I doubt I'll ever play it. Maybe I would have done, but the fanbase is genuinely putting me off. If I played it, I'd go for hard mode of course. I love a challenge. But my own game isn't going to be affected by how anybody else chooses to play.
Poll: Will you ACTUALLY be playing Dark Souls 2 easy mode? (if there is one)
- Thread starter CpT_x_Killsteal
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Yes, but only after completing it on "Normal" mode. And only really just to see what's changed.
Why are sports a "real" achievement? Either way it's doing something pointless with some arbitrary rules set by someone else. I sincerely doubt that someone's ability to hit a small ball going at high speeds towards a designated small area with a piece of wood is going to matter all that much outside of the game that has rules regarding it. I don't really care about bragging rights, but to suggest that sports are more "real" of an achievement then some other form of game is pretty ridiculous. Even if you try and limit it professional sports, then you're extending your argument to say amateurs, college players ect ect can't be proud of their victories, which is pretty silly.Vault101 said:
I meant as it applys to "everyone gets a trophy" thing that people go on about...in the case of academic achievement and sport (albeit less so) that kind of thing is harmful..for kidsinfinity_turtles said:
when it comes to a game however its like "dude..its a fucking [i/]game[/i] and even then I doubt ht ecomparison is a valid one
Yes, that is abundantly clear. It is also clear by virtue of cherry picking what you see as valid and what you wont, you are not going to. You have exhibited you do not want to.Vault101 said:
So if you are proactively going out of your way to NOT get it, despite having it explained at length in multiple ways by multiple people, even if you DONT get it by virtue of there being multiple people who are telling you NO and explaining why, that there is in fact a reason. If you still persist in ignoring it on the basis of there is no reason when presented with the reason, then it wont matter what anyone says. You still wont get it. So to continue to elaborate is pointless and wasteful, is it not?
They're going to keep twisting and firmly misunderstanding everything you say in a firm "No True Scotsman" kind of way, you realize. Might be best to just break off.Vault101 said:
Cherry picking, eh? Let's finish that sentence you quoted:viranimus said:
That seems a specific enough thing. Why not answer it explicitly? Why does the option of an easy mode (or an option for anything at all, in fact) affect your own game if you choose not to use it?Vault101 said:
Ultimately, making a game with explicit, variable difficulty as part of the design will have some effect on all modes. It may be a minimal effect, but for a game like the Souls game where being difficult is part of the point, it will likely be a negative one for anyone who liked the previous games. That's not really what viranimus is arguing about, but it is important to keep that in mind.Vault101 said:
Now, there is no One True WayTM to enjoy any game, so someone claiming that giving less experienced players an easy mode is essentially letting them play the game wrong isn't exactly correct. It's just a game, right? What's the harm in letting people play however they want? That may be true, but by trying to change one of the few big game series out these days that does have a higher barrier to entry, that allows for those who want an experience that is intended to be somewhat exclusionary to have a game that caters to them, you are essentially saying that playing their way is also wrong.
Most games these days are designed to be beaten by as many as people as possible. What's wrong with there being a small handful of games that aren't designed to be beaten by everyone? Especially when the difficulty is more than just a barrier to the other content of the game, but actually is the content of the game and a part of the story.
There are movies that are hard to follow and books that are hard to read. Games that are hard to play merely existing shouldn't be seen as bad thing.
What if it doesn't? Sure I can think of design decisions that would harm the proper mode, but I don't see how such a thing is guaranteed. Suppose the game is made with multiple modes, and the hard mode (or normal mode if you want the 'proper' mode to be called that) is exactly as the fans of the originals wanted. Would you still be against that easy mode being available?burningdragoon said:
That seems a specific enough thing. Why not answer it explicitly? Why does the option of an easy mode (or an option for anything at all, in fact) affect your own game if you choose not to use it?[/quote]
How many times and different ways does it have to be said? It has already been stated, by me as well as others. It cannot be expressed any more explicitly, and honestly it doesnt need to be.
Does it truly need to be said yet again? Looks like someone else just did it while I was writing it out.
How many times and different ways does it have to be said? It has already been stated, by me as well as others. It cannot be expressed any more explicitly, and honestly it doesnt need to be.
Does it truly need to be said yet again? Looks like someone else just did it while I was writing it out.
While I might not have gotten to touch on it too much for more pressing factors, that is in fact another facet of the position. I Also thank you for basically expressing much of what I have been driving at in a much more eloquent manner than I have been able to muster.burningdragoon said:
not if they simply keep doing what they are doing, design the game to BE HARD from the ground up, then for easy mode there are NUMEROUS ways they could make it easier for an easy mode, which in no way would effect any of the people who bought/play the game for the ball crushing hard mode. (separating online modes or even make online mode not applicable for easy mode people)burningdragoon said:
My best friends dad, a HUGE gamer, has been playing games for nearly 20 years now, but he is by far the WORST gamer I have also ever met, he can't beat halo past easy mode(even then it's pushing it), he can't beat most games these days, but he still loves and plays them to his hearts content, how is he any less deserving to play the game because he can't play it on YOUR difficulty (not you specifically, anyone arguing that point to the extreme).
Honestly, it takes away NOTHING short of e-penis waving because you could beat a game and someone else couldn't, that is the most childish tantrum if there ever was one, that a game would be made so everyone could play at their pace.
to the argument "oh they can play numerous other games that have easy modes", what if they like that story setting? what if they like the fact it is "difficult" (subjectively to them), they like the gameplay, they like the developer, they like the art style, but noooo, apparently they aren't supposed to play because they can't do YOUR difficulty.
movies/books are at their own medium btw, they have been around ages longer than games have, and they come out a dime a dozen more than games do, and they aren't interactive like games are.
i'm not saying the dev's HAVE to do anything, if they want to make it balls hard, then by all means, go ahead, that's how the last two games are and i don't have a problem with it, but what i do have a problem with is the fucking attitude many people are showing on here, to piss and moan like a fucking child because someone else can enjoy the game too, it's sick that you are so ignorantly elitist in your own bubble.
It would help if you wrote out your opinion, yes.viranimus said:
If you mean "it's impossible for an optional mode to be introduced without affecting the main game" then I find that highly dubious. Furthermore, I don't believe for a moment that that's what people are worried about.
So, completely hypothetical scenario here; disregard whether you think it is possible or not. Suppose the game was released in such a state where the main mode was perfect. I mean perfect; absolutely everything you wanted it to be. But, there's also an easy mode included. Would you see that as a bad thing?
You realise what you're asking for is nothing to do with difficulty at all. What you want is for less people to play the game.viranimus said:
Dude... the difficulty was one of the main reasons I loved the Souls series. No way I'm backing out of that.
Maybe, but probably not.
If all they did was add a checkpoint so I didn't have to bash my head against a wall 50 times then sure (and don't tell me this is the point of the game, its boring and repetitive and doesn't actually add to the difficulty.)
But if they do it'll mean everything will have one health so no.
If all they did was add a checkpoint so I didn't have to bash my head against a wall 50 times then sure (and don't tell me this is the point of the game, its boring and repetitive and doesn't actually add to the difficulty.)
But if they do it'll mean everything will have one health so no.
But it will to some extent. Simply by designing it to have a the difficulty scaled down will effect how the normal version is designed. The Souls games already scale up in NG+, so they could maybe do it successfully without impacting normal mode, but the mere idea of "we will need to scale it down" will be a factor to every decision. The literally only way adding easy mode wouldn't have any effect is if it is 100% an afterthought not even slightly considered until the game is already complete.WoW Killer said:
And even then, since the difficulty is also a part of the story and more. I wouldn't expect or want a game (or book or movie) to have an "easy version" of the story where the dialog is rewritten. I would want the writers to tell the story they want.
It's not that I'm against making the game more accessible, because I am not. I want as many to people to play and beat and get lost within the lore of the Souls games as possible. I just think a variable, selectable, explicitly scaled difficulty is a very wrong way to do that. There is a lot to the game to help people succeed, more than the realize, and there are probably more people in the fanbase/community who want others to join them in the "we love Souls" club than there are who want to have a "no noobs allowed" sign outside the clubhouse. I would love if the discussion moved to how to make DS more accessible without flipping an easy mode switch, but not many people seem to want that discussio.
But if people really want a straight up easy mode (under how it's usually defined. Selectable, scaled, etc) to the game there is one way I think it would be okay. Make an easy Souls game. Call it Souls Lite or something. Hell even have an easy mode to Dark Souls 2 that is a completely separate game. Different levels, different enemies or weaker versions that are clearly distinguished. Basically something akin to Final Fantasy Mystic Quest, which was basically designed as a beginner's Final Fantasy game.
That's a lot to ask for these days, but it would probably be the "best" way to do it.