Namco Denies Dark Souls Difficulty Comment

[Woe Is You]

Take away the snobs power, and you're left with a game that has little to no draw.

I'd say you're right but not in those words. What many (me included) have said in this thread, though, is that neither Demon's Souls nor Dark Souls do anything spectacularly well compared to other games. The world and the atmosphere flat out lose to something like Skyrim, Fable 2 and 3, Dragon Age, Kingdoms of Amalur or almost any other big budget western style RPG out there. The story is there but it's minimal (again, compared to just about any other RPG). The battle is serviceable but kind of clunky. The only way it differentiates itself from the pack is the complete disregard for the player.

Now, if you take all that into account, it does seem a bit strange to have people clamoring for an easy mode. If you know you don't enjoy a game that is built to punch your teeth in with everything else coming second, then you aren't missing out on much. Everything else the game does has been done better elsewhere.

 

[kburns10]

On one hand, yes I can simply not choose a difficulty that is in the game and life goes on (I tend to choose Normal by default and never touch Easy). But it's pretty admirable that a game is openly balls hard and makes no apologies for it. I would hate to see them change that to please everyone.

 

[Paradoxrifts]

What's the point of going to the effort of climbing Mount Everest if a travel agency installs an escalator into the side of it?

If you can't see the point of scaling it the "old fashioned way" even if some company were to build an escalator, than you are missing the point the in the first place.

The inclusion of an "easy" mode would have taken NOTHING away from this game, as long as the difficulty outside of "easy mode" were the same. Nothing. In fact it would give all you "core" gamers a chance to further ridicule noobs, which is what you like, right?

Mate, I don't give a square fuck what you do with your time. And truth be told I haven't even played Dark Souls, nor do I feel somehow compelled to prove myself through the conquest of masochistically hard video games. But what I don't do is resent the players that do enjoy those sorts of challenges, nor the companies that make them, whenever they pack a lunch and go on a picnic without me.

Now if someone bought the game thinking that they could prove themselves somehow and ended up being found a little wanting, sorry mate, too fucking bad.

They accepted the challenge. They didn't measure up to it. End of.

The marketing campaign for the game openly and honestly told gamers what sort of gaming experience they were in for, so to anyone who bought the game without first doing their research, not is it too bad but in my opinion that's straight up pretty stupid consumer behaviour and you deserve to have wasted your money.

 

[Paradoxrifts]

{Snip}

And if Everest had an escalator, it wouldn't attract the same sort of people to climb it, would it?

Less these guys.

[http://img235.imagevenue.com/img.php?image=289184524_Climbers_122_255lo.jpg]

More these guys.

[http://img165.imagevenue.com/img.php?image=289180838_US_Tourist_122_66lo.JPG]


Now, do you understand?

 

[fuzz]

Dark Souls on easy mode would be abysmal. There's no overt plot, barely any npc interaction and exploring the games world isn't enough to carry the game on it's own unlike Skyrim. Knowing that, people still think FromSoft should invest time and effort into making and balancing an easy mode which would make the game worse. So that people who don't really appreciate the game can play it without dying and then in all in all likelyhood go 'the game was boring, there's no story and there's nothing to do'.

Dark Souls as a game is meant from the ground up to be a challenge. Recently I played through the Witcher 2. I played through twice on easy for the story and then jumped up to dark difficulty for the challenge. Now imagine playing the Witcher 2 on easy without any story, any character development, any side quests. That's what easy mode Dark Souls would be like. No one want's to play that.

If you don't like Dark Souls that's fine obviously, but adding an easy mode wouldn't get you to like it any more. Dark Souls as it stands could have done with more development time. The bed of chaos feels rushed as does Gwyn. There are also quest lines that were removed such as Oscar helping you through the forest or Shiva coveting the blade of chaos. Taking the time to add a pathetic easy mode would only have made the game worse and I don't want that to happen to the next souls title.

 

[Morbissus]

Nothing is changing. Just i'd put that out there...

 

[Something Amyss]

Bullshit, you can't make comments defending the game and trying to argue in it's favour and then say "who cares?"

Actually, you can. I am "defending" the game because I don't need to have every game on the market appeal to me. I don't get the need to complain that there are niche titles that aren't pandering me because ponies.

I don't even like the game, I don't have a dog in this fight, and I am only arguing based on the irrational basis of your comments.

Hiding behind "Niche" game also doesn't work here, I've explained before that it is technically inept, and for some reason people think that saying it's a "Niche" game stops it from being a bad game with terrible levels, and it's all part of the challenge, in that case you can't argue with people like that because they'll deliberately look away from the massive problems with the game and just declare them intentional, no matter how stupid or anti-fun they are.

You claim it's technically bad, others claim otherwise, I don't care. Besides, "technically bad" means nothing. There are people arguing that Call of Duty is technically bad, and it's aimed at such a broad base that my mom could pick up and play it.

 

[Something Amyss]

If you can't see the point of scaling it the "old fashioned way" even if some company were to build an escalator, than you are missing the point the in the first place.

Keep in mind, this is gamers we're talking about. A demographic that complains when it has to collectively get off its ass and go to a store to buy a game (the horror).

But he kind of has a point. The existence of the segway completely eliminated walkers, right?

 

[Warachia]

Bullshit, you can't make comments defending the game and trying to argue in it's favour and then say "who cares?"

Actually, you can. I am "defending" the game because I don't need to have every game on the market appeal to me. I don't get the need to complain that there are niche titles that aren't pandering me because ponies.

I don't even like the game, I don't have a dog in this fight, and I am only arguing based on the irrational basis of your comments.

Hiding behind "Niche" game also doesn't work here, I've explained before that it is technically inept, and for some reason people think that saying it's a "Niche" game stops it from being a bad game with terrible levels, and it's all part of the challenge, in that case you can't argue with people like that because they'll deliberately look away from the massive problems with the game and just declare them intentional, no matter how stupid or anti-fun they are.

You claim it's technically bad, others claim otherwise, I don't care. Besides, "technically bad" means nothing. There are people arguing that Call of Duty is technically bad, and it's aimed at such a broad base that my mom could pick up and play it.

If you want to make an argument then you CAN'T bring in the "who cares" bit because you lose every point you tried to make, as it makes you a hypocrite.

When I say it's "technically bad" I mean that it is badly programmed, I went into further details in earlier posts about this, like how a boss will get an invisible Area of effect attack, and how the game doesn't tell you which ledges are safe to drop onto and which will kill you, despite them all being 2 foot drops, among other things.

 

[lapan]

Take away the snobs power, and you're left with a game that has little to no draw.

I'd say you're right but not in those words. What many (me included) have said in this thread, though, is that neither Demon's Souls nor Dark Souls do anything spectacularly well compared to other games. The world and the atmosphere flat out lose to something like Skyrim, Fable 2 and 3, Dragon Age, Kingdoms of Amalur or almost any other big budget western style RPG out there. The story is there but it's minimal (again, compared to just about any other RPG). The battle is serviceable but kind of clunky. The only way it differentiates itself from the pack is the complete disregard for the player.

Now, if you take all that into account, it does seem a bit strange to have people clamoring for an easy mode. If you know you don't enjoy a game that is built to punch your teeth in with everything else coming second, then you aren't missing out on much. Everything else the game does has been done better elsewhere.

I'd say it beats at least the Fable games story- and atmospherewise by a long shot. Skyrim beats it storywise, but the combat is inferior. Dark souls Combat is one of the best in Action-RPGs in my opinion, although the one thing i would improve upon is making the enemies play by the same rules as in: don't let them attack through walls.

 

[Paradoxrifts]

[Snip]

No, it's really that you just don't get it, and I'm running out of ways to try and explain it to you. The rest of it is just you talking mainly out your arse.

Take for example a test for secondary school, university or whatever, the location of the test itself is irrelevant. If all you need to do in order to pass the test is get 75% or more of the questions correct, and getting a higher percentage will have little to absolutely no effect on your quality of outcome, then what is the point of being exceptional and getting a 100% of the questions correct?

Reasoning like yours is poisonous to the pursuit of merit.

People shouldn't have to expect the only reward to being better at something than other people, is that they're better at something than other people.

And that reward is the view from Everest.

 

[Woe Is You]

Let the other children play in the sandbox and stroke your ego to something that actually deserves acknowledgment.

Come on... Did you even read what a lot of people are posting here? The thing is that none of the qualities exist in the Souls games that someone who'd be in it just for the experience would like. There's no epic, crazy and/or well-written plot to enjoy, no combat system that makes you feel badass, no huge sprawling world to explore. The only thing it does really differently from other western style RPGs is that the game punches you in the gut for every mistake you make. Remove that and all you're left with is a mediocre hack & slash.

I know we have some posts that scream people to man up but quite a few people realize that if you don't like its defining quality, the game just isn't for you. And that's fine... there are game types I don't like.

 

[Woe Is You]

I don't feel it fair or you to state what other people may or may not like. You may not personally feel the series has anything to offer outside of challenge, but that doesn't mean others wouldn't have fun with the games on easier settings.

Do you feel that it does offer anything outside of it? As someone who has played it, I feel like I made a compelling case that it really doesn't. I'd imagine the whole design document has been crafted by someone who really wants to screw with the player. From the way it obscures cause and effect like roguelikes, the way you're asked to do leaps of faith to see what's coming next to the way savepoints revive enemies. All of that is weighed against the things I listed it doesn't have compared to, well, any other game with RPG elements (Diablo 3 for instance...) and... well, I have no idea why someone would even consider the game even if it were easier.

We'd be talking about the kind of hypothetical player who'd play Call of Duty for its deep and engaging story at that point.

 

[Woe Is You]

But they like it, so, what harm is there in having the difficulty slider?

You see a "boring game that makes itself hard for its own sake". I see it like this: the basic mechanics of the games work so that without the things making it hard, it'd still be a boring game to you.

To be really honest... Based on how the game works, to make an easier game would mean a whole ton of tweaking basic systems. In this game's case, it's not just giving the player more health and making the enemies deal less. It's rebalancing a whole new game to make it easier (like I said, the game obscures a load of information, has a ton of one-shotting and sluggish combat amongst other things)... and at that point, why not just make a new game? I'd understand it if we were talking about Bioware, Bethesda or any other big company. But we're talking about a relatively small team of people making a game for a (admittedly) niche audience. This whole argument, to me at least, is a lot like people buying a turn-based strategy game and expecting it to be a shooter.

If From Software wants to make a similar kind of game that is much more forgiving, I'll still be there trying it out. And to be really honest, I'd rather have From do new games than just retweak their past ones like The Witcher devs seem to be doing.

 

[Burst6]

Moreover, it leads the the question: why not? Why not have an option for people to play a video game on an easier setting than others? Maybe they want it a little easier. Maybe they want it a lot easier. Maybe they want it so easy they just walk through it and enjoy the distraction--like a bad action flick. Some people obviously want the ability to reduce the difficulty somewhat and you not understanding what they'd gain from it isn't in any way a good reason not to include that option. If anything, making the series easier to approach will doubtlessly lead to some people enjoying it and getting into the community.

Childish and selfish ego stroking is the only reason one could give for wanting to keep others from having their fun and that stinks.

Or maybe because the game has its own theme and the developers shouldn't ruin it because some people don't want to try? Not every game has to change itself to suit people who don't even want to experience the main part. The game is so dependent on its difficulty that an easy mode will likely be crap unless they make massive changes to the game. Both times it's a waste of developer time and money.

I don't know if you played dark souls, but the way the online component works they would either have to cut off easy mode from online, or buy twice as many servers and segregate easy mode and normal mode players. Which is not worth the cost for something that will probably be very bad.

It doesn't matter if they want it easy. This game just isn't designed this way. There are plenty of games out there that you can walk through for a distraction, like 95% of the AA market, so why pick on dark souls just because it tries something different that a lot of people like? Dark souls isn't an action flick. The main point of the game is that it hides everything from you, and that's where the difficulty comes from. Removing that is like replacing Mario's jump with a dash attack and making all the levels flat and holeless. It'll turn from its own thing into a horrible beat-em-up.

 

[Burst6]

[Hardly. Adding more checkpoints (especially right before instant deaths), giving the player more health, making enemies attack less often and do less damage--there's plenty of ways to very quickly and very easily reduce the difficulty.

The number of people that would at least purchase the game to try it if it didn't have the reputation of being stupidly hard, would justify the extra week they spend on adding difficulty settings.

This whole thing is elitism and not wanting other people to join your club (not you personally, but the group as a whole, I mean).

There is simply no reason valid not to give players the ability.

no reason to add more checkpoints. You can sprint past everything easily. The whole game is laden with shortcuts. I don't remember any instant death trap in the game that didn't make itself obvious, so that isn't much of a problem.

Removing the need to not get hit makes the combat boring. It greatly reduces the need to block or dodge, makes parrying worthless, makes pretty much every kick/dodge attack useless, and generally reduces the combat down to spamming your basic attack in the enemies face. Everything already dies quickly (most things die with 3-4 good hits with a decent weapon, 1 hit if you pull off a backstab/riposte), everything already attacks very slowly (other than maybe the black/silver knights or darkwraiths, which rarely appear), and you can armor yourself up and build your character in a way that gives you very high HP and defense without sacrificing damage if you know how.

And if you're having a lot of trouble with an area you can call on someone else online to help you. I'm sure there are plenty warriors of sunlight that could use the medals.


Just because the game has a reputation of being hard doesn't mean it is. It's just tricky. I said it in another post and i'll say it here, dark souls isn't that hard. This isn't an elitism thing, i'm serious. Everything has a trick to it. The game hides great strategies for you. There are shortcuts everywhere and you can create incredibly powerful weapons and spells to beat most bosses easily. I want people to play, i really do. More people buying the game = more incentive for them to make another, but i want them to play the actual game and not some easy mode that will probably be very boring and leave a bad taste in their mouths. If you want to make dark souls easier for yourself all you need to do is go on gamefaqs and read a guide or walkthrough. Once you get used to the control scheme and know all the tricks it isn't that hard.

 

[Paradoxrifts]

{Snip}

Why does the existence of one game that doesn't go out of it's way to grab you by the dick and balls and lead you through it step-by-step so offensive to you?

Dark Souls isn't a public library, it doesn't need wheelchair access.

Nobody is missing out on the game's quintessential experience, except for the people who are inclined to make misinformed gaming purchasing and sore losers. I just feel people like yourself are being asshats for resenting other gamers having the opportunity to prove themselves at being exceptional at something. And the reward for being good at Dark Souls, is the opportunity to advance and keep playing Dark Souls.

And please get your memory checked, because like I stated earlier I've never played the game and I likely never will.

 

[Something Amyss]

If you want to make an argument then you CAN'T bring in the "who cares" bit because you lose every point you tried to make, as it makes you a hypocrite.

One can examine the logic (or in your case, lack of) without actually caring about the point at hand. That's not hypocritical, because I still don't care.

When I say it's "technically bad" I mean that it is badly programmed, I went into further details in earlier posts about this, like how a boss will get an invisible Area of effect attack, and how the game doesn't tell you which ledges are safe to drop onto and which will kill you, despite them all being 2 foot drops, among other things.

That sounds like about 90% of games out there. And again, people complain about bad technical design with MW3. So what?

And who cares?

 

[Warachia]

If you want to make an argument then you CAN'T bring in the "who cares" bit because you lose every point you tried to make, as it makes you a hypocrite.

One can examine the logic (or in your case, lack of) without actually caring about the point at hand. That's not hypocritical, because I still don't care.

When I say it's "technically bad" I mean that it is badly programmed, I went into further details in earlier posts about this, like how a boss will get an invisible Area of effect attack, and how the game doesn't tell you which ledges are safe to drop onto and which will kill you, despite them all being 2 foot drops, among other things.

That sounds like about 90% of games out there. And again, people complain about bad technical design with MW3. So what?

And who cares?

Then you are lying, if you don't care, why argue? It seems to me that you are doing this for the sake of arguing, but according to you, you can't be because you don't care, and now you are just ignoring the points I'm making.

 

[Evil Smurf]

ahhh backpedalling I love it.