Namco Denies Dark Souls Difficulty Comment

[Rack]

That's much worse. I mean some intelligent tweaks to make the game more appealing to those without the time or the skillset to deal with Dark Souls punishing regime while maintaining the core experience is one thing. Tricking or forcing people into playing something they won't enjoy is down right sinister.

Oh and.

Look what happened to Ninja Gaiden 3.

Don't you mean Ninja Gaiden Black? That was the one that added an easier difficulty option, and I don't remember the sky falling in. Ninja Gaiden 3 was the one where they lost the creative director.

 

[Havoc Himself]

Dark Souls and Demon Soul's aren't even that difficult. I love those games to death even though I was missing a console and PC for a few years and have not finished either one. I'm at the bed of chaos in dark souls right now and it is awesome! Anyway all you need to win at the Souls games is a good head on your shoulders and patience. And another helpful tip is to read all the item descriptions they tell you a lot about the game and what you are supposed to do.

 

[jollybarracuda]

I think realistically, this would never be much of a threat to the franchise to begin with. The Demon's/Dark Souls franchise has already built a very devoted fanbase because of it's punishing difficulty, and if they were to go and change the way the difficulty worked, be it difficulty levels or just an easier game in general, that fanbase would be gone in no time. It's just too much of a risk to change something that big about the game. And like someone mentioned earlier, it really is like taking the jumping ability out of Mario. It's not a punishing game because it's being elitist, it's a punishing game because that's the foundation for it's very own mechanics.

 

[kyogen]

Snip.

How is arguing against the addition of an easy mode taking away options? You can't take something away if it doesn't exist in the first place.

I would prefer that From not bother investing development resources to adulterate its own work for an audience that isn't seriously interested in that particular product. They would end up with the same sort of backlash they got from the problematic PC port. It would be better for everyone if they developed a completely new game for that part of the market which is curious about From's design style but can't commit to the same level of challenge. If the fear is that there isn't enough of a market for such a game, then there really isn't enough of a market for easy mode Dark Souls either.

 

[Weaver]

The problem with making dark souls easier is that death is an absolute core mechanic of the game. You're supposed to die, and the game's mechanics essentially revolve around this.

 

[Phlakes]

to adulterate its own work for an audience that isn't seriously interested in that particular product.

the market which is curious about From's design style but can't commit to the same level of challenge.

I think I see what's going on here. And that means I'll stop wasting my time.

 

[hazabaza1]

People who say it should have an easy mode just watch:

 

[kyogen]

I think I see what's going on here. And that means I'll stop wasting my time.

What's going on here? Someone disagrees with you, and neither of us is going to change our opinion? In that sense, we're probably both wasting our time. At least both of us have expressed our opinions without flinging mud at each other. That's not bad for a forum thread on a controversial topic.

The tone of your post suggests that you have taken offense, however. That's unfortunate. It certainly wasn't what I intended. Peace.

 

[Phlakes]

I think I see what's going on here. And that means I'll stop wasting my time.

What's going on here? Someone disagrees with you, and neither of us is going to change our opinion? In that sense, we're probably both wasting our time. At least both of us have expressed our opinions without flinging mud at each other. That's not bad for a forum thread on a controversial topic.

The tone of your post suggests that you have taken offense, however. That's unfortunate. It certainly wasn't what I intended. Peace.

Dear lord, I didn't want to respond anymore but this whole post couldn't have been more of what I expected. I don't know if you really can't see it or you're just playing coy, but either way, I'm actually done now.

 

[Trishbot]

I said in my quote its a video game not real life WW2 one shot. I can't believe im hearing this over a video game. Get you to put yourself on the front line you would be crying for your mama.

I'm not trying to be a dic but you honestly are with your reasons to be not playing it.

ITS A VIDEO GAME!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Actually, I play a variety of games because I'm a GAME DESIGNER. It's my JOB to play both good and bad games, easy and hard, and to identify where the games succeed and fail in their respective categories. I then analyze, break down, and study every facet of the game in preparation for my own ventures and collaborations. I have a pile of nearly 30 games I'm working through, from short survival horror games to epic and long JRPGs, and I wager I'd get through that pile long before I get through Dark Souls.

Look what happened to Ninja Gaiden 3.

Don't you mean Ninja Gaiden Black? That was the one that added an easier difficulty option, and I don't remember the sky falling in. Ninja Gaiden 3 was the one where they lost the creative director.

Precisely. Ninja Gaiden Black STILL makes the list of "hardest modern games ever" even WITH the OPTIONAL easier difficulty (which is still far from "easy"). The sky did not fall in, the fans did not cry and complain, and, in the end, the game appealed to the original audience AND a newer audience without sacrificing an iota of its identity, difficulty, and gameplay. These Dark Soul fans are being ridiculous... such as the following...

It loses value and appeal by simply being there, exactly the same way a game loses a lot of its appeal once you start cheating (there's the popular saying "cheating ruins the game" for a reason).

The sheer EXISTENCE of an optional difficulty ruins YOUR experience? How? In what way? The original difficulty would remain unchanged. Also, I keep using examples of notoriously hard and beloved games such as Ninja Gaiden Black and Devil May Cry 3, which added in easier difficulty modes, and NOBODY complained and the games REMAIN highly praised and loved by the fans. The sheer existence of the easier difficulties did not make these classics "lose their value" in any way, shape, or form, and, actually, their re-releases are widely considered superior to the original releases. So why would Dark Souls lose ITS value when both Devil May Cry 3 and Ninja Gaiden Black (a game the director himself declared existed to "kill the player") both had them added with no loss of value whatsoever?

If you know that by the press of a button you can turn yourself invulnerable and pass anything that might be slightly challenging there isn't any challenge anymore, same with being able to turn the game to "Easy-Mode" at any point.

Let me show you a quick image which will make your argument at the bottom seem silly:

Super Mario 3D Land has an INVINCIBLE Tanooki suit available if you die several times in one level. If you choose to wear it, you will be invincible for the rest of the level. Die even more, and you even get the option to warp straight to the end of the level. It's an "instant-win" power-up and "cheat" to the end of a level.

And Super Mario 3D Land is STILL one of the most challenging and enjoyable Mario games in years. Why? Because that INVINCIBLE Tanooki suit? You can choose to ignore it. You can choose to not wear it. And I did NOT wear it. I'm playing the game and I wanted to beat the level fair and square and I ignored the power-up to overcome those difficult levels on my own merits.

However, the sheer EXISTENCE of it to help younger or less skilled players did nothing to take away the value or enjoyment of my experience. Quite the opposite, whenever I failed and the game offered me the power-up, I felt angry and mustered up my resolve NOT to need it. The game continued being a perfectly balanced, highly difficult adventure.

And Donkey Kong Country Returns, a game many players hail as one of the hardest games on the Wii, ALSO has its "invincible power-up" that you can choose to ignore. Just because the option for it exists did nothing to take away the intense challenge and rewarding satisfaction gamers experienced when they ignored it and beat the game on their own merits. And, see, the games are still designed in a way that encourages you and inspires you to do that, no matter how many "instant win" power-ups they give you the OPTION of using. The games are great, even with that easier option around.

If you read the book "The Art of Game Design", game developers reveal what they call the "difficulty curve", which is difficult to maintain for almost any game.

Well if some *game designers* are saying that, especially the ones we have to thank for this generation of gaming and largely led by publishers and their desire to make the most money possible by making something that appeals to the masses (and the designers that are lately all tending to "social gaming" because it's the new thing), replicating the process from the TV and movie industry who have American Idol, Big Brother and Transformers they're obviously right!

Actually, they ones who wrote the book were collaborators on beloved games such as Deus Ex, Half-Life, Monkey Island, and others; old-school games with old-school difficulty that almost universally encouraged skill, resourcefulness, and innovative thinking.

Now if you want to actually design a great, unique and memorable game throw that crap away as far as you can throw it.

Again, Shigury Miyamoto, creator of Mario, Zelda, Donkey Kong, and involved in the creation of practically half of the Smash Bros. roster, ranging from Star Fox to F-Zero to Metroid Prime, argues against that. His advice was "let players play the game the way THEY want to play it, not the way YOU intend them to play it." It was his ideas to have the "invincible" power-ups in the new Mario and Donkey Kong games. And I would dare say his resume is filled with some of the greatest, most unique and memorable games on the planet, including many labelled as the GREATEST GAMES OF ALL TIME. I think he knows what he's talking about.

You also keep bringing up these games that have *added* difficulty options after the fact, and while I can't judge them since I didn't play any of them being mainly console franchises (I do expect the "added" difficulties were likely the same old stat buffs to HP/damage and the likes that more often than not turn awry and not an actual redesign of the games...)

You may not have played them, but I HAVE. I studied the games and their difficult options. No, they are not just "stat buffs" like Dragon Age 2. The enemy AI was rebalanced, difficult combat moves were either added or taken away, health and item drops were altered between difficulties, and enemies were either more or less aggressive, including the use of their more deadly attacks and counters. The games, even on easy, were brilliantly remastered to provide a satisfying challenge to those with less-than-perfect skills, timing, or reactions. Just because another studio screws up doesn't mean it can't be done and done WELL. The proof EXISTS, so don't tell me it CAN'T be done.

Super Meat Boy and the Souls games only became the way they are because of the uncompromising design and the attempt to achieve challenge and exactly because they didn't have the mindset to develop a walk-in-the-park for casuals to wade through from start to finish like they're in a sightseeing bus.

Why do you STILL not understand that OTHER people have varying degrees of skill, and what would be "easy" for you would be an "uncompromising design that achieves challenge" in the experience of other players. Again, Ninja Gaiden Black's "easy mode" is practically a Normal or even Hard mode for most other games; skilled players still have to jump, dodge, counter, attack, balance powers and health, use tactics, and they still will die. And die. And die. Just because it was "easier" did not make it a "walk in the park". It was a stiff challenge, even on easy, but it was still more accessible than the default difficulties and it provided the same satisfaction and challenge that a more skilled player would experience on the harder modes.

Why do you refuse to accept that Dark Souls could ALSO do this? Why does the "sheer existence" tarnish the "value" of your experience? That excuse did not work for Ninja Gaiden Black, or Devil May Cry 3, or Kid Icarus: Uprising, or Super Mario 3D Land, or Donkey Kong Country Returns, or Silent Hill 2, or Darksiders... even the cult classic Catherine altered the difficulty to be more forgiving, and fans of the original were more than okay with this.

"Accessibility" isn't something you should strive for if you want to design a great and memorable experience but rather stay the hell away from: http://www.hiwiller.com/2010/04/29/if-mario-was-designed-in-2010/

Again, funny you used that Mario spoof... considering the latest Mario games give you the option to be invincible when you die enough times. So, Mario in 2012 IS "accessible"... and it's also one of the greatest platformers of the past decade, filled with great challenges, incredible bosses, and loads of skilled gameplay and tense difficulty moments. Nothing was diminished. Nothing was lost. It's both as hard and easy as you, the player, WANT it to be, and it became a great and memorable experience that can stand alongside Dark Soul proudly as a pinnacle of great game design.

It's a great game, as are Ninja Gaiden Black and Devil May Cry 3, and NOTHING was lost with the addition of optional easier modes. NOTHING.

 

[ImperialSunlight]

What there could be is some easier starting dungeons that then curve up to the normal difficulty that let them loose in the preexisting locations. There, problem solved, game is still as difficult, and now more accessible.

That would give you the opportunity to level up much more before the difficult content, making the difficult areas easier. Changing the difficulty curve in a game like this isn't that easy. Making anything easier in Dark Souls has the chance of undermining the delicate balance of difficulty/reward that it does so well, which is practically the point of this game.

 

[Rack]

People who say it should have an easy mode just watch:

I watched ten minutes of that moron completely fail to grasp the issue at all. I mean he didn't even understand the basic principle of why Dark Souls is difficult let alone how people can want a divergent experience. It was just "me like hard game, not me should like hard game too"

 

[hazabaza1]

People who say it should have an easy mode just watch:

I watched ten minutes of that moron completely fail to grasp the issue at all. I mean he didn't even understand the basic principle of why Dark Souls is difficult let alone how people can want a divergent experience. It was just "me like hard game, not me should like hard game too"

I don't think insults are necessary.
And it makes fine sense to me. I disagree with some points but generally I think he gets it down pretty well.

 

[Rainboq]

What there could be is some easier starting dungeons that then curve up to the normal difficulty that let them loose in the preexisting locations. There, problem solved, game is still as difficult, and now more accessible.

That would give you the opportunity to level up much more before the difficult content, making the difficult areas easier. Changing the difficulty curve in a game like this isn't that easy. Making anything easier in Dark Souls has the chance of undermining the delicate balance of difficulty/reward that it does so well, which is practically the point of this game.

They could simply change the xp drops and the leveling progression in those early dungeons.

 

[taciturnCandid]

Just only allow achievements in the normal mode. Not to that but limit the kind of cosmetic things you can have and maybe not give as many of weapons.


But some of us just aren't that great at games and wouldn't mind to be able to play them through at least once. I tried demon souls and I ended up selling it. I just wasn't able to have fun.

Maybe you have that privilege of being able to practice at a game in order to play it, but some of us don't have the time and patience. Gaming is just a fun activity that I do. I don't plan to dedicate hours of my life just getting a little better so that way i can get a little further in the game.

Gaming to me is a form of escape from stress and depression. If I play through a game and I really like it, then I will sometimes play on a higher difficulty. Though I don't do that as often. i thought dark souls looked cool, but I realized that i would never be able to finish it.

If you want the pride of beating a difficult game, why not beat it on a high difficulty level? Why do you have to restrict the amount of people who want to play your game just because of your pride?

I mean look at ninja gaiden black and 2. They both added modes for people who weren't that great. Did it take away from the holy cow this is extremely difficult factor? No. Because there were difficulties that still gave you that.

Adding an easier mode doesn't take away from the pride that you beat it on a hard mode. I don't understand why people think that.

Think about it this way. If they make an easier mode and more people can play it, then more people will buy it. That subsidizes the development of a new game. If your game is so challenging that only a select few can beat it, then less people will want to play it and it won't do as well. So less encouragement to make more of it.

I mean, you don't have to make it child like easy. In ninja Gaiden 2, acolyte still cause you to die if you screwed up. It was difficult, but not to the point of throw your controller difficult.

 

[Burst6]

/snip

I'm not going to reply to all of that, but i do have some things to say.

Ninja gaiden and dark souls are two different games.

There's nothing to ninja gaiden that you need to really know. It's a game designed to have flashy linear combat. There are lots of enemies to hack and slash through with fancy moves and it's relatively cinematic and straightforward. It's difficulty came from its fast paced combat.

Dark souls on the other hand hides everything from you. That's where the difficulty comes from. The combat isn't that hard or fast paced. Dying isn't that much of a punishment because
1) every place has shortcuts
2) even if they don't it's not that hard to sprint through the enemy lines without being hit and 3) souls and humanity are easily farmable so it doesn't matter that much if you lose them

Really there isn't that much punishment or difficulty in dark souls. There's not even that much trial and error as people say. It's not hard because the monsters attack quickly or they have a lot of health, its hard because it hides everything for you and expects you to figure it out. Here's an easy mode for you. Go look up hints on one of the wikis or GameFAQs. Everything in dark souls has a trick.

When i see people complaining about dying and having to fight monsters over again i get confused. I almost never have to do that. Most of the time i open a shortcut and just sprint past the enemies, which puts me in front of the boss in half a minute. Entire major bosses are skippable if you know the secrets.

Making it easy will make it crap. The combat isn't that exciting so without the constant fear of getting 2-shot you realize that it's slow, unimpressive, and spammy. Ninja Gaiden had cool flashy combos. Mario has its own simplistic charm. Dark Souls has tight but boring game play. Without the difficulty you just the game will degrade into beating all of your enemies by spamming your basic attack, which is boring. If From really did want an easy mode they would have to greatly overhaul the combat to make it more flashy and combo oriented, which will hurt the main game.


And then there's the nightmare of incorporating easy difficulty into the online system. Other than buying twice as many servers so the easy mode players can only play against each other only i don't see a good solution.

They could simply change the xp drops and the leveling progression in those early dungeons.

No they really can't. In the game lvl doesn't matter that much. Gear is everything. They already give you great gear early on too, if you know where to look.

 

[Therumancer]

My basic opinion is that Dark Souls and it's spiritual predeccesor (Demon's Souls) is fine at the current level of difficulty. There are lots of games out there that are intentionally accessible and "introductory" level for that kind of gamer, true hardcore gamers should be allowed to have their titles as well, and it's not like there are a lot of them out there that are developed on this level.

The problem with adding easier modes to these games is that it defeats the purpose, and the prestige of playing them successfully, when everyone can get and display the acheivements, being able to show that you did specific things loses a lot of it's meaning.

I also tend to look at things like "Ninja Gaiden" which followed this trend and pretty much wound up losing it's soul in the process.


Now, perhaps in contridiction to the above I *do* think the game could stand to have it's controls and response/handling tightened up, and the magic system expanded. To be honest I think a lot of the alleged "difficulty" of the game simply comes from the game not doing
what you tell it to, even if your stats should permit it. In many cases I've died in these games because I suddenly couldn't do something that I had previously done about a hundred times. Also to be fair, as a result a lot of people are getting through the game by patiently working to set up glitches and such, specifically because it's nearly impossible to do what your supposed to do in some cases due to the game's handling. When it comes to magic, I'm a guy called "Therumancer" and as you might guess I like to play mages, I find it utterly irksome that these games so far have required a huge focus on melee, making magic both difficult to use AND a finite resource, especially in "Dark Souls" where you can't even get a mana regen ring. I understand the reasons for it to an extent, but I find it annoying. Personally I think beefing up the accessibility of magic, and the relative power (increase accuracy and the speed at which some projectives travel) would not be a bad thing.

 

[Warachia]

snip

snip

If you don't strive to make your game accessible to players, and present players with new ideas, and challenges to overcome, you have failed as a game creator, if you make a game like Dark Souls and deliberatly make it so hard that most people don't want to play it, and choose not to add in an easier difficulty, you are simply making a game for yourself, the way you want it, not a game for any cutsomer.

For some reason, people think Dark Souls is well designed, it's not, the biggest fact comes from the terrible hit detection, things that will kill you when they shouldn't (I died once from jumping down 2 feet onto a lower platform, but the game decided that it was an instant kill zone and I couldn't walk there) and atrocious dungeons, like the tomb of the giants, where you can't see anything 3 feet away, or the pvp forest, no warning it's going to be pvp, no route to bypass it if you don't like pvp, no way to skip it, the only thing you can do is disconnect from the internet, and then you still have some ghosts who attack you and you can't attack back without being cursed.

An argument that was brought up is you can always grind or get better equipment, no you can't, because Dark Souls limits you to the places you can go before beating Ornstein an Smough, one of the shittiest cheapest bosses ever. All the places that have what you need to upgrade equipment are out of reach, all of the monsters in the area don't provide you with enough souls, the only ones that come close are the giant statues and you need to be using a very specific weapon to kill them, otherwise they heal themselves.

I mentioned The twins as being a terrible boss, and that is mostly due to the terrible hit detection I mentioned, firstly they can combo you to death, when you are stun-locked by one you can't move to avoid the other, and when one dies the other gains his powers, if it's smough, he gains an invisible AOE attack to every attack he does, you can't see it leading to you dodging, but not far enough, and you get hit and die, if Ornstein is left he becomes huge, an if you are a melee character you are screwed, you run in trying to kill him, but he'll just jump up in the air, land and shock you, and I've seen him do only this attack for the entire fight, you can't hit him and escape in time.

Lastly, there's the abyss, but what happens if you enter the abyss before getting the item you need to survive? You die, naturally, what happens if you try to leave to get the item? You can't, because the game locks you into the entrance to the abyss and forces you to kill yourself, permanently cheating you out of all of those souls you have collected.

Now I went off on several tangents, various difficulty modes with characters being carried over between modes would not only make dark souls more accessible, it would allow people to overlook these problems in favour of the game world they are presented with and the normally fun gameplay. There are even several ways to make the game better without compromising the game, on easy mode, enemies drop more souls and you don't lose souls when you die, Bosses don't have AOE attacks, where there are two bosses, now you only fight them one at a time, things like this would still make the game tricky, but would reduce the frustration, and would increase the replay value, because I'm more likely to play a game again if I'm having fun.

EDIT: Sorry joshuaayt, should be fixed now.

 

[Something Amyss]

But they're NOT removing the difficulty.

My point being more about the appeal to the games being solely in the difficulty, you're arguing a pretty semantic difference.

 

[Something Amyss]

If you don't strive to make your game accessible to players, and present players with new ideas, and challenges to overcome, you have failed as a game creator, if you make a game like Dark Souls and deliberatly make it so hard that most people don't want to play it, and choose not to add in an easier difficulty, you are simply making a game for yourself, the way you want it, not a game for any cutsomer.

They ARE making it for customers. A specific niche of customers who like to play brokenly hard games.

there is such a thing as a niche game. This is clearly intended to be one. Not every game is for every person. DS is not for me. I don't know about you. But really, who cares?