Dark Souls: an experiment in logic

[barbzilla]

SNIP

snip

I don't feel tension, I don't get scared when a dragon plops down in front of me, I generally just move forward thinking about how to improve my character (though I do feel a little tension when someone invades me as I'm almost at the boss in a difficult area), and yet I agree with you. The difficulty does make the game better. In both instances you mention, the difficulty made the game better (as evident by Ninja Gaiden 3). But why does an easy mode effect that? A small change in the damage of the monsters would make all the difference in the world to some players. Hell just slapping something called easy mode in the game with no changes other than no pvp would probably make more people play the game. I don't advocate the changing of the core game at all (other than perhaps tightening the controls a bit, the still feel slow to me).

The main reason this is an argument at all is that people ASSUME that From adding a new difficulty will change the core experience, and I just don't think its the case. I do think that some players who could beat the game just fine on traditional mode will play on easy mode thinking "Oh, I just want to see the story" and be disappointed (unless they know where to look), but those players will either quit afterwards or join traditional mode to see what the fuss is about. So... Yay! more net players.

The other people who would use an easy mode are people who otherwise wouldn't play the game. We are talking about more sales for From and (potentially) more players for us on Traditional mode. Win Win situation.

The game was made with an emphasis on tactics NOT reflex.In fact,that is the very reason why Miyazaki spoke so highly of the shield.I have beaten the game with multiple "tactics" and strategies and I can honestly say that if you can't beat dark souls the problem lies with you.There are far too many ways to tackle most bosses and item drops that allow you to tackle each challenge with absolutely no reflex.Name a boss.I can probably tell an item on that bosses way that could help you.

Oh and I know you beat the game,so you are not who I am addressing with my entire post.

Also, Easy Mode?-No trophies...discuss.

Well the game does emphasise tactics. I agree ( I seem to be saying that a lot), but (I seem to be saying this a lot too lol) the initial battle with a new enemy is reliant of reflex. People who are slow learners or people who have poor reflex will have many battles with these enemies before they can potentially figure their movements out. If it is one battle too many, that is one player lost. That player isn't coming back and we have a net loss. Once they get past the initial "Ohhh, I see" they can rely on tactics 90% of the time instead of reflex.

I'd be fine with Easy Mode = No Trophies/achievements/steam thingys. My only argument in favor of an easy mode is giving from more money to make more games like this. I've encouraged all of my friends to buy it and try it, but that is about all I can do as an individual (short of donating mass funds I don't have).

I agree,but(lol),When you see a new enemy-put up your shield.They will expose their pattern and then you kill them.p No enemy I can think of escaped this method when first seen.

Works very well once you get a 100% shield and enough stam/stability to withstand the attacks. The first time that new player comes up on the most basic enemy doing the rapid slash you will stagger pretty quick. Although it really isn't that hard to figure out once you understand the leveling system and what the game requires of you. That being said, how long was it before you even understood what Stability on a shield meant?

 

[Rooster Cogburn]

Update: what this means is, an easy mode would have a huge impact on the design of the normal mode almost as a necessity. Either they literally make two different games, which is obviously unrealistic, or they take both easy mode and normal mode into account in the design of every enemy, every area, every encounter, every puzzle, every boss, the leveling system, the weapon system, parry/riposte/backstab mechanics, poise/stability/defense mechanics, invicibility frames... you get the idea. So don't act so sure this won't effect my gameplay experience. It will most likely effect it in every aspect.

Let me just leave this here...

Why? Why would they possibly want to make the game easier when nearly all of the feedback has complimented them on how hard the game is? It makes no sense, from a business standpoint or a design standpoint. That is why this is a slippery slope fallacy: you are assuming that one necessarily follows the other, when that is not the case. Yes, they will keep the lower barrier of entry in mind for future titles, but do you know what else they will keep in mind? How much so many liked how difficult the game was. Games are not designed for the lowest possible entry point. They are designed for the largest base. And the largest base is the one that likes the difficulty.

Just take the already existing NG+ mechanics, and change some code slightly so players at the new mode start at something like NG-1 or NG-2 (in terms of modifiers applied to stats). Bam, solved it, I am a genius.

It sounds deceptively simple, but it's really just deceptive. Scaling the HP up makes the mechanics more relevant. Scaling the HP down makes the mechanics less relevant. By "mechanics" I mean things like parry/riposte, backstab, shield protection/stability, poise, spell use limits, weapon movesets, timing, spacing, weapon scaling, equipment upgrades, etc. This game emphasizes those things heavily, or rather learning to take advantage of them. But if I can defeat that first Black Knight without undergoing that learning process, the experience is fundamentally different, especially in the way the player approaches the encounters. By scaling the health points UP, you bring that learning process back into the limelight. It's an attempt to bring that learning experience into sharper focus and recreate it for experienced players. Bringing the health points DOWN has the opposite effect.

So what this means is, you make an easy mode that you know is relatively shitty and boring or you account for the easy mode in the design of the game's mechanics.

EDIT: Just saw your other post. The only reason to add an easy mode is to expand the game's appeal to an audience outside your core fanbase. If they do that I expect From to make adjustments to make the game less shitty and more enticing to the new audience. It only makes sense for them to do that, and they would only be doing what pretty much every other developer has done. Even if you don't have to sell out your core audience to chase that broad appeal, it's very hard to walk that line, which is why virtually no series (none I can think of) has done so successfully.

Additionally, you can leave the normal mode perfectly intact (still extremely unlikely) while changing the way I experience it.

 

[Yopaz]

Why does everyone seem to be thinking that having optional difficulties ruin a game? Now I have played through some hard games and I love the gratification of feeling badass when I accomplish something as much as anyone else, but does easy mode really ruin things for us?

There are plenty of easy games out there and I want optional difficulties for games that are too easy and most of you will agree when I say that we should be able to pick a harder difficulty. However so many of you seem to refuse to consider that hard games should have an easier difficulty.

Let people pick their difficulty rather than having a set difficulty that only appeals to a few.

 

[BreakfastMan]

It sounds deceptively simple, but it's really just deceptive. Scaling the HP up makes the mechanics more relevant. Scaling the HP down makes the mechanics less relevant. By "mechanics" I mean things like parry/riposte, backstab, shield protection/stability, poise, spell use limits, weapon movesets, timing, spacing, weapon scaling, equipment upgrades, etc. This game emphasizes those things heavily, or rather learning to take advantage of them. But if I can defeat that first Black Knight without undergoing that learning process, the experience is fundamentally different, especially in the way the player approaches the encounters. By scaling the health points UP, you bring that learning process back into the limelight. It's an attempt to bring that learning experience into sharper focus and recreate it for experienced players. Bringing the health points DOWN has the opposite effect.

So what this means is, you make an easy mode that you know is relatively shitty and boring or you account for the easy mode in the design of the game's mechanics.

I... don't see how you got that conclusion. The mechanics are still there, simply making the player less easy to kill doesn't take them away from learning them. It just means they are not forced to use them, so they can learn them at their own pace. Players will still explore their options, they will still try new things. There is no logical reason to cut mechanics because some players don't learn them fast enough, it makes no sense. Yet, this is what you are proposing the devs are going to do if an easy mode is added.

And the easy mode might be boring and crappy for you; for others, it might be awesome. Don't generalize your experience to everyone.

 

[thejackyl]

The only thing I can say about the Souls series and easy mode is this:
I personally wouldn't mind an Easy mode, because I will not play on it.

Here's an idea for it though, they could do it like Resident Evil 2/3 did. Easy mode allows you to start with better items, increased drops, etc. But you can't unlock ANYTHING (from what I remember, you couldn't only get certain weapons if you played on "Hard", which was effectively the exact game, but you started with 100 extra bullets and in Assault Rifle on 2 and 3.

Here is what I would do:
Normal players start on the games main difficulty(New Game, or NG)
Easy players start on NG-

NG-: enemy health and damage is reduced by about 25-50%, drop rates are increased for everything except upgrade stone, which are REDUCED. Boss souls do not drop, and upgrade Slabs do not exist. Once the player beats NG-, they are put into NG difficulty, but with the same restrictions as NG-. NG- players can only invade/co-op with other NG- characters. Messages can be read by everyone.

NG: Enemy health and damage is normal, drop rates are balanced for everything, Boss souls DO drop and Upgrade Slabs Drop/can be found at their normal places. NG players can play with anyone NG or higher.

This way "Content Tourists" are happy they can see the ending and experience all the bosses, lesser skilled/patient players can practice against bosses, and the current fans can still have their game balanced just like the older entries. And to top it all off, players on Easy have incentive to play on Hard.

 

[Exius Xavarus]

I don't have good internet. I actually have very, very awful internet. I wouldn't mind being invaded if it didn't mean being unable to fight them. But I've played and beaten Dark Souls entirely on my own, all the way from NG to NG++, so I fail to see the need in summoning people to help me out. I wouldn't mind playing it online like I did Demon's Souls, but I fear I may not get that chance anytime soon.

 

[Rooster Cogburn]

I... don't see how you got that conclusion. The mechanics are still there, simply making the player less easy to kill doesn't take them away from learning them. It just means they are not forced to use them, so they can learn them at their own pace. Players will still explore their options, they will still try new things. There is no logical reason to cut mechanics because some players don't learn them fast enough, it makes no sense. Yet, this is what you are proposing the devs are going to do if an easy mode is added.

And the easy mode might be boring and crappy for you; for others, it might be awesome. Don't generalize your experience to everyone.

You can already learn the mechanics at your own pace. What you're talking about is effectively making them irrelevant, and eliminating or at least minimizing that carefully crafted learning experience. That's the only reason to scale down the HP, that's all you accomplish. There is little technical skill in taking advantage of the mechanics after you have learned them. The game is impenetrable when you start, but it's all easy one-hit kills (heh just about) when you master it. The fun is in getting from Point A to Point B, that's why the game is designed the way it is. That's why you can't expect people who aren't learning the mechanics because the game doesn't require it of them to have any fun.

There is every logical reason to cut and adjust mechanics to accommodate new audiences who don't want to engage the existing content. I don't see how anyone in 2012 could deny that is typical developer behavior.

No, it would be boring and crappy for them as well, unless they have a thing for boring and crappy games. I'm human, I can generalize how people may feel about things, that's allowed.

 

[Lonewolfm16]

Heres the thing... no one is forcing you to play the easy mode. If you don't like it, you cna pretend its not there.

How about I put my finger in your face all day and you pretend it isn't there? Has anyone ever spoiled the ending of a movie for you? It changes the tension of the situation even if I never touch it.

It may be a option for other people, but you have made it very clear where you stand on the issue, so I can almost guarentee it is not a option for you. I just don't see how the mere knowledge of its existance would ruin everything.

Well the mere knowledge would only affect the tension (no small point by the way), the sense of reward offered by the learning experience, and arguably change the community aspects. Now that wouldn't be such a huge deal in most games, but Dark Souls is not most games. You wouldn't take exploration out of Skyrim, because Skyrim sacrifices everything else in the name of exploration. So you shouldn't take the learning experience out of Dark Souls, and you shouldn't add anything that fucks with it or makes it less rewarding. And that learning rests on the difficulty of the encounters. From creative director Hidetaka Miyazaki:

"What Dark Souls is offering is a feeling of accomplishment. That is the game concept of Dark Souls, so it looks a difficult game. Dark Souls is a game offering a feeling of accomplishment which may be relatively rare among other games nowadays"

(emphasis mine) I use this quote not because I care what his intentions were, but because I think he succeeded and that's the experience I am looking for.

Unless you are argueing you would be tempted to use it then I don't see your problem. What if there was a check box, that you clicked and then it asked you to confirm a few times, and that made sure the easy mode was never accessible to you. Would that help?

No, I would know it's there. I would know I can beat Ceaseless Discharge. I would know I can beat Nito. It would not be the same. In some other game, that may not be a big deal. But as I keep saying, this isn't that game.

I don't see why anyone would purposefully limit the options avalible to them on how to play the game but you are argueing for limiting everyone who plays the game's options so I guess my normal logic has failed here.

Because not having that option is integral to the sense of helplessness in the game and the sense of achievement I get when I beat that boss. Not having the option is the whole point. It's the difference between "oh neat, a gaping dragon" and "OH MY GOD IT'S A GAPING DRAGOOOORRRRN!!1!" It's the difference between "phew, that was tough" and "I... AM... GOD!!!" It also makes the process of learning how to beat enemies and encounters more rewarding. Overcoming a genuine obstacle is always more rewarding then one imposed by the player on him/herself.

And it's true, if there's no easy mode, people who want an easy mode won't like it. But if you trivialize tension and accomplishment in one of the very few games that are designed around them, I won't like it. So we're at an impasse. Everyone tries to make me out the bad guy, but is it really so freaking wrong to have ONE difficult game? Think about it. The question is whether any game, any, at all that doesn't have an easy mode, should be allowed to exist. And you're basically telling me that even ONE instance of that is bad, that LITERALLY EVERYTHING should have this particular option, and there is LITERALLY NO CIRCUMSTANCE that could be an exception. Do you really think that is fair to me? If you want an accessible game, why don't you play, oh I don't know, anything? Literally anything that isn't Dark Souls? Let me have one freaking game, for the love of all that is holy.

At the very least, I think it's POSSIBLE for a game to exist that would not be improved by the addition of an easy mode.

I am not making any assumptions as to how they would have implemented the easy mode. I realise that they can massively screw up the way the game plays if they do not implement it correctly. I'm not so thick as to be unable to empathise with your points entirely. I am sorry if I came off as calling you elitist, that wasn't my intention. I only wanted to point out that in your previous post you claim to want the game to remain the same so that you can have a game that is difficult for others to beat. If that wasn't the actual point and I am off base I am sorry.

You are correct in that, but I don't think you understand why I think it should be difficult for others. It's not because I want them to be frustrated, it's not because I love to brag, it's not because I want to cull out the weak, it's nothing like that. It's because if Dark Souls wasn't hard, it wouldn't be a very good game. And it's because if an easy mode exists, it exists in my reality too, not just yours. You seem to view the game's difficulty as incidental. You are not understanding that it's integral. No difficulty = no learning process = no significant content = shit game = bad reception = no more Souls series. Either that or they change the entire design focus of the game.

You however keep making a correlation fallacy by saying x = y. You are saying if they implement an easy mode it WILL effect your gameplay. I am simply saying that it does not have to. I actually agree with you about games that went the route of the elder scrolls by slowly dumping game mechanics and adding new ones just to appeal to a broader audience. I don't want that for dark souls either, but them implementing an easy mode does not mean they will do that (yet another correlation fallacy that you make).

"Seeking a broader audience leads to selling out the core audience" is only a correlation fallacy if one isn't causing the other. And it's very obvious that selling out the core audience has very often come as the direct result of seeking that broader appeal.

It does not make sense to seek a broader audience (what implementing an 'easy' mode actually is) and leave the normal Dark Souls experience unchanged. Would you leave the story inaccessible? How about the level progression? Or the combat mechanics and encounters? No, you adjust them to accommodate the new audience, the same audience you designed the easy mode for. It's a severe practical challenge and it pulls you in two direction in terms of design, and history leaves no doubt which tends to win out.

I get why you think it is possible for both sides of the issue to pull a win out of this, but I think it is so unlikely it is only reasonable to assume that won't happen. And the stakes are ten times higher for my side of the issue then the other.

So please feel free to have your own opinion on the matter, I know I do. But, maybe, try to take others points into consideration instead of refuting them absolutely. The argument is null and void at this point anyway as From has said there will be no Easy mode. This is the very reason I wanted discussion on the multiplayer aspect and not the previous arguments.

Happy Hunting

Maybe I feel like people are trying to refute my arguments absolutely lol.

How does my check box that permanantly blocks off easy mode not help? Sure you can say someone else might be able to beat Nito and the rest, but you don't have that option. It would restore the game to its normal state, for you leaving everyone else to choose their own path. Also I am with Yahtzee on this one, every game that can have difficulty options, should. Difficulty is hard to nail down because players bring vastly diffrent expierences, difficulty prefrences, and natural skill levels into each game. Normal mode is basically what the devlopers worked out as the ideal difficulty, then usually have a hard mode for greater challenge, a easy mode for those without expierence or who lack confidence in their abilities, and mabey a hardcore mode for those who like nail-biting frustration. This difficulty system is popular because it works, it allows as wide a range of players as possible the best expierence possible. Of course some games don't work well with difficulty settings. Again to use Yahtzee's example platformers would do poorly trying to incorporate difficulty. Mabey Dark Souls need a little bit less tradtional difficulty adjustment, but some adjustment option would be nice. Again I stand by my "option to permanently disable difficulty settings thereby preserving tension" system. Explain why this wouldn't work. It gives you your prefered "true" darksouls and everyone else a nice choice.

 

[Tallim]

SNIP

snip

I don't feel tension, I don't get scared when a dragon plops down in front of me, I generally just move forward thinking about how to improve my character (though I do feel a little tension when someone invades me as I'm almost at the boss in a difficult area), and yet I agree with you. The difficulty does make the game better. In both instances you mention, the difficulty made the game better (as evident by Ninja Gaiden 3). But why does an easy mode effect that? A small change in the damage of the monsters would make all the difference in the world to some players. Hell just slapping something called easy mode in the game with no changes other than no pvp would probably make more people play the game. I don't advocate the changing of the core game at all (other than perhaps tightening the controls a bit, the still feel slow to me).

The main reason this is an argument at all is that people ASSUME that From adding a new difficulty will change the core experience, and I just don't think its the case. I do think that some players who could beat the game just fine on traditional mode will play on easy mode thinking "Oh, I just want to see the story" and be disappointed (unless they know where to look), but those players will either quit afterwards or join traditional mode to see what the fuss is about. So... Yay! more net players.

The other people who would use an easy mode are people who otherwise wouldn't play the game. We are talking about more sales for From and (potentially) more players for us on Traditional mode. Win Win situation.

The game was made with an emphasis on tactics NOT reflex.In fact,that is the very reason why Miyazaki spoke so highly of the shield.I have beaten the game with multiple "tactics" and strategies and I can honestly say that if you can't beat dark souls the problem lies with you.There are far too many ways to tackle most bosses and item drops that allow you to tackle each challenge with absolutely no reflex.Name a boss.I can probably tell an item on that bosses way that could help you.

Oh and I know you beat the game,so you are not who I am addressing with my entire post.

Also, Easy Mode?-No trophies...discuss.

Well the game does emphasise tactics. I agree ( I seem to be saying that a lot), but (I seem to be saying this a lot too lol) the initial battle with a new enemy is reliant of reflex. People who are slow learners or people who have poor reflex will have many battles with these enemies before they can potentially figure their movements out. If it is one battle too many, that is one player lost. That player isn't coming back and we have a net loss. Once they get past the initial "Ohhh, I see" they can rely on tactics 90% of the time instead of reflex.

I'd be fine with Easy Mode = No Trophies/achievements/steam thingys. My only argument in favor of an easy mode is giving from more money to make more games like this. I've encouraged all of my friends to buy it and try it, but that is about all I can do as an individual (short of donating mass funds I don't have).

I agree,but(lol),When you see a new enemy-put up your shield.They will expose their pattern and then you kill them.p No enemy I can think of escaped this method when first seen.

Very much depends on level and equipment. There are several things whose opening assault could mangle you even with a shield if you aren't properly upgraded. And a couple that could even if you were.

But otherwise a good tactic.

OT: Erm would it bother me if they added 'Easy?' Probably. Although I couldn't tell you exactly why. Dark Souls is already a lot easier than Demon's Souls and since release the patches have made it much easier in general over the vanilla game.

I don't actually remember this coming up about Demon's Souls :/ Maybe the multiplat has just got so many more people into it than Demon's where the fact that we got an official English release was good enough.


I'd like to think that From just made the game that they wanted to make regardless of reception. The thing that seems to be mostly missing this generation is that not all games are for everyone. We're losing niche markets in regards to professional titles.

 

[Mikeyfell]

There's no other form of art (Media, what ever) that gives the audience control over the creators intentions.

"I don't like how hard this game is. I'm going to change it."
"I don't like that The Mona Lisa isn't smiling. I'm going to change it."
"I don't like that that character died. I'm going to change it."

If the creators intended to make the game that punishingly hard that's the experience they want to convey. That's the experience you either accept or don't.

In the case of Dark Souls making it easier doesn't diminish the experiences it removes it. If a menu option is all that stands between you and a formerly insurmountable challenge that's not what the creators intended, that's not Dark Souls.

 

[barbzilla]

snip

The thousands that I said comes from an article I read when the easy mode was mistakenly announced. The POTENTIALLY hundreds of thousands is just an extrapolation based on the thousands information I was provided with. Assuming they don't know about every person on the earth who would play it one can safely assume there will be more than an already known quantity. Either way I wasn't trying to get an exact number across, I was actually aiming more for a percentage of the current user base as I was informed about a demographic regarding the number of people abandoning the game before getting much farther than the Asylum that states around 12% of the people who purchased the game quit (this is quoting a person and not a source so I can't validate its authenticity).

As for the argument on if we should or shouldn't I have finally gotten a viewpoint I can validate in favor of not implementing the change, so I have taken a step towards your side. I was more interested in the why of it though, I don't mean to change From's mind.

 

[BreakfastMan]

I... don't see how you got that conclusion. The mechanics are still there, simply making the player less easy to kill doesn't take them away from learning them. It just means they are not forced to use them, so they can learn them at their own pace. Players will still explore their options, they will still try new things. There is no logical reason to cut mechanics because some players don't learn them fast enough, it makes no sense. Yet, this is what you are proposing the devs are going to do if an easy mode is added.

And the easy mode might be boring and crappy for you; for others, it might be awesome. Don't generalize your experience to everyone.

You can already learn the mechanics at your own pace.

No, you can't. You really, really can't, the game forces you to learn most of them quite early on.

What you're talking about is effectively making them irrelevant, and eliminating or at least minimizing that carefully crafted learning experience.

No, I am not. I am talking about letting the user learn them at a more relaxed pace, not cutting the need for them entirely.

That's the only reason to scale down the HP, that's all you accomplish. There is little technical skill in taking advantage of the mechanics after you have learned them. The game is impenetrable when you start, but it's all easy one-hit kills (heh just about) when you master it. The fun is in getting from Point A to Point B, that's why the game is designed the way it is. That's why you can't expect people who aren't learning the mechanics because the game doesn't require it of them to have any fun.

Okay, so everybody needs to be forced by the game to learn all the mechanics? They can't learn it by exploring what different weapons can do, what they get from talking to different merchants, and what they get from exploring the environment? They have to be forced to learn by the difficulty of the game, they cannot learn by exploring. That is basically what this is coming across as: that people don't learn mechanics as they explore the game, they have to be forced to use them because of the difficulty. And that is absurd.

There is every logical reason to cut and adjust mechanics to accommodate new audiences who don't want to engage the existing content. I don't see how anyone in 2012 could deny that is typical developer behavior.

Yep, because it totally makes sense to make your game easier in order to attract the COD market to your still niche title, and not make it harder to attract more people. Oh wait, they already did the later.

No, it would be boring and crappy for them as well, unless they have a thing for boring and crappy games. I'm human, I can generalize how people may feel about things, that's allowed.

You can't assume everyone enjoys things the same way you do, though. Not everyone plays games for the challenge.

Congrats, you're a genius. Have you thought about how this would affect low level PVP? As in, people who start playing on a harder difficulty only to be ganked by easy moders who have access to all the loot from the earlier playthrough.

That is what match-making is for. Have easy players only get into matches with others who played on easy.

But that wouldn't have a chance to happen for many people because easy mode would become the no-brainer choice for a first playthrough. Some people would get bored before they get to the game's challenging parts. By introducing NG-1, you've screwed NG vanilla.

Just like some people got frustrated with the harder parts and quit in NG vanilla? I don't see how introducing an NG-1 mode would screw NG.

 

[Alcamonic]

Good to know I was not the only one who went for the graveyard at first. Man I sure did feel like a total idiot after spending over an hour sloowly grinding a couple of levels on those skeletons.

I avoid the online part of the game as much as possible. Mainly because I don't want to risk being invaded by cheaters.

 

[Rooster Cogburn]

How does my check box that permanantly blocks off easy mode not help?

Because I'm not an ostrich? lol. I still know it exists. For the purposes of creating tension in the game, knowing that I could've chosen to make Gaping Dragon easy isn't much different from knowing that I still can.

Sure you can say someone else might be able to beat Nito and the rest, but you don't have that option.

In your check-box example, yes I do.

It would restore the game to its normal state, for you leaving everyone else to choose their own path. Also I am with Yahtzee on this one, every game that can have difficulty options, should.

I find that close-minded. Even Yahtzee cannot see all ends. If game design was as simple as separating the good features from the bad ones, no one would ever make a bad game. It's what you are able to accomplish from the interaction of features that counts.

Difficulty is hard to nail down because players bring vastly diffrent expierences, difficulty prefrences, and natural skill levels into each game. Normal mode is basically what the devlopers worked out as the ideal difficulty, then usually have a hard mode for greater challenge, a easy mode for those without expierence or who lack confidence in their abilities, and mabey a hardcore mode for those who like nail-biting frustration. This difficulty system is popular because it works, it allows as wide a range of players as possible the best expierence possible.

I totally agree with all of this. The question is how does it apply to Dark Souls, a game which incorporates difficulty in its design in an unusual way.

Of course some games don't work well with difficulty settings. Again to use Yahtzee's example platformers would do poorly trying to incorporate difficulty.

Dark Souls has the same problem, the mechanics are far more relevant than numbers by design. Dark Souls has the additional problem that it's specifically designed to convey a sense of achievement through a learning experience anchored by the difficulty of it's encounters. If the encounters can be breezed through without learning, there is nothing for the player to do that they couldn't have gotten a million other places, probably better.

Mabey Dark Souls need a little bit less tradtional difficulty adjustment, but some adjustment option would be nice. Again I stand by my "option to permanently disable difficulty settings thereby preserving tension" system. Explain why this wouldn't work. It gives you your prefered "true" darksouls and everyone else a nice choice.

I don't see why you think giving me the option to turn off the easy mode once and never see it again is significantly different from my option to just never play easy mode. If I'm an idiot for not being satisfied with the latter then I'm the kind of idiot that won't be satisfied with the former.

 

[UnmotivatedSlacker]

We got enough easy games to last a lifetime . People that want that can go play the wide array of games for them . This is a game for the challenge seekers. Niche , if you will.

It's been said a billion times already, but this game isn't hard; it's unfair. It's full of cheap deaths, surprise bullshit, bad controls, one-hit deaths, attacks that track you illogically, and enemies you're not supposed to be fighting yet in areas you have no choice but to be in if you want to progress. Anything you can see coming or know is there already is extremely easy to beat; enemies are predictable and have lengthy tells, you have a lot of useful options for dispatching them, and none of it poses much challenge the second time around. It's bad design that became popular because it makes certain people feel good about themselves.

I wouldn't go so far as to say the game as a whole is bad; there's some strategy that does need to be employed, and beating the crap out of the game on its own unfair terms can be satisfying, but from a design standpoint, as someone who enjoys difficult games and goes out of their way to play them, this game falls flat on its face, no question whatsoever about it, and I've never met anyone not of the opinion of "IT'S HARD AND ONLY REAL MEN CAN PLAY IT" who doesn't agree.

Then again, I don't talk to many people, but I still know crappy design when I see it.

A poorly-designed "hard" needs to skulk about and kill you in one hit because you didn't know a boulder was around the corner and had no way to avoid it logically without falling off a cliff. A well-designed one will kick your ass even when you see it coming.

Totally didn't mean for that to be an essay. Sorry.

There are very deaths in this game I would actually call cheap. Most of time if you die, it's most likely your fault. I'm currently watching a guy play through it blind and he's doing very well. He takes his times, observes his surroundings and is very careful on how he takes on new enemies. He's even beaten some bosses I've had trouble with on his first try. And this game is not full with one-hit deaths, that's bullshit. I'm currently doing a SL1 run and nothing in the game so far has been able to one-shot me. If you're getting one-shot by stuff, it's because you haven't been upgrading your armor or health and it's not the games fault if you don't do that. You call it unfair, I think you're just bad at the game.

 

[FriedRicer]

SNIP

snip

I don't feel tension, I don't get scared when a dragon plops down in front of me, I generally just move forward thinking about how to improve my character (though I do feel a little tension when someone invades me as I'm almost at the boss in a difficult area), and yet I agree with you. The difficulty does make the game better. In both instances you mention, the difficulty made the game better (as evident by Ninja Gaiden 3). But why does an easy mode effect that? A small change in the damage of the monsters would make all the difference in the world to some players. Hell just slapping something called easy mode in the game with no changes other than no pvp would probably make more people play the game. I don't advocate the changing of the core game at all (other than perhaps tightening the controls a bit, the still feel slow to me).

The main reason this is an argument at all is that people ASSUME that From adding a new difficulty will change the core experience, and I just don't think its the case. I do think that some players who could beat the game just fine on traditional mode will play on easy mode thinking "Oh, I just want to see the story" and be disappointed (unless they know where to look), but those players will either quit afterwards or join traditional mode to see what the fuss is about. So... Yay! more net players.

The other people who would use an easy mode are people who otherwise wouldn't play the game. We are talking about more sales for From and (potentially) more players for us on Traditional mode. Win Win situation.

The game was made with an emphasis on tactics NOT reflex.In fact,that is the very reason why Miyazaki spoke so highly of the shield.I have beaten the game with multiple "tactics" and strategies and I can honestly say that if you can't beat dark souls the problem lies with you.There are far too many ways to tackle most bosses and item drops that allow you to tackle each challenge with absolutely no reflex.Name a boss.I can probably tell an item on that bosses way that could help you.

Oh and I know you beat the game,so you are not who I am addressing with my entire post.

Also, Easy Mode?-No trophies...discuss.

Well the game does emphasise tactics. I agree ( I seem to be saying that a lot), but (I seem to be saying this a lot too lol) the initial battle with a new enemy is reliant of reflex. People who are slow learners or people who have poor reflex will have many battles with these enemies before they can potentially figure their movements out. If it is one battle too many, that is one player lost. That player isn't coming back and we have a net loss. Once they get past the initial "Ohhh, I see" they can rely on tactics 90% of the time instead of reflex.

I'd be fine with Easy Mode = No Trophies/achievements/steam thingys. My only argument in favor of an easy mode is giving from more money to make more games like this. I've encouraged all of my friends to buy it and try it, but that is about all I can do as an individual (short of donating mass funds I don't have).

I agree,but(lol),When you see a new enemy-put up your shield.They will expose their pattern and then you kill them.p No enemy I can think of escaped this method when first seen.

Works very well once you get a 100% shield and enough stam/stability to withstand the attacks. The first time that new player comes up on the most basic enemy doing the rapid slash you will stagger pretty quick. Although it really isn't that hard to figure out once you understand the leveling system and what the game requires of you. That being said, how long was it before you even understood what Stability on a shield meant?

You will stagger-but it will never be enough to one-shot after your stamina is drained.Also,they don't chain "flurry"(name?) into oblivion.I pressed select and read what each stat did and I personally checked stability in shields on mobs.It really rewards you the more you treat the game like your are not supposed to win and ANYTHING you can learn is an advantage.Hit skelly with long sword.Hit with mace...hmmm?Why?!Sees weapon attack type.Oooh!No wonder clerics and such pilgrimage towards them!

TL;DRHow do you do this?)Dunno I walked like a wuss with my shield up and read everything I could. Even if we made bosses and such do less damage, if the player cannot grasp the pattern or "trick" to the enemy(Balder parry/Stone soldier TWOP/BLIGHTTOWN(rofl)),they would still die.

 

[Naeras]

As long as the players that play easy mode don't get to interact with players playing on the original (and far more manly) difficulty level, there isn't a problem with this.

No, don't even try to argue with me, because there's not even a discussion here. If you seriously think that FROM getting more money from casuals without affecting your gameplay experience is a bad thing, there's seriously something wrong with you. If the notion that "omg casuals are gonna be able to beat my SRS DIFICULT HRD GAEM ON LOWER DIFUCLTIZ" even remotely bothers you, you're probably the kind of guy that only bought Dark Souls to brag about it on the internet.