd be amazed if he didn't have a filter or possibly someone to sort through all the hatemail. Even though he's a douche, he doesn't have unlimited time.

Do you guys think that this is a good letter for Mr. Atkinson?

Dear Mr. Atkinson,

While you may believe that gamers and game enthusiasts alike are just a small minority composed of small, helpless children; the real world is quite the contrary.
In the real world, gamers count for around 70% of the Australias population. That 70% counts for human beings of ages from 5 to 33. Thirty-Three years old is not a child, and should be treated as an adult.
A percentage, as you hopefully know, is nothing more than a fancy fraction. 49/100 would be a minority. 50/100 would be an equilibrium. 51/100 is a majority. We account for 70/100. That is MUCH, much more than what is the bare minimum for a majority.

Now I don't know much about how math works in Australia, I'm from another country, but in reality 70% is a very large Majority and you should listen to that majority.
We know of your false promises to allow games an 18+ rating after re-elections. We do not believe them.
But we are legion.
We do not forgive,
and we do not forget.
These ghosts will haunt you, Mr. Atkinson.

Now, please, enjoy the hot steaming load in your inbox.

Tell me what you think.

Change 'worlds population' to Australias, 70% of the worlds population do not play videogames, that's an outrageous claim (the majority of the worlds population are, in fact, living in poverty). I'd probably cut the anonymus part tool, enough people have been threatening him and it's acheived nothing.

I doubt he has a filter for this, how could he tell what's spam and what's not.

There would have to be some sort of filter, perhaps blocking specific phrases, otherwise he'd literally spend all his time sorting through his mail (I can assure you a great many vocal Australians would email him, most of which would be abusive dribble).

 

[Sterence]

Yahtzee just comes off as a giant baby if you ask me.

It seems he was butthurt about the game kicking his ass, and felt his manliness was mocked or something, because his death "wasn't funny", unlike in IWBTG.

As for the checkpoints/difficulty system bitching... Grow a pair. I'm not gonna go all reviewer-ish on him, but come on. That's the point of the game."

Did you even listen to what he said in his review? It was something like "Yes the game is difficult but it doesn't seem like I've been given much of a chance here" he is saying it's a bad game because they made it hard on purpose, if im playing a game and i cant beat a certain part and have to repeat it alot it doesn't seem very entertaining. Progressing through a game and getting to the ending with a challenge is entertaining but if that doesn't seem achievable then what's the point in continuing?

 

[Sylocat]

Wow... given Yahtzee's opinions on nostalgia, I never expected him to like IWBTG. That's a pleasant surprise.

And yes, thank you for posting Atkinson's e-mail addy. I don't know how much good it will do, but at least we can let him know that we're not all going to go away quietly.

 

[Sylocat]

I think the problem with an 18 rating in games, is the same problem with the AO (or is it A?) rating in America. Stores will refuse out-right to stock the product because of fears that it may be sold to people who are under-aged.

Sadly, I don't think that's what they're afraid of at all.

What the Moral Guardians are scared of is the thought that ANYONE would buy an AO game. Because sex is evil, even adults can't be trusted to make their own decisions, so we need to coddle the poor innocent children until they're 35 and/or herded off into an arranged marriage.

 

[flamezlord]

Sent Michael Atkinson an e-mail. I was polite relative to how I normally react to such a situation. But I probably came off as a jerk anyways

On to Yahtzee's article, I agree with his point about difficulty settings. Whenever a game doesn't have one, I get confused. It doesn't have to be an effort; you can simply create a variable that you multiply by certain constants to determine things like enemy hp and damage. But I don't really agree with Yahtzee's point about checkpoints. Where's the intensity if the price for failure is backtracking thirty seconds? He made a similar comment when discussing timed-button sequences, why contradict himself for everything else?

 

[angel85]

I still hate memory test games, but you're right about hard games not always being frustrating. When I played n+ I could die literally dozens of times in some of the stages, but I'd always respawn back in the same room so I wouldn't lose any progress, if the save points were set up so you'd have to go back to the first room in an episode when you died the game would have been virtually unplayable.

 

[Anarex]

All this debate about whether the checkpoint system is really about difficulty is silly and should stop. It really just boils down to whether you want to play a game that inspires real fear or not. People that get truly upset about having wasted there time when they die should not be playing the game. Its not for you. If the game is making you angry about having died or messed up, the designer did its job right. That is the point. You are suppose to be upset and angry you died. It was built that way on purpose.

Some people game to see the story all the way through. Like a book or a movie. If you paid 60 bucks for it, they feel entitled to see the end without feeling frustrated. That is ok. It is a perfectly valid reason to play games. Go play the newest Prince of Persia or Assassin's Creed or Uncharted 2, they were made specifically with you in mind. It fact, more and more games are being made with this player in mind. But, accept that other players exist who gain enjoyment from something else. Understand that these players were here first. When we started gaming this is all we had. Do you think we played Final Fantasy or Super Mario for the rich story?

For many people, gaming is not just about seeing the story to the end. We want to loose. We want to die many times and be severely punished for doing so. When I see a boss for the first time, I want it to absolutely destroy me. When I die because I messed up, I want to be punished so that I will learn from my mistakes. There are limits, but it has to be meaningful punishment. It has to make you upset on some level. I want to be afraid of dying. To feel like I need to be careful. It makes the victory that much better for me. Just because it has no significance for you does not mean our view is invalid.

Why does every game have to be for the casual gamer? Some games should be just for us. Besides this game and the last Ninja Gaiden, name the last major console game that was for us. All the games used to be for us. Now only a very few. Giving the few games made for us negative reviews is wrong. We are the people the industry was built on. We should never be totally left out in the cold. Without us, you would have no games.

 

[Riobux]

I think the problem with an 18 rating in games, is the same problem with the AO (or is it A?) rating in America. Stores will refuse out-right to stock the product because of fears that it may be sold to people who are under-aged.

Sadly, I don't think that's what they're afraid of at all.

What the Moral Guardians are scared of is the thought that ANYONE would buy an AO game. Because sex is evil, even adults can't be trusted to make their own decisions, so we need to coddle the poor innocent children until they're 35 and/or herded off into an arranged marriage.

Haha, I doubt that's what they're afraid of as well, but that's likely what will happen due to a silly "family image". Although, if I'm wrong on that feel free to correct me. The problem is that despite our media and society being flooded by "questionable" things that go unnoticed or, simply, without a care, we still think that computer games alone influences crime. Honestly, crime needs motivation and influence and influence you can get anywhere.

 

[Stewie Plisken]

All this debate about whether the checkpoint system is really about difficulty is silly and should stop. It really just boils down to whether you want to play a game that inspires real fear or not. People that get truly upset about having wasted there time when they die should not be playing the game. Its not for you. If the game is making you angry about having died or messed up, the designer did its job right. That is the point. You are suppose to be upset and angry you died. It was built that way on purpose.

Some people game to see the story all the way through. Like a book or a movie. If you paid 60 bucks for it, they feel entitled to see the end without feeling frustrated. That is ok. It is a perfectly valid reason to play games. Go play the newest Prince of Persia or Assassin's Creed or Uncharted 2, they were made specifically with you in mind. It fact, more and more games are being made with this player in mind. But, accept that other players exist who gain enjoyment from something else. Understand that these players were here first. When we started gaming this is all we had. Do you think we played Final Fantasy or Super Mario for the rich story?

For many people, gaming is not just about seeing the story to the end. We want to loose. We want to die many times and be severely punished for doing so. When I see a boss for the first time, I want it to absolutely destroy me. When I die because I messed up, I want to be punished so that I will learn from my mistakes. There are limits, but it has to be meaningful punishment. It has to make you upset on some level. I want to be afraid of dying. To feel like I need to be careful. It makes the victory that much better for me. Just because it has no significance for you does not mean our view is invalid.

Why does every game have to be for the casual gamer? Some games should be just for us. Besides this game and the last Ninja Gaiden, name the last major console game that was for us. All the games used to be for us. Now only a very few. Giving the few games made for us negative reviews is wrong. We are the people the industry was built on. We should never be totally left out in the cold. Without us, you would have no games.

Could you be more patronizing? I'm an old-school gamer myself and I can tell with certainty I would end up smashing the game disk to pieces. Hell, Yahtzee -whose review is apparently 'wrong'- is an old-school gamer and he still verbally assasinated Demon's Soul. Where do we fit in your plan?

 

[TheDrunkNinja]

Yahtzee, I know you're all for comedy and sarcasm, but you missed a few glaring points that would have made things clearer for those who rely on you to help them choose games.

1: "No checkpoints"
No, there's no checkpoints in the sense that "Oh shit, I died, I'll respawn here and only have to walk five feet to get back where I was", but there ARE game mechanics that function the same way and it seems you either willfully omitted mentioning them or didn't spend any time exploring to find them.

In the first level, the two side towers of the main gatehouse have locked gates; make it down to the bottom from the top entrance via the battlement, and there's a lever you can pull to open them. Those gates stay open, and act like checkpoints because even if you die you can just fight back up the tower and instantly be back on the battlement without having to slog through the entire beginning again.

1a: "No saving until a boss is beaten"

Not true. Above-mentioned unlocked shortcuts STAY even if you quit the game, go somewhere else, or die.

2: "Dodging doesn't do shit"

Dodging works, but it's not a quicktime event. You have to keep dodging or blocking, and the skeleton scenario you described counts as TWO attacks, so you have to respond to both by either blocking, countering, or dodge/rolling. You can't just sit there like a twat and bask in the glory of your dodge. BTW - what he did to you is called a Riposte.

3: "Dragon came out of nowhere"

Sure, it's seem that way if you ran out onto the rampart like a football player chasing teenage skirts, but if you'd explored the castle gatehouse you'd have SEEN that dragon and realized the entire level is one big area, and HE FLIES BEHIND THE GATEHOUSE.

4: "Notes left by other players are worthless"

Again, you didn't play long enough to see this (clearly), but bad comments don't last more than a day. If messages aren't promoted, they're deleted during a server cycle (about once a day).

5: "Only way to get HP back is to defeat a major Demon"

Again you didn't seem to play enough to find this out, but you can also get your life back by helping another player (Via blue-eye stone), killing another player (via red-eye stone), or having a message that is promoted by a certain number of other players as being helpful.

6: "Difficulty.DemonsSouls = Concrete.obj + forehead.obj"

Again, not true. Each enemy simply requires a different tactic to beat, and the game punishes you for running in like Rambo without thinking about it. Once you learn a tactic to defeat each enemy, it's more about keeping up with the new ones and upgrading your armor than banging your head against an impossible wall. One solution does not fit all monsters.

Also, Turpentine kills those dogs MUCH quicker, upgraded armor will help you IMMENSELY against the Tower Knight and his guards, and yes, the underground way is much much easier.

In conclusion, all this stuff I learned on my own because I'm awesome that way, but if the difficulty is like so much water in your treacle, there's an official wiki that everybody who plays the game contributes to where you can quickly learn these hints and benefit from other players' experiences.

The game is great and I think you should give it another go with this knowledge.

- Helba

He's pretty much referring to this elitist douchebag.

 

[Anarex]

They are the people who have adjusted their expectations. People who just don't remember the feelings of joy and accomplishment they got from beating those ancient NES titles. People who have become casual gamers out of necessity. I am not saying its wrong. I don't have time to game seriously anymore. I play about 2-3 titles per year now. The only real time I have to play is on the weekends. I get causal gaming. Its just not for me. I would rather play rarely and experience the joy I got when I was a kid. I have no interest in a watered down experience that fits better into my weekday schedule. Obviously, my style of play will not support the industry anymore. Casual gamers are important. I just want to make sure I get 2-3 titles per year just for me. Giving the very few games made for us negative reviews because they are too hard is just mean spirited.

 

[The Deadpool]

Could you be more patronizing? I'm an old-school gamer myself and I can tell with certainty I would end up smashing the game disk to pieces. Hell, Yahtzee -whose review is apparently 'wrong'- is an old-school gamer and he still verbally assasinated Demon's Soul. Where do we fit in your plan?

Yeah, I also disagree with the idea that because I like a good game with an interesting story I must hate a challenging, skill based one, and vice versa.

BUT, I think at heart, man might have a point. Why should a game have to appeal to everyone?

Of course, he seems to be missing the crux of the argument, which is the validity of the long checkpoint system as a game mechanic...

 

[Jzolr0708]

Extra Punctuation: Demon's Souls

The problem with Demon's Souls isn't that it's hard, but that it purposefully wastes player's time.

Read Full Article

ahaha, I am, in fact, quite proud of my letter:

Subject: Legal Question on Acquiring Public-Affairs Permit

Greetings Mr. Atkinson,

I was wondering what the legal process would be for reserving a large area on public property in order to hold a community event. This year, the C.F.L.D.C will be hosting a rousing book-burning on the lawn of city hall. Coincidentally we will also be going through several works of world literature and drawing giant black Xes on anything that might make someone feel uncomfortable. We will then proceed to censor all other great works of cinema and video gaming and make sure that all incidences of violence, sex, or creativity are replaced by unicorns and rainbows. After all, how would children know about violence if we never TELL them? This is why times in the past pre-videogaming were so idyllic (Ah, to live again in the halcyon days of the dark ages, world wars, and near-nuclear annihilation!) This has clearly been shown to drastically reduce all manner of violent crime and deviant behavior in society (please ignore all those fancy "Scientists" and "Statisticians" in their ivory towers whose libertine "Scientific Methods" of study have found no such link whatsoever and claimed the media is merely scapegoating as a way of avoiding any analysis of serious sociological issues.) I applaud your continued resistance against public opinion and the concept of free speech. It is good to see that someone at least cares about the messages we pass on to our children

Sincerely,

- Walter A. Silveira
Chairman of the C.F.L.D.C (Censorship and Fascist Luddite Douchebags Committee)

P.S. Don't you just LOVE the game Yahtzee?

EPIC!! my email wasn't nearly as good as yours.

Dammit! I actually tried to be constructive. No one told me that I was supposed to be mean =(

Although I did call him a "deaf to the current generation" idiot, so maybe that counts.

 

[solidstatemind]

The more I read, the more I'm convinced you never played the game. On ym first playthrough, I had to redo maybe half the stages. And even those maybe one or two were redone more than twice.

It's not about repetition like people seem to think.

The game's harsh punishment for death is offset by death being easily avoidable for someone with care and patience. Hand-eye coordination helps, but not running blindly around the corner will keep you alive far more often than quick dodging will...

Uhm... You're right. I haven't played DS yet-- and I said that in my first comment. From my original post on the topic:

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.)

No, I don't explicitly say it, but I think it's reasonable to expect people to conclude I haven't played the game from that statement.

But this isn't the Demon's Souls review we're commenting on here, so whether or not I played the game is only tangentally relevant. This Extra Punctuation was the exposition on how Yahtzee feels the use of artificially long periods between checkpoints as not being a viable game mechanic, rather a cop-out on the part of game developers--- that's it; that's all. I don't think I'm reading it wrong to say that while the thought process might've been initiated for him by the feedback on the DS ZP review, this was generally non-specific to Demon's Souls. Perhaps DS is the exception to the rule, but a single exception does not necessarily invalidate his point. And I have been arguing in support of his position, non-specific to any game. I simply thought that there were aspects that he didn't cover for whatever reason that worthy of consideration in this context. OK, and I got a little tired of the "Haha, the truth is you suck" crowd acting like that is any sort of a legitimate argument whatsoever, too.

I think if you consider my comments in light of that information and leave out any direct application of them to DS specifically, they will make much more sense, particularly in re: mindless repetition, the senselessness of trophy/award elitism, and, of course, the monkeys. (Can't leave out the monkeys. They get angry.)

To provide a quick recap of my argument:

I have a friend who enjoys Demon's Souls. He usually gets frustrated with games more easily than I do, so I'm going to guess that Yahtzee is probably exaggerating a lot about Demon's Souls specifically.

(Actually, new input here: reading between the lines of the ZP review and noting that he didn't drive the fact that DS is at least JRPG-like, a genre he normally loathes, into the ground definitely says something to me: I was going to give it at least a rental based upon that observation alone. I bet you he actually liked it a lot; but it's his job to generate traffic, and nothing generates traffic like dissention. Don't you think that with the flood of email saying "Yahtzee, please check out Demon's Souls! Itz teh B0mBz!", he didn't make the conscious decision that he was going to have to beat the piss out of something about the game? And it worked-- 715 comments on the ZP Review as of this writing, not including the hot lava flows of the EP. Added together it surpasses the hate-fountain of SSBB... and that's saying something!)

HOWEVER, as much as people love to defend a favorite game like they do a child, that exaggeration about Demon's Souls does not invalidate what he is saying about the core issue in general: putting long periods of time between checkpoints is not really a legitmate 'game mechanic'; it's really just lazy game design. I agree with his opinion on this, and think the people who disagree-- again, this is without specificity to DS-- are wrong. What it is, is a way to a) artificially lengthen the playtime of a game, and b) make a game appear harder by attempting to use frustration to simulate difficulty. {Supporting reasons can be found in previous posts.} Some folks- yourself included- have made interesting counter-arguments, but I can't help but notice that that are almost completely (if not 100%) based upon Demon's Souls ... and while it might be interesting to speculate how to use this EP to invalidate some of Yahtzee's original points in the ZP, the central thesis remains intact: 90% of the time, long periods between checkpoints is a bullshit move by the game developer.

The only way I brought DS into this specific conversation was to idlely wonder whether or not its difficulty might actually be a disservice by reducing its fanbase via turning off people who are more recreational gamers than challenge-seekers. And again, that wasn't necessarily a critique of the game itself, it was just a random observation.

But as a postscript, I still think the people who can only muster responses of "Yahtzee is a crybaby. Grow a pair." without any reasonable support are being ridiculously, irrationally defensive of DS (i.e.- fanboys), regardless of how good the game may or may not be, they certainly aren't making it more appealing to people such as myself. That I'm responding to you means that your arguments don't fall into that category, btw.



If folks TL;DR'd. Sorry: nothing much to do at work right before the holidays. Gives me plenty of time to ramble on and on (and on... and on...)

EDIT: Oh, and being a coder, I can tell you that the difficulty level can be used to accomplish much of what the "we want a challenge" crowd seeks, IF the developer bothers to think outside the established paradigms of "harder difficulty = monsters with more health/player with less health and ammo".

 

[PhunkyPhazon]

I went ahead and sent him an e-mail, a polite one that just states our side of the argument. Though in retrospect, I probably shouldn't have mentioned I'm from the U.S.

BTW people, PLEASE don't just spam him. It will only make things worse.