I don't think even Dark Souls players would want to lose literally everything when they die a few times to a late game boss.Happyninja42 said:I dunno, this seems right in line with the sadistic mentality of people who love the Dark Souls series, specifically because it's hard. As they would say "get gud". I don't mind the rule, and personally like it.Bindal said:I dunno, losing several hours of progress because I had a few problems with a specific encounter seems more like a big middle finger to me, where the game tells me that it doesn't want me to play it.Happyninja42 said:A game with tangible, negative consequences for my actions, forcing me to take my choices and actions seriously, instead of being cavalier with the character's life because it's just a game right? Cool. I'm in favor of this.
In which case, I gladly take action and not even buy it, either.
Dark Souls might be hard - but it's also FAIR by always giving you another chance. At a cost in terms of resources, but still a chance.
Deleting your save? That's not a chance, that's the opposite.
You mean the games where you can in fact beat the games in about an hour if you know what you're doing? And, in case of SMB3, STILL has a form of "checkpoint" system that allows you to skip to a part where you already have been after losing all your lives?Tropical said:Anyone ever play super mario brothers?
Yes, I did - different system, different playtime lengh and functionally phased out of the newer games.