Jimquisition: Dumbing Down for the Filthy Casuals

[VyceVictus]

and none of that splits the community, changes the overall atmosphere, or cheapen the experience?

Are you talking about my examples? Yes, I believe that would be the case. It wasnt that hard, I just remembered back to how other difficult games accomplished this feat and thought "which ones of those dont have to change main game code/could be easily downloaded?". Again, no game has to do any of that stuff, but if it did it would not disrupt the original core game, especially if it was optional.

 

[grumbel]

"I like games all games should cater to me"

I am not saying that all games should cater to me, I am saying I paid for the thing so I should be allowed to play it the way I want. If I want to read a book in reverse, I can. If I want to start a movie right at the end, I can. Games on the other side lock up the content I paid for.

 

[anthony87]

Words will not do justice to how fking dumb your answers are.

Insults are not a replacements for an argument, try again.

Please stop talking to him.....please? You're going to keep answering his questions, he's going to keep bringing up examples that don't make sense, you'll save yourself a lot of time and effort.

 

[anthony87]

Words will not do justice to how fking dumb your answers are.

Insults are not a replacements for an argument, try again.

Please stop talking to him.....please? You're going to keep answering his questions, he's going to keep bringing up examples that don't make sense, you'll save yourself a lot of time and effort.

I'm sorry it's optional is not an answer to my questions... If you want explain how the comunity wont be affected? You can't so pleas carry on with it's optional the game it's self is optional. So why do you want to take this game and turn it into a different game? Do you hate to think a game is lurking out there you don't like is it too much for you?

......What?

Seriously, I have no clue what you're trying to say.

EDIT: Okay now I understand. Fact is you've gotten answers, many answers, just because you don't agree with the answers given doesn't mean that they're not answers. How about you try and contribute to the discussion a little better if you care so much rather than talking nonsense about shooting referees and tits in FIFA game?

But this isn't really something I care about enough to get into anymore. I'll play Dark Souls the way I've always played it. If they were to introduce an "easy mode" of sorts? I'd ignore it, what other people do isn't my concern.

 

[infinity_turtles]

So it's ok to ruin the comunity the online aspect rip out a core gameplay concept and it won't affect me ok yea i believe you.... I call BS

Nobody is forcing you to play on easy. Nobody is forcing easy-mode to be compatible with normal-mode when doing multiplayer. Options are optional. Why is that so hard to understand?

I think you're missing something about designing in an interactive medium. Adding more options is not always a good thing. Which options you include and which you don't is an important aspect that shapes both the design and play experience.

I don't give a damn about who can or can't play the games I do, but an easy mode hurts my ability to enjoy the game for it's challenge. Why? The difficulty is no longer a constant. The game would start with a decision that has by far more impact on my ability to beat the game then anything I decide regarding stat increases or gear. From then on, if I die, I won't feel like it's because the boss is tough, I was ill-prepared, or because there was something tricky I didn't notice. No, it will be because I didn't take the tactically superior choice of easy mode. It becomes as stupid a choice to me as playing the game with only the starting broken straight sword. An artificial challenge I have to place on myself, and I don't enjoy those unless I'm already heavily invested in the game.

You may not get this mindset, and that's fine. But the fact is, there are very few games that I can enjoy the challenge of anymore, and because you want to enjoy this one in addition to all the others you can, you're saying I shouldn't be able to. Do you really need to change one of the last few games I can play for it's challenge to be like all the games I can't? You can't let me have this one game?

 

[anthony87]

so the online will be no different? People in easy won't get to play with people on normal? The development and level design for easy will take no money time or thought for the developers to do? Do you really expect anyone with a brain to swallow that bullshit? @Anthony87

Those things have been addressed by people already but instead of answering them you've just been talking nonsense. I'm not saying that one way is right and the other is wrong, I just don't think it'd be as detrimental as you're all making it out to be.

 

[anthony87]

so the online will be no different? People in easy won't get to play with people on normal? The development and level design for easy will take no money time or thought for the developers to do? Do you really expect anyone with a brain to swallow that bullshit? @Anthony87

Those things have been addressed by people already but instead of answering them you've just been talking nonsense. I'm not saying that one way is right and the other is wrong, I just don't think it'd be as detrimental as you're all making it out to be.

No none of these concerns have been addressed in any meaningful way at all. It's optional is not addressing any of my concerns at all.

Don't want normal mode and easy mode players mixing? Separate them. Having to completely redesign the game based on difficulty mode? That's just stupid.

That's basically the summary, if you want the actual detailed posts you'll have to find them. I'd look myself but I'm really not arsed trawling through 24 pages and you're the one with the issue, not me.

 

[Peithelo]

So again why do you want to play a game you don't like?

Because it's a good game and there is no reason to prevent people from playing.

It is a fantastic thing to be able to appreciate something, but it is also quite essential to recognize that a thing can remain objectively good in its own right even without you liking it. I acknowledge that, for the sake of example, many Mario games are objectively very well made and in that way good, even though I will never enjoy playing one in their current form. No one is actively preventing anyone from doing anything here, but there are certain prerequisites that you have to meet before you can fully enjoy Dark Souls. So it is with any other thing.

Dark Souls is a wonderful game, but what makes it also a great experience is the very reason it demands you not to take succeeding as a default value. You have to have the very real possibility of failure, which is essential for the experience Dark Souls is intended to provide you with. I am still absolutely certain that most people would still be able to succeed in the end if they just are bothered enough to really give it a try. And again, just because you see others enjoying something doesn't mean that it is necessarily suitable for you as well.

This consequently also helps the commununity as it will consist of rather likeminded individuals. This essentially is no different from any other unified fandom out there, but it does help the community to remain consistent. Many other fandoms are not so united in their views as their experiences can differ greatly.

How about we stop doing translations, play your Japanese games in Japanese for some extra difficulty? Doesn't sound like a good idea?

That would depend on how much dialogue and text there is. :] Joking aside, are you aware that even the Japanese version of Dark Souls only has english voice acting in it? I'm not quite sure, but I recall it was a conscious decision that was hoped to improve the ambiance of the game world. Still, while well done translations certainly do make different forms of media more accessible, doing so will not usually intrinsically change the way the content is experienced. At least if the translation isn't a direct one and takes culture shifts into account as well.

Is there maybe some value in making games accessible to wider audiences?

If the accessibility doesn't go against the games primary goals and very purpose, then perhaps there is. Even then games shouldn't be designed to be enjoyed by any group of people explicitly. Much like with novels (publishers and their possible part in this aside), you write it out of desire to write and it may be appreciated or not, but whether it is or not shouldn't really matter. If it is in fact enjoyed greatly by many then it might be translated to other languages. Every part of the content would still remain the same and it would still remain every bit as difficult to comprehend and read as before.

A creation that remains true to itself and the goals it was set out to fulfill is infinitely more preferable than a more accessible game that may not succeed in achieving these goals.

EDIT: Let me say this again: Dark Souls was designed to work without having to resort in the use of modal difficulties, and it manages to be better as a result of this.

 

[Church185]

Don't want normal mode and easy mode players mixing? Separate them. Having to completely redesign the game based on difficulty mode? That's just stupid.

Thank you for finally admitting that having to go back and redesign portions of the game would be stupid, not we can move on and the game doesn't have to change.

 

[anthony87]

so the online will be no different? People in easy won't get to play with people on normal? The development and level design for easy will take no money time or thought for the developers to do? Do you really expect anyone with a brain to swallow that bullshit? @Anthony87

Those things have been addressed by people already but instead of answering them you've just been talking nonsense. I'm not saying that one way is right and the other is wrong, I just don't think it'd be as detrimental as you're all making it out to be.

No none of these concerns have been addressed in any meaningful way at all. It's optional is not addressing any of my concerns at all.

Don't want normal mode and easy mode players mixing? Separate them. Having to completely redesign the game based on difficulty mode? That's just stupid.

That's basically the summary, if you want the actual detailed posts you'll have to find them. I'd look myself but I'm really not arsed trawling through 24 pages and you're the one with the issue, not me.

So separate comunitys is keeping the game as it is? sounds like you are fragmenting it to me is that a good thing? I won't find them because they are not there you prove your own point. How do you recreate the tension dread hopelessness community and sense of achievement? When this game is a cake walk?

I thought the people who'd like an easy game were the ones who didn't want to keep the game as it is? you really gotta make your mind up man.

 

[Atmos Duality]

The cherry picking has reached critical mass, and all logic in my arguments have been ignored. Repeatedly.

It's infuriating. Given the constant appeals to pathos, Appeals to Authority, overwhelming Slippery Slope logic and contradictions I'm being presented ("Dark Souls isn't difficult...it's difficult...it's meant to be difficult."), there's no point invoking logic anymore.

Others are losing their patience with ME, and not my arguments, so that's as good an indicator as any to quit.

I remain unconvinced of how an easy mode would hurt or destroy the game; at worst separate content would be required, and that leads to the slippery slope of "That's time they should be spending on the next game!"

The entire ordeal reeks of self-pandering, and the game is put on a shrine like an idol, not to be touched or blemished, with anyone suggesting even hypothetical changes to be burnt at the stake for their heresy.

I await the usual slew of Parthians Shots, personal insults, and implications of how I'm petty, "don't get it", "condescending" (with the hypocrisy of that accusation being rank as ever) or that I'm somehow metaphorically "the problem that destroys art".

And if you manage to not do any of that, despite being highly tempted, congratulations: You're a stronger person.

The concept of First World Problems is one of the lousiest things I've seen in recent times. Mostly because of its common use in situtations that deserve no such belittling. No matter how insignificant some problems may seem to be in comparison to other problems, they still remain problems all the same.

Proportional response to the proportion of the problem.
That's what I mean by "First World Problems".
We put more effort and fervor into defending our entertainment than we do our own jobs.

I honestely don't think the presentation and its intended goals are debatable.

Then don't debate them.

 

[anthony87]

Don't want normal mode and easy mode players mixing? Separate them. Having to completely redesign the game based on difficulty mode? That's just stupid.

Thank you for finally admitting that having to go back and redesign portions of the game would be stupid, not we can move on and the game doesn't have to change.

I've been saying that it'd be stupid ever since someone said that it'd have to be redesigned to make the game easier so....you're welcome?

EDIT:

snip

What he said. After being in this thread for so long I'm glad that I mostly play offline if this is an example of the oh so grand Dark Souls community. Suppose that's my cue to leave........although I'll probably be back anyway because I'm stupid like that...

 

[Mortrialus]

Don't want normal mode and easy mode players mixing? Separate them. Having to completely redesign the game based on difficulty mode? That's just stupid.

That's basically the summary, if you want the actual detailed posts you'll have to find them. I'd look myself but I'm really not arsed trawling through 24 pages and you're the one with the issue, not me.

One of the things that happen in the game is that skilled players will do low level runs through the game to get the best gear in the game and gank low level players. This is a pretty difficult task in the game so you aren't going to see a lot of people doing this (With the exception of the bottomless box glitch that was around until the DLC / PC version).

If you provide an easy mode, you've just made it that much easier for people to make twinks and steam roll lowbies. Providing an easy mode could actually have the opposite effect for online player; with an over abundance of gankers and griefers making it extremely difficult.

Every action someone takes to make an easy mode is going to have serious ramifications on the game.

Do you just make Easy mode only have CoOp? Is easy mode entirely offline? Again, you're excluding less skilled players from the content. And I can tell you just from playing World of Warcraft, even on PVE servers where the possibility of ganking doesn't exist, most players like to enjoy the battlegrounds every now and then.

Do you make it so that online matching checks both equipment and level? That requires new coding algorithms and development time.

Plus, servers are expensive. "Just add another set of servers for easy mode" costs money that could have gone elsewhere in development. Plus there is the long term cost of maintenance, ect. ect.

And the most common proposed solution for even making an easy mode, tweaking the health and damage for the player and enemies, only goes so far especially in a game where everything is designed to present a serious challenge. There are many, many areas where getting hit isn't dangerous just because of the damage enemies can do, but that the knock backs can easily send you falling off a bottomless pit. Do you remove knock backs? A lot of times, when you get hit a knock back is a good thing because when you get up, you have a bit of breather room between you and the enemy. Do you remove knock backs from only certain enemies? That requires going back and reevaluating all of the level design and enemy placement. Do you just remove the possibility of getting knocked off a ledge? That also requires going back and reevaluating all the level design, and inserted extra assets (railing and walls) to prevent death from falling.

Just for example, Sen's Fortress has these tight walkways over pits that can do serious damage to a player or outright kill them. Over these walkways are swinging pendulums and if they hit you, you're going off that edge. Do you remove the pendulums?

A lot of games that don't have environmental hazards such as these in nearly every level, like Devil May Cry 1&3 make the inclusion of modal difficulty much easier. It is just tweaking health and damage, as well as enemy AI and aggressiveness.

It's infuriating. Given the constant appeals to pathos, Appeals to Authority, overwhelming Slippery Slope logic and contradictions I'm being presented ("Dark Souls isn't difficult...it's difficult...it's meant to be difficult."), there's no point invoking logic anymore.

Dark Souls is difficult, but most of the difficulty isn't a result of the technical skill required to beat the game, which is minimal. It's difficult because of the knowledge base required to beat the game which you gain through trial and error. Everyone here has been explaining this and yet none of the people asking for an easy mode acknowledge this is even the argument.

And things like authorial intent do matter.

 

[Church185]

The cherry picking has reached critical mass, and all logic in my arguments have been ignored. Repeatedly.

It's infuriating. Given the constant appeals to pathos, Appeals to Authority, overwhelming Slippery Slope logic and contradictions I'm being presented ("Dark Souls isn't difficult...it's difficult...it's meant to be difficult."), there's no point invoking logic anymore.

Others are losing their patience with ME, and not my arguments, so that's as good an indicator as any to quit.

I remain unconvinced of how an easy mode would hurt or destroy the game; at worst separate content would be required, and that leads to the slippery slope of "That's time they should be spending on the next game!"

The entire ordeal reeks of self-pandering, and the game is put on a shrine like an idol, not to be touched or blemished, with anyone suggesting even hypothetical changes to be burnt at the stake for their heresy.

I await the usual slew of Parthians Shots, personal insults, and implications of how I'm petty, "don't get it", "condescending" (with the hypocrisy of that accusation being rank as ever) or that I'm somehow metaphorically "the problem that destroys art".

The concept of First World Problems is one of the lousiest things I've seen in recent times. Mostly because of its common use in situtations that deserve no such belittling. No matter how insignificant some problems may seem to be in comparison to other problems, they still remain problems all the same.

Proportional response to the proportion of the problem.
That's what I mean by "First World Problems".
We put more effort and fervor into defending our entertainment than we do our own jobs.

I honestely don't think the presentation and its intended goals are debatable.

Then don't debate them.

Hi, I haven't directly spoken to you yet because I spend most of my time just reading this forum instead of posting in it (due to the fact the arguments on both sides don't seem to have changed all that much).

While you seem to be civil and gentlemanly enough in your later posts, your entrance into the fray was rather condescending. Saying we are all "whining (our) ass(es) off like a pretentious fuckhead(s)" and saying that our fears are invalidated because they are "first world problems" is not a good way to try and get someone to see your point of view.

I am on the opposing side of the fence, I don't believe that the game should be changed or that there should be optional difficulties added for a few reasons.

1. there are already systems in place that make the game more accessible to the new, or inexperienced player

2. the addition of an easy mode could potentially break the existing multiplayer structure by giving easy mode players an advantage over the people who take the optional normal difficulty, and it could potentially be an avenue for griefers to wreak havoc on lower level players. (which would also negatively effect the easy mode players)

3. separating multiplayer by difficulty would cost money that I would rather see spent on developing the sequel and polishing it (though this example may be selfish)

4. excluding easy mode players from multiplayer (like has been mentioned) would gate them from seeing content that they paid for (which is another existing argument) like rewards from the various covenants that require you to play online to get the required materials. it also would keep them from experiencing one of the most fun aspects of the game.

I do have the more casual player in mind, but I don't think that putting in an optional difficulty is the answer. In the future i think there could be more explanation of how the game systems work from the onset, and how the payer uses those features greatly changes how difficult the game can be. I personally am part of the crowd that helps newer players along, just because I think its fun. I have multiple characters in the game that i wont level past a certain point, and I keep them near tough parts of the game so I can be summoned into other player's game worlds and help them overcome a great obstacle. If at all possible I'll communicate with the player that summoned me to see if they may need any further assistance further down the line, and if that's the case then to send me a message on XBL so I can place my summon sign somewhere that they can find it. I know others play the game this way too, because of the whole "sunbro" attitude that I see every now and again. The game rewards those of us who play together and help the community by giving us powerful items and spells that in turn make our game more fun as well.

Will you please engage me in meaningful conversation?