Jimquisition: Guns Blazing
- Thread starter Jimothy Sterling
- Start date
Recommended Videos
From the French - Nicher:- to nest.Annihilist said:
Worse is 'buoy'. It's pronounced 'boy' Americans, its short for buoyancy. What the fuck is a "boowy"?
Language evolves though. I get annoyed by the way that Americans pronounce herbs, Post 19th Century RP English pronounciation aspirates the 'h' but in Colonial American English (and the original French) the 'h' is silent.
Holy cow, Jim. Take a chill pill. I've seen toddlers throwing tantrums with more dignity. (Unless you're being a damned fine troll showing up the self-called Hardcore gamers.)
From what I see of games developers and their parasitic publishers, everyone is losing money hand over fist. As such, any sucesses are going to get the "bigger and better or bust" treatment. However, I grant you that it doesn't often work out mostly due to the law of diminishing returns. Surely there's nothing wrong with trying to make a sequel bigger and better than it's predecessor in any case?
So what if From software want to make the game a little more like Skyrim? If I recall correctly, you couldn't tear yourself away from Skyrim for weeks after it. Dark Souls or Skyrim are just as deep as one another. Both have a Adventurer see, Adventurer kill type gameplay but in a world with a whole ton of lore almost hidden in the background of the game.
So what if it has difficulty settings for novices - I'm a novice who bought the game but could never finish it. The Tomb of the Giants was just too difficult for me. (Which will probably get me tons of "Learn to play, noob" type flak.) If I got difficulty settings to turn down to let me finish the game - I'll be all the more grateful for them. Conversely, if I were a complete masochist, I'd turn them up.
If you are so sure the game now sucks, may I ask if you have actually played it yet? I'd imagine not.
Try to avoid gleaning every little bit of information about the game and play it - it only builds up unrealistic expectations of the game on your part. It's bad enough publishers do it, but I'm sure the developers don't need the same behaviour from us gamers too.
Know about the game, but let's not obsess over it. After all, it's only a game.
From what I see of games developers and their parasitic publishers, everyone is losing money hand over fist. As such, any sucesses are going to get the "bigger and better or bust" treatment. However, I grant you that it doesn't often work out mostly due to the law of diminishing returns. Surely there's nothing wrong with trying to make a sequel bigger and better than it's predecessor in any case?
So what if From software want to make the game a little more like Skyrim? If I recall correctly, you couldn't tear yourself away from Skyrim for weeks after it. Dark Souls or Skyrim are just as deep as one another. Both have a Adventurer see, Adventurer kill type gameplay but in a world with a whole ton of lore almost hidden in the background of the game.
So what if it has difficulty settings for novices - I'm a novice who bought the game but could never finish it. The Tomb of the Giants was just too difficult for me. (Which will probably get me tons of "Learn to play, noob" type flak.) If I got difficulty settings to turn down to let me finish the game - I'll be all the more grateful for them. Conversely, if I were a complete masochist, I'd turn them up.
If you are so sure the game now sucks, may I ask if you have actually played it yet? I'd imagine not.
Try to avoid gleaning every little bit of information about the game and play it - it only builds up unrealistic expectations of the game on your part. It's bad enough publishers do it, but I'm sure the developers don't need the same behaviour from us gamers too.
Know about the game, but let's not obsess over it. After all, it's only a game.
You really had to reach deep for that one.DVS BSTrD said:
"That surgeon left tools in their chest cavity!"erttheking said:
"Well yeah...but I mean...let's see you do better before you go criticizing them."
"But he died!"
"Sure, but I mean, you have no right to be upset about it."
It sucks for the consumer sure (some of them anyway), but I'm not sure I agree with Jim's point. Take his example of Dead Space, was DS2 really such a failure? I don't know the sales figures but the developers know that the people who liked the original will buy the sequel anyway, so you might as well market to a broader audience. You might fail to appeal to them but you won't sell less than if you aimed for the niche again. And sales is what it's all about. Jim needs to elaborate what he means by "failure", any why. I didn't know whether this piece was about marketing, the business of game publishing or gamer satisfaction or a mix of all three.Redd the Sock said:
Really hoping that (since that was a quote from the PR guy) that he simply meant more money will be spent on marketing it. Of course as Jim said its a niche game and people who like that kind of game likely already know and will tell any friends that might be interested. If that is all he meant then I just hope they don't spend more on marketing than they can realistically make back.
And of course, "hope to god that it works" should never ever be part of the business plan.
And of course, "hope to god that it works" should never ever be part of the business plan.
Yeah, I must admit that I'm a bit bummed out by those statements... and alarmed.
Just the other day, I went back to play Demon's Souls, it's been a while. After being under the vague impression that Dragon's Dogma and Bioshock Infinite took bits and pieces of what I liked, nay, loved, from the Souls games, I needed to give my infinite loop of perfection on Dark Souls a break so I picked up Demon's Souls again.
And I have to say that I miss the daring beauty of Demon's Souls already. I still love Dark Souls, it was so new and shiny when I first got it. But compared to the original, Dark Souls has so many more issues and imperfections. I love how I can just navigate an environment in Demon's Souls once I got it all mapped out in my mind. In Dark Souls, I can't get up the tiniest of ledges, when I'm overburdened I might encounter some very deadly issues just stepping onto a plank that's half an inch higher than the ground it rests on, sending me plummeting to certain death. In Demon's Souls, I now find it even more impressive, radical, poetic... everything I do, everything that happens in the game. The way I can choose how to engage the boss demons, if at all. One has a bird on his head that tells him where to come lick me. One can't see and smashes everything to bits. One isn't even a boss, but he'll BBQ your ass anyway. Another one just commits suicide because she knows that all you want is that soul.
I've been holding back for quite a while now, but nothing I've seen or read or heard makes me believe that the folks peddling Dark Souls II (bad name) to me have understood one single bit about it. And that's a shame.
Just the other day, I went back to play Demon's Souls, it's been a while. After being under the vague impression that Dragon's Dogma and Bioshock Infinite took bits and pieces of what I liked, nay, loved, from the Souls games, I needed to give my infinite loop of perfection on Dark Souls a break so I picked up Demon's Souls again.
And I have to say that I miss the daring beauty of Demon's Souls already. I still love Dark Souls, it was so new and shiny when I first got it. But compared to the original, Dark Souls has so many more issues and imperfections. I love how I can just navigate an environment in Demon's Souls once I got it all mapped out in my mind. In Dark Souls, I can't get up the tiniest of ledges, when I'm overburdened I might encounter some very deadly issues just stepping onto a plank that's half an inch higher than the ground it rests on, sending me plummeting to certain death. In Demon's Souls, I now find it even more impressive, radical, poetic... everything I do, everything that happens in the game. The way I can choose how to engage the boss demons, if at all. One has a bird on his head that tells him where to come lick me. One can't see and smashes everything to bits. One isn't even a boss, but he'll BBQ your ass anyway. Another one just commits suicide because she knows that all you want is that soul.
I've been holding back for quite a while now, but nothing I've seen or read or heard makes me believe that the folks peddling Dark Souls II (bad name) to me have understood one single bit about it. And that's a shame.
Jesus, no wonder gaming isn't taken seriously as an industry no matter how much it grows, the administration in general of the companies is apparently controlled by amateurs who don't know shit about neither games nor administration. i say this because the clusterfuck they create is simply too HUGE too OFTEN.
Dark Souls and Skyrim attend different audiences, the fact that both are fantasy and have dragons do not put them on the same page. Bandai can create the BEST Dark Souls game ever, if it's focused on the Skyrim public they'll say "SHIT! Pretty nice game, it reminds me of Skyrim" as in "it's a copy, a good one, but it's a copy" they'll finish the game, and then they'll get back to waiting anxiously for the next Elder Scrolls, Dark Souls will be their "cannon fodder". All the while, that might also hinder the classic Dark Souls experience, thus it will ALSO drive away the original fans.
There's a reason Harley-Davidson does not produce smaller CCs bikes, there's a reason we don't see a "popular Ferrari", just the same McDonald's and Burger King have cheap prices: THEY ALL KNOW their target audience, they know what they want and what they expect of them. In my opinion, the gaming industry is looking at gamers as whole, it's failing to cross the line between the expectancy of each "group" of players, and that is crushing their knees when they act amateurishly and the real amateurs (indie companies) grasp this concept with ease and gain the loyalty of so many.
Dark Souls and Skyrim attend different audiences, the fact that both are fantasy and have dragons do not put them on the same page. Bandai can create the BEST Dark Souls game ever, if it's focused on the Skyrim public they'll say "SHIT! Pretty nice game, it reminds me of Skyrim" as in "it's a copy, a good one, but it's a copy" they'll finish the game, and then they'll get back to waiting anxiously for the next Elder Scrolls, Dark Souls will be their "cannon fodder". All the while, that might also hinder the classic Dark Souls experience, thus it will ALSO drive away the original fans.
There's a reason Harley-Davidson does not produce smaller CCs bikes, there's a reason we don't see a "popular Ferrari", just the same McDonald's and Burger King have cheap prices: THEY ALL KNOW their target audience, they know what they want and what they expect of them. In my opinion, the gaming industry is looking at gamers as whole, it's failing to cross the line between the expectancy of each "group" of players, and that is crushing their knees when they act amateurishly and the real amateurs (indie companies) grasp this concept with ease and gain the loyalty of so many.
As one of the people who played Skyrim and could not possibly care less about the Dark Souls franchise I have to say that you are absolutely, without a doubt, correct in your assessment that no commercial - however epic in its design and creation - could make me care about a franchise I know from hearing the people who are super-enthusiastic about it talking around here about it all the time does not appeal to my gaming interests, style, play expectations, or general enjoyment criteria.
I am not saying it's a bad game either! I'm simply saying that some people like certain games and some other people like certain other games and only occasionally will those people end up liking the same game and there's nothing the industry can do without homogenizing itself out of existence that will make that change into "all players will always like all games."
I am not saying it's a bad game either! I'm simply saying that some people like certain games and some other people like certain other games and only occasionally will those people end up liking the same game and there's nothing the industry can do without homogenizing itself out of existence that will make that change into "all players will always like all games."
The problem is Greed.
Publishers for the most part aren't happy with turning a steady profit a slow sustainable growth, they want the big bucks this applies to the share holders as well, gaming is now big money and they all want the biggest slice of the pie they can manage.
This has meant the homogenisation of everything to be like everything else in a desperate bid to bring in the cash by trying to nab other games fans, as Jim said Dead Space instead of just staying true to the original turned into Gears of War, Battlefield is trying to be Call of Duty. Every MMO is trying to be WoW, although 9 years of failure has started seeing a change to that philosophy.
This is mostly due to the people in charge not being gamers and decisions being made through focus testing and marketing research, hence why nearly evrey fucking game in the past few years has had multi player shoehorned into it with a few notable exceptions.
Publishers for the most part aren't happy with turning a steady profit a slow sustainable growth, they want the big bucks this applies to the share holders as well, gaming is now big money and they all want the biggest slice of the pie they can manage.
This has meant the homogenisation of everything to be like everything else in a desperate bid to bring in the cash by trying to nab other games fans, as Jim said Dead Space instead of just staying true to the original turned into Gears of War, Battlefield is trying to be Call of Duty. Every MMO is trying to be WoW, although 9 years of failure has started seeing a change to that philosophy.
This is mostly due to the people in charge not being gamers and decisions being made through focus testing and marketing research, hence why nearly evrey fucking game in the past few years has had multi player shoehorned into it with a few notable exceptions.
Again, this isn't necessarily a bad thing.
It really depends on exactly what changes they actually plan to make. There's no discernable cause for concern in the statement released by them. I hardly think "widening the net a little" as is their exact words is reason to believe that they're going to make the kinds of shifts we've seen in Resident Evil or Dead Space. It is right of Jim to warn them. It's a perfectly reasonable concern in today's publisher silliness of swinging for the moon when there's no need to and missing everything.
But seeing as they did everything right that they could have with the original, I'm going to give them some rope. That can use that leeway to make something truly wonderful or they can use it to hang themselves. Either way, the genie is out of the bottle and they have the power to do what they wish thanks to their previous success.
I'd say to trust "From Software". They do darn good work and are also part-publishers on the project in addition to being the developers. I don't much care what Namco Bandai Moneybags Games says in the meantime. With a list of titles like Dark Souls and Demon's Souls to From Software's name I wouldn't expect anything too drastic. But companies surprise us all the time.
It really depends on exactly what changes they actually plan to make. There's no discernable cause for concern in the statement released by them. I hardly think "widening the net a little" as is their exact words is reason to believe that they're going to make the kinds of shifts we've seen in Resident Evil or Dead Space. It is right of Jim to warn them. It's a perfectly reasonable concern in today's publisher silliness of swinging for the moon when there's no need to and missing everything.
But seeing as they did everything right that they could have with the original, I'm going to give them some rope. That can use that leeway to make something truly wonderful or they can use it to hang themselves. Either way, the genie is out of the bottle and they have the power to do what they wish thanks to their previous success.
I'd say to trust "From Software". They do darn good work and are also part-publishers on the project in addition to being the developers. I don't much care what Namco Bandai Moneybags Games says in the meantime. With a list of titles like Dark Souls and Demon's Souls to From Software's name I wouldn't expect anything too drastic. But companies surprise us all the time.
Perhaps, but, unfortunately, reality has no obligation to conform to any of our desires, wishes, religions, philosophies, ideologies, or fantasies. It simply is what it is. Now, that's not to say that what I said above is true. I'm merely pointing to a non-intuitive possibility.canadamus_prime said:
I'm not a fan of the Demon's/Dark Souls games(doesn't fit my niche), but this still upsets me, because I respect what those games stand/stood for. I'm getting really tired of the AAA market and its bullshit.
In an unrelated note, I didn't know they made sex toys modeled after the fists of porn stars... so, now I know.
In an unrelated note, I didn't know they made sex toys modeled after the fists of porn stars... so, now I know.
I purchased Dark Souls a few months after it came out, not knowing anything about it except that it was getting good reviews. I was hooked. Best game of 2009, by far. Dark Souls took that formula, refined it (though some would argue the point) and made another excellent game.
I have high hopes that Dark Souls II will be just as good as Dark Souls, but some things do worry me. The quote from Namco that Jim highlighted is worrying. Just from reading gaming forums across the 'net, I've seen the divide between players that love the Souls game, those that don't give a shit and those that tried them and found them lacking, too hard or just not their cup of tea. Trying to reel those people in is a mistake. They aren't going to like a Souls game if what they enjoy is Gears of War, Skyrim and Bioshock Infinite.
I'm also highly disappointed that the best name they could come up with for the third game in the series is "Dark Souls II". Really? Why establish a pattern of unique, but similar, game titles only to immediately abandon it? One of the laziest things about sequels is the names. Just slap a number on the end of the old title so people know it's new. That's the path to creative bankruptcy.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not down on Dark Souls II. I'm still stoked for it, I'll most likely even pre-order it. I will probably enjoy it from what I've seen, but the trend that the series seems to be leaning towards with this game makes me wonder if Dark Souls III (and there will be one, mark my words) will be the steaming pile of shit that the phrase "massive, massive triple A" makes me think of.
I have high hopes that Dark Souls II will be just as good as Dark Souls, but some things do worry me. The quote from Namco that Jim highlighted is worrying. Just from reading gaming forums across the 'net, I've seen the divide between players that love the Souls game, those that don't give a shit and those that tried them and found them lacking, too hard or just not their cup of tea. Trying to reel those people in is a mistake. They aren't going to like a Souls game if what they enjoy is Gears of War, Skyrim and Bioshock Infinite.
I'm also highly disappointed that the best name they could come up with for the third game in the series is "Dark Souls II". Really? Why establish a pattern of unique, but similar, game titles only to immediately abandon it? One of the laziest things about sequels is the names. Just slap a number on the end of the old title so people know it's new. That's the path to creative bankruptcy.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not down on Dark Souls II. I'm still stoked for it, I'll most likely even pre-order it. I will probably enjoy it from what I've seen, but the trend that the series seems to be leaning towards with this game makes me wonder if Dark Souls III (and there will be one, mark my words) will be the steaming pile of shit that the phrase "massive, massive triple A" makes me think of.
On the bright side, due to the increasing lack of genuinely quality games released, I've had more time to go outside and do outdoorsy activities for a change. Heres to you Major Publishers and your terrible marketing departments.
They won't give a shit because shareholders are more important than customers, and niche titles don't increase quarterly sales reports to make shareholders happy.
And all those previously independent developers from the 90's and early 2000's that saw those same dollar signs when publishers began to buy them up are what got this snowball rolling.
The gaming industry needs to collapse again.
And all those previously independent developers from the 90's and early 2000's that saw those same dollar signs when publishers began to buy them up are what got this snowball rolling.
The gaming industry needs to collapse again.
I don't have a source to fully back this up, but if they could've, I believe Dark Souls would've just been Demon's Souls II, in all honesty. Miyazaki and the new directors of Dark Souls II have stated that the games (all three) have really nothing to do with the other in terms of story, and it's a continuation mostly on mechanics (some might debate this, and you're in the right, because we don't know jack at the moment for DaS II). The name is, I think, natural because it joins the series together. The only reason why they even kept the Souls name, if this is true, is so that people associate it with Demon's Souls, otherwise they would have named it anything else.Zom-B said:
Back on topic, I'm not too frightened as a lover of Dark Souls. Namco Bandai will take the hit if it doesn't go as well, but ultimately From Soft calls the shots for the franchise and is the publisher in Japan. If it becomes a financial success for From, and I think it will, but bombs Namco, they can just find someone else. The question then would be if they could find a publisher just as good in terms of creative freedom.
In short, don't be worried about it affecting DaS II in terms of game mechanics or quality. Really.