A Dark Souls easy mode would require a fundamental change in level design.

[barbzilla]

snip, how much of this topic have we eaten now?

I'm sorry I'm still confused as to the tactical choice thing. I tend to choose my difficulty by picking the hardest difficulty I think I will be able to complete. This doesn't always mean the absolute hardest difficulty on every game I play, but the difficulty that will enable me to use my brain and my reflexes to their fullest extent. So that I can enjoy a minor sense of accomplishment. Putting in an easy mode to me, wouldn't effect me (a hard mode might, as I think i can safely move forward onto one), so I don't see the personal issue with it. I know I can complete the difficulty as it stands, I won't move down a notch. If I pick up a game and decide its too easy I will start over again on a harder difficulty, that is just how I am. I like to make sure I have pushed myself to my personal limit in a game. I will eventually either beat the game or hit a brick wall I can't pass. If I can't pass it I will put the game away and try again when my skills advance. Or I might look something up to help me, if I am desperate. I guess we just have two completely different ways of choosing our modes.

Yeah, I think I may have been too vague, I know that it isn't all of the people against an easy mode that are hypocrites. I just get irritated at the few who are. So, nothing against you or any of your ilk (the anti-easy mode advocates), just the hypocrites among you, and the ones among my side as well.

No worries, I have that issue myself. If I don't notice something or I don't pay enough attention to it, I tend to forget it all together.

Anyway, I like you. You have engaged in intelligent discourse and tried to influence me without reverting to accusations or name calling so I'm going to add you. The who reason for these threads is to figure out the why and how of things, not so much the IF. I know that many people here defend or attack based on a perceived chance or weakness, but it just isn't there. This is merely a glimpse into the reasoning behind the concepts.

 

[infinity_turtles]

I'm sorry I'm still confused as to the tactical choice thing. I tend to choose my difficulty by picking the hardest difficulty I think I will be able to complete. This doesn't always mean the absolute hardest difficulty on every game I play, but the difficulty that will enable me to use my brain and my reflexes to their fullest extent. So that I can enjoy a minor sense of accomplishment. Putting in an easy mode to me, wouldn't effect me (a hard mode might, as I think i can safely move forward onto one), so I don't see the personal issue with it. I know I can complete the difficulty as it stands, I won't move down a notch. If I pick up a game and decide its too easy I will start over again on a harder difficulty, that is just how I am. I like to make sure I have pushed myself to my personal limit in a game. I will eventually either beat the game or hit a brick wall I can't pass. If I can't pass it I will put the game away and try again when my skills advance. Or I might look something up to help me, if I am desperate. I guess we just have two completely different ways of choosing our modes.

Yeah, I've had difficulty getting others to understand my mindset. But "using my brain to the fullest extent" requires me to try and make choices that give me the biggest tactical advantage. In some games that's what enemy to prioritize, what equipment to use, which party members to bring into a fight, or what units to build. In games with multiple difficulty options, the biggest advantage is always the easiest setting. I start looking at my tactical options the moment the game turns on because, well, that's when the game starts. Everything from then on is part of the game and part of the choices the game gives me to beat it with. I can't really wrap my head around how people don't think the mode isn't one of those choices and just acts like it's not there.

 

[barbzilla]

I'm sorry I'm still confused as to the tactical choice thing. I tend to choose my difficulty by picking the hardest difficulty I think I will be able to complete. This doesn't always mean the absolute hardest difficulty on every game I play, but the difficulty that will enable me to use my brain and my reflexes to their fullest extent. So that I can enjoy a minor sense of accomplishment. Putting in an easy mode to me, wouldn't effect me (a hard mode might, as I think i can safely move forward onto one), so I don't see the personal issue with it. I know I can complete the difficulty as it stands, I won't move down a notch. If I pick up a game and decide its too easy I will start over again on a harder difficulty, that is just how I am. I like to make sure I have pushed myself to my personal limit in a game. I will eventually either beat the game or hit a brick wall I can't pass. If I can't pass it I will put the game away and try again when my skills advance. Or I might look something up to help me, if I am desperate. I guess we just have two completely different ways of choosing our modes.

Yeah, I've had difficulty getting others to understand my mindset. But "using my brain to the fullest extent" requires me to try and make choices that give me the biggest tactical advantage. In some games that's what enemy to prioritize, what equipment to use, which party members to bring into a fight, or what units to build. In games with multiple difficulty options, the biggest advantage is always the easiest setting. I start looking at my tactical options the moment the game turns on because, well, that's when the game starts. Everything from then on is part of the game and part of the choices the game gives me to beat it with. I can't really wrap my head around how people don't think the mode isn't one of those choices and just acts like it's not there.

For me the mode choice comes down to how I want to experience my game. If it is a game that I like the mechanics of I play on harder difficulties to test myself. If it is a game I don't care for the mechanics behind, but I want to see the story, i'll play it on easy. Most of the games I buy I play on hard though.

 

[Therumancer]

It occurs to me that if you walk off a ledge, it's not a failing in difficulty level. And I don't see a problem in putting an easy mode IN, because it doesn't mean you'd actually have to do it. And if you have to use ME2 style ledges for easy, fine, I say just have hard be open at the beginning so that people get a good choice.

Well the problem with an easy mode in my mind is that half the point of a tough game is the accomplishment of being able to do something not many people are able to do (comparitively speaking). The cinematics, story progression, achievements, etc... are your reward for success and preserverance. An easy mode simply gives all of those things to players without having to earn them, an easy mode means all of this stuff is taken for granted, choosing to play on a harder mode is simply you choosing to challenge yourself, not a matter of the game being difficult, or there being any intristic value in earning progression.

That said, an easy mode in Dark Souls or whatever is fairly easy to do. "Easy" does not mean "cannot fail under any circumstances". They could probably add better jump guidance, lower enemy health and damage, and have the bosses simply not use certain moves or stay in their relatively vulnerable states longer.

They could also remove some of the more arbitrary limits from the game. One of the reasons why I never really got "into" the series is less a matter of difficulty and more a matter of not being able to play a character I really like. The entire thing is too melee centric for me, when it comes to sword and sorcery I like to use magic (my handle is Therumancer), Dark Souls in paticular has made magic a finite resource as part of the difficulty curve, and it's impossible to play through as a dedicated mage without resorting heavily to melee combat. What's more the spellcasting system, aim, spellpower (mostly) and other things is fairly bad. It's so much of a pain that I inevitably wind up hacking through things even with spells because it's so much of a headache to use their magic system and typically most things I could kill would magic would be easier to beat using melee just because of the way the game is designed. Of course at the same time if they let you have an easily usable set of ranged magical attacks it would ruin the game since you could then pretty much burn down every enemy your facing fairly easily.... a fundementally bad design choice, I suppose with the current design if they made their magic system more usable it would count as an EZ mode as well. I personally look forward to a sequel that manages to maintain the essential difficulty, while allowing me to use magic as my only tool through the entire game as a viable option.

I'll also add that part of the issue with Dark Souls to an extent is that the stats don't matter much unless you have a whole lot of them. I consider ti barely an RPG because you don't really see much effect other than what gear you can wear/carry and how fast you can roll, until you've gained literally scores of levels. By the time a build/strategy starts to have a truely signifigant effect against computer opponents is about the time you have to worry about people invading your world and trying to murder you in PVP regularly. PVP having some very differant considerations than what works on the computer controlled enemies, which is again part of the whole "killer vibe" of the game. Another way to make an easy mode would simply be to increase the power of the stats, so you need less investment of points/souls to see signifigant effect, and ultimatly leading to characters who are polymaths by the usual point it does become a factor, giving the player a far greater range of options/gear and effective moves than they would normally have.

 

[Clive Howlitzer]

I think just reworking the checkpoint system to be less of an obvious way to pad game length would do wonders to making the game less tedious. I know people will say it is all about the difficulty and making you try hard not to die, but come on. The real reason the developers did it was to pad game length, the same reason old brutally hard NES games are the same way.

 

[BilltheEmu]

Except I was told that it made it easier, hence I shouldn't be picking it. Also, I chose an assassin, those don't have the key, AFAIK. Finally, I was making a throw away character, not the one I'd be playing seriously. I actually ended up playing through the whole of the beginning level (until you're taken by the giant raven) which is more than what I planned for. I was only testing how it's running.

There is no assassin class, so I assumed you were talking about the thief, which starts with the bandit's knife and target shield, giving parrying and backstabbing bonuses. And it's the one with the black leather starting gear and the mask. And again, I respectfully disagree with whoever told you that it would be easier. Not for a first playthrough, in any case. It provides more opportunity for getting lost in the beginning, which is exactly what I did the first time. Ended up going very much in the wrong direction, and ended up fighting my way, backwards, through an entire area that I wasn't supposed to get to until later. It's easier on subsequent playthroughs, however, when you know your way around, and know how to use the key to your advantage.

But hey, I enjoyed letting myself get lost, and going against the natural direction of the game, and finding my own way. I appreciate that Dark Souls allowed me the freedom to do that in the first place.

 

[Eternal_Lament]

Look, the ledge argument isn't a very valid point, but there are points to the level design argument.

I do see it as a valid point when discussing areas such as the Crystal Cave, Sen's Fortress, Tomb of the Giants, and the Chasm of the Abyss, in so much as this point: let's say a player chose easy mode with reduced enemy damage, stronger weapons, and reduced stamina consumption. At those points in the game, with things such as invisible bridges, traps that push you down, or just plain pitch black drops, they seem like sudden spikes of difficulty in a game that up till that point just seemed like a bleak hack-and-slash. This makes the game seem unbalanced or uneven. However, while the harder difficulty makes the whole game an ordeal of sorts, these sudden changes in level design just seem to be going with the flow rather than arbitrary inserts that make things uneven.

To use another example, how about enemy placement? Let's say that the Anor Londo archers didn't have the power or knockback that they do now. Would their placement seem like a fort that is indeed fortified with the best talent and power that souls can buy, or would it just seem like random enemies that have no real relation to the environment, except maybe to question why no one has chosen to storm the fort before if it's that easy to infiltrate.



I've said this before, and I'll say it again. An easy mode in the current iteration and version of Dark Souls, with all it's location design, enemy placement, and acquisition of abilities, a version without any major changes to these elements or complete reworking of the game, would not work and would instead make the game seem uneven or heavily unbalanced. The most that could be done would be a few changes to stats so damage is still a concern but not life-threatening, and perhaps turning Seek Guidance from a miracle to a special ring or infinite use consumable like the Silver Pendant so that those who could benefit from it's use can do so right off the bat. Now, if Dark Souls 2 is designed in such a way that both regular and easy mode can co-exist without making the other look uneven or unbalanced, then I have no problem with From doing so. I still think that at this point that that's not what From is doing when they said they'll make DS2 more accessible, nor do I think it's even necessary for them to do so.

 

[Calcium]

I get the feeling that if the developer claimed they were making a hard(er) mode, people wouldn't be running around to tell each other how the game would have to be redesigned, and how that such a mode would detract resources from the core experience.

 

[WoW Killer]

The answer to that is, it depends. Theoretically possible that it could be done in a way that I'd enjoy it, but as the loss of enjoyment stems from feeling like I'm playing stupid or not being challenged, I'd have to believe the reward to be competitive with the advantage of Easy Mode. Easy Mode in a normally challenging game by it's nature is such a massive advantage that having it from the start almost certainly outweighs any possible advantage you could get that only arrived at the end. So possible, but so unlikely that if I'm playing smart I'd never take the chance.

That often only works in theory, in reality that end game reward has to be something really amazing or the player will at some point just go "fuck it, its not worth it" unless they have amazing will-power. It has happened to me quite some times when I for example dont even feel like the reward is worth me "torturing" myself. To really pull it of i think the game needs to constantly reward the gamer for playing on a higher difficulty, an at that point you start to get into some very tough game design where the game has to adapt to every difficulty.

I think for me I wouldn't care so much how powerful the little extra is, per say, I'd only want it to be unique. The kind of thing where if you described to me what it did I'd still have to try it for myself to work out if I'd use it or not. That's a worthy enough reward for me, even if I ended up not liking it. I'd just want to try it; that's the reward. Even better, if the list of weapons/spells/abilities on easy mode was one bigger than everything I could get (on that mode) and I had a big empty space glaring at me; I'd have to do a hard run in that case. The thought of not having that last item would irritate the hell out of me. That's the completionist in me.

I guess that's an example of how gamers can differ. People have different tastes, and it's not always such a simple thing as casual and hardcore. Whether you're talking about a deep indie revolutionary title or a lowest-common-denominator film-adaptation you'll still find people who enjoy it for different reasons. What bugs me about this particular debate is that I thought the "ideal" solution to different tastes was to include more options. I mean surely giving players the freedom to choose their own game is better than tailoring to one niche or another.

I do kind of understand the willpower thing though, even if you don't like to call it that, because I've used that argument myself. In Skyrim, I've often advocated a mod that removes the fast travel feature. The obvious question is "why not play normally and just not use the fast travel?". But for me there's definitely something different there. What would satisfy me is something at the start which says "do you want fast travel: yes/no?", because that locks you in. You can make that conscious decision at the start what your challenge is going to be, and then stick to it. What stops me from being fed up and rerolling on a new character is that I'm already invested in that toon and I want to see it to completion.

 

[Madgamer13]

Greets!

Dark souls, a game designed around a specific atmosphere of adversity, needs to be easier? How, pray tell? How could Dark Souls be easier? The enemies hit for less? Your undead hits for more? Enemies swing their weapons slower? Arrows, god forbid, move even slower than they already do?

I've seen so much rage concerning the 'issue' of an easy mode for Dark Souls, from flaming trolls that liken themselves to Video Gaming Purists of Absolute Masochism(Tm)

I never see stable arguments for or against the inclusion of a so called 'easy mode' due to one side yelling from the rooftops that it should be easy to progress in the story of the game and others bellowing from the depths of blighttown that the masterpiece should be retained as it is.

I'm sorry, but I really do not care for either arguments, because I find Dark Souls to be easy enough as it is! I went into the game expecting to be utterly frustrated by the 'unforgiving difficulty' and found myself instead snoring. So, is this fabled Dark Souls a masterpiece of game design to be treasured for its incrediable difficulty? Nay! I see no such difficulty.

Is anyone even paying attention to other things within the game that are woefully mysterious? The background lore that is never properly expanded on inside the game itself? Why the hell are Gwynevere's tits so big?

Nay, I never see such arguments for Dark Souls. So, I'll make one now:

For the next addition to the Souls Series, I want to see more expanded and in-game accessable lore for each individual game area, a codex perhaps that fills with entries on lore you have discovered and can read like a compliation of books on the Souls Universe. Some more systems in game that take advantage of the modification and reinforce systems, like an alchemy craft system that can give you something more to work towards than your +5 Occult Zweihander of face pwn. Some more customisation for characters and armour pieces. An expansion of the PvP system that'll allow for larger conflicts and more objectives than 'be a *****' or 'render justice!'

To me, Dark Souls is a woefully underdeveloped game with great potential, I wish to see this expanded further, then it might rival my current standing series of awesome games; The Legend of Zelda.

Get to it, From Software!

 

[Aglynugga]

Greets!

Dark souls, a game designed around a specific atmosphere of adversity, needs to be easier? How, pray tell? How could Dark Souls be easier? The enemies hit for less? Your undead hits for more? Enemies swing their weapons slower? Arrows, god forbid, move even slower than they already do?

I've seen so much rage concerning the 'issue' of an easy mode for Dark Souls, from flaming trolls that liken themselves to Video Gaming Purists of Absolute Masochism(Tm)

I never see stable arguments for or against the inclusion of a so called 'easy mode' due to one side yelling from the rooftops that it should be easy to progress in the story of the game and others bellowing from the depths of blighttown that the masterpiece should be retained as it is.

I'm sorry, but I really do not care for either arguments, because I find Dark Souls to be easy enough as it is! I went into the game expecting to be utterly frustrated by the 'unforgiving difficulty' and found myself instead snoring. So, is this fabled Dark Souls a masterpiece of game design to be treasured for its incrediable difficulty? Nay! I see no such difficulty.

Is anyone even paying attention to other things within the game that are woefully mysterious? The background lore that is never properly expanded on inside the game itself? Why the hell are Gwynevere's tits so big?

Nay, I never see such arguments for Dark Souls. So, I'll make one now:

For the next addition to the Souls Series, I want to see more expanded and in-game accessable lore for each individual game area, a codex perhaps that fills with entries on lore you have discovered and can read like a compliation of books on the Souls Universe. Some more systems in game that take advantage of the modification and reinforce systems, like an alchemy craft system that can give you something more to work towards than your +5 Occult Zweihander of face pwn. Some more customisation for characters and armour pieces. An expansion of the PvP system that'll allow for larger conflicts and more objectives than 'be a *****' or 'render justice!'

To me, Dark Souls is a woefully underdeveloped game with great potential, I wish to see this expanded further, then it might rival my current standing series of awesome games; The Legend of Zelda.

Get to it, From Software!

Yo did you find the one cat thing and then fight the dog cause that was mad crazy wasnt Zelsa like a wolf too so they should just put zelda in dark souls and we could do that.

 

[Colt47]

There's no point to adding an overall easy mode to Dark Souls. The games sense of immersion comes from the adversity of the game world and the intense fights, where it's made deathly clear that the player character is a mortal being. Easy mode would just detract from that experience and leave people with nothing but the story line, which while interesting, isn't the main draw to the game. However, I am for adding a temporary easy mode option if the player gets stuck and ends up dieing a whole lot more than they should at certain areas or bosses.

On a side note, as a player who has played Demons Souls casually but hasn't gotten around to getting Dark Souls yet, did they add in proper directional attacks to weapons? One of the biggest issues I had with the first game is that the difficulty in some spots was largely due to a lack of proper directional strikes (Which is a problem I similarly had in the 2d era with Castlevania Rondo of Blood coming from SNES Castlevania 4.)