Understanding Dark Souls difficulty
- Thread starter zinho73
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Fully agree. I've always though Dark Souls was closer to a platformer than to a fighting game. It isn't about fighting, it's about solving the puzzle. Over and over again.
Walk out of spawn point, kill crosbow skeleton. Jump down stairs and kill skeleton. Walk down stairs and fight skeletons. The enemies have distinct "types" with patterns to defeat them. Dodge, block, slash, hack. It is about the puzzle solving.
Walk out of spawn point, kill crosbow skeleton. Jump down stairs and kill skeleton. Walk down stairs and fight skeletons. The enemies have distinct "types" with patterns to defeat them. Dodge, block, slash, hack. It is about the puzzle solving.
I would say that everyone atleast watch that video because it makes the point better than any of us guys can.
The devs made this game with an artistic / gameplay focus, where every element comes together to make a near perfect game for those ppl who like this sort of thing. I would show a YT video that makes this point about Darksouls where the guy in the video mentions a German word meaning all the elements work together perfectly (i'm hoping someone else can link it).
Personally I think ppl are confusing elitism and gamers who are purists. An elitist would say that they don't want casuals stinking up the place, a purist would say yes please play this great game but within the confines of what the developer intended. The problem is that it's quite hard for purists to bring their arguments across when others automatically chalk them down as elitists. So in the end many purists just revert to saying get off my lawn rather than waste their time.
Purist or elitist whatever you feel DS gamers are, it doesn't mean that their own views and wants are any less than other gamers, and I don't see why one game which is catering to them should be watered down to suit others tastes, especially when their are plenty of other games to play.
Easy mode to many DS players is like EA wanting to put in capture the flag in Mirrors Edge 2 or co-op in Dead Space 3. PPl who like the originals react the same way, they aren't against co-op or capture the flag but don't want it in those 2 games because it goes against the original focus, to bring examples of other games which have co-op is mostly meaningless unless it's an exact clone, DS is unique to no direct comparisions can be applied.
If the Souls series hadn't been this big thing we wouldn't even be having this conversation, but the fact that it has proves that there is a sizable chunk of gamers who want this type of experience.
The devs made this game with an artistic / gameplay focus, where every element comes together to make a near perfect game for those ppl who like this sort of thing. I would show a YT video that makes this point about Darksouls where the guy in the video mentions a German word meaning all the elements work together perfectly (i'm hoping someone else can link it).
Personally I think ppl are confusing elitism and gamers who are purists. An elitist would say that they don't want casuals stinking up the place, a purist would say yes please play this great game but within the confines of what the developer intended. The problem is that it's quite hard for purists to bring their arguments across when others automatically chalk them down as elitists. So in the end many purists just revert to saying get off my lawn rather than waste their time.
Purist or elitist whatever you feel DS gamers are, it doesn't mean that their own views and wants are any less than other gamers, and I don't see why one game which is catering to them should be watered down to suit others tastes, especially when their are plenty of other games to play.
Easy mode to many DS players is like EA wanting to put in capture the flag in Mirrors Edge 2 or co-op in Dead Space 3. PPl who like the originals react the same way, they aren't against co-op or capture the flag but don't want it in those 2 games because it goes against the original focus, to bring examples of other games which have co-op is mostly meaningless unless it's an exact clone, DS is unique to no direct comparisions can be applied.
If the Souls series hadn't been this big thing we wouldn't even be having this conversation, but the fact that it has proves that there is a sizable chunk of gamers who want this type of experience.
first you say im oversimplifying the combat, next you say you like the simple combat. I do not like simple combat, which is also why i never finished playing Fallout3 as every weapon basically feels the same and shooting things becomes extremely boring after a few hours (despite the fact that i thought that FO3 had better environment and story). Skyrim require a hell of a lot more thought with combat than demon souls ever did, especially with stealth, archery, or magic (melee not so much).The Almighty Aardvark said:
Reaction time is not the same thing as thought. I dont think a person would say that Dance Dance Central requires a lot of thought. Honestly combat in dark/demon soul is similiar to that of QTE.
The witcher 2 has a much better combat system that is both varied and difficult.
you know how i beat the tower knight in demon souls? not by learning his attack pattern and successfully dodging it, but by turning off lock on and swinging like a blindfolded kid looking for the pinata. never got hit once. wooo, look at all of the thought that required!
Sorry, written at way too early in the morning.Ryotknife said:
What I meant by simplified I meant by your number of options, so you don't have 20ish abilities to throw around in combat, it's a matter of using what abilities you have well and effectively.
Seriously though? QTE? Did you not read anything I said about positioning? Or even play the game? Considering you cite DMC as a good game for combat when it's very largely based around your ability to press a preset series of buttons in sequence. The fact that you're able to move and generally NEED to move around to avoid dying makes it very different from a quick time event. Oh, and also the fact that you need to decide for yourself when to press the buttons. Sorry, how is it similar again?
I assume that you are aware of what an exploit is? Which is what you got on the tower guardian. However if you wish to claim that isn't unique and the whole game is like that, please help all of the people having trouble with the game by telling them the solution to all of their problems is charging in and swinging repeatedly
LOL. Climbing a mountain =/= beating a videogame. When I beat Through the fire and flames on expert mode guitar hero...here comes the shocker...people who played on easy mode could still listen to me brag and understand that it took skill. What you are asking for is childish. Not just you the whole community that doesn't want an easy mode. They don't want an easy mode because they all have this mentality that games today are too easy and that its not fun if its easy..blah blah blah nobody cares bro.Smertnik said:
You make it sound like its the olympics and we are taking the high jump bar and lowering it 2 feet and telling all the best players to compete at a height we all know they can jump. This is so not the case. There will still be the hardcore players on their hardcore community forums discussing their accomplishments. All those incoming noob players that can't pick easy mode cause you won't allow it arn't going to play the game like you given enough time. They are going to outright quit after the first few levels. In fact, easy mode will only benefit you since a greater community means more money for developers and better future games with even greater challenges.
Just cause I can't solve the 4x4 rubik's cube and I can only solve the 3x3 doesn't mean I can't appreciate your ability.
refusing to use lock on....is an exploit.....The Almighty Aardvark said:
might want to rethink that one.
an exploit would be finding a glitch in the wall during the armored spider boss where you can hit the boss but the boss was incapable of hitting you with projectiles. No i did not do that.
Climbing a mountain was used as a metaphor not a comparison.RomanceIsDead said:
Also, I'm not allowing or not allowing anything, I'm just saying that an easy mode is a bad idea and that the developer resources could be better used elsewhere. Plenty of easy game on the market, just one that menages its difficult using game mechanisms. I would like to keep that one.
Please, read the thread as I'm not going to post what has been said over and over again, but long story short, I don't think the community will grow with an easy mode because people that don't like the game now will probably like it even less if its easier because there will be no sense of accomplishment, no reason to explore and the game will feel short and pointless.
The difference between a Dark Souls with or without a difficulty setting would be subtle but important, like the difference between a metaphor and a direct comparison.
Rubik's cube is actually a pretty good example that not everything needs an easy mode. There's no "easy" mode for Rubik's cube.RomanceIsDead said:
You play to your limit and with guides, patience and dedication you can surpass that limit.
If there were an easy version of the cube it would not have the popularity and longevity that it has now, i can guarantee you that. It became famous because it was a somewhat complex and different thing unlike other toys in the market.
As you said, to beat the cube is something that it is easily seen in any culture and in any place as a matter of some skill. Also, there would be no point in playing with the thing if anyone could solve it in five minutes - the time and money of the toy industry would be much better spent building other toys for a broader audience.
The point of the cube is to solve the puzzle;
The point of Dark Souls is to beat the difficulty (with such a variety of tools that sometimes it is simply not difficult at all).
On the subject of combat, just my two cents:
I find that it has simple mechanisms that allows somewhat complex interactions. If you wanna to keep it simple, you can. If you take advantage of the flexibility it can offer, you will be more efficient (or at least have more fun).
I find that it has simple mechanisms that allows somewhat complex interactions. If you wanna to keep it simple, you can. If you take advantage of the flexibility it can offer, you will be more efficient (or at least have more fun).
"I've only played the game for 20min and not bothered to learn any of the techniques or strategies or come up with any of my own so I think this game should have an easy mode that will point me to every objective so I can sleepwalk through it like practically every other game out at the moment. Why are you all telling me I don't get it? You guys are elitist wankers who must have cheated to get through the game at all because it actually teaches you NOTHING. I swing my sword and do fuck-all damage and then my guy gets tired. This is shit. Why isn't there a tutorial?"
But now you are literally holding their hands in a way an easy mode can't ever do.Windcaler said:
An easy mode is a mode of gameplay where the difficulty is reduced so much that anyone can clear it. There is no chance of failure with it and by extension no accomplishment for beating the game. I believe it also cheapens the accomplishments of those of us who beat dark souls in its current formZachary Amaranth said:
However arming someone with knowledge is not holding their hands. I would be holding their hands if I took the controller from them and did it myself. As I said, arming a person with knowledge requires them to make use of it. I can tell or show someone how to beat a boss or bypass an area but it still requires them to apply that knowledge to their gameplay.
Let me try to give an example (this will not be a perfect example since following a recepie is far different from adapting to a combat system in a game). Lets say I know how to make some awesome fried chicken. I give you all the information you need to know to make my awesome fried chicken. You still have to prepare the chicken, put on the right seasonings, and cook it right. So lets say you succeed in making the awesome fried chicken, now did I make it or did you make it?
While Im thinking about it, could you give us your definition of hand holding and easy modes?
One's an active attempt to improve their knowledge in order to more easily find a secret or overcome a challenge. The other is wanting a secret to be accessible to everyone as opposed to only those who seek it out, and thus not a secret, or altering a challenge so it no longer requires knowledge or investment of thought or effort.Zachary Amaranth said:
I think something a lot of people don't just get is, there's a certain satisfaction that, for some people at least, comes from doing something that requires investment of more then just time. While you might be doing the same things, the knowledge that had you taken a very clearly marked option you could've accomplished things so much more efficiently can drain, lessen, and cheapen the feeling of accomplishment you get from doing things the hard way. For people who feel like that and like games with those sorts of strict requirements, there are very few new games like that nowadays. And when people demand an easy-mode in the Souls games, they're demanding one of the last quality series of that niche to change to suit their wants.
While I am usually for gamers having choice in how they play their games (I dislike always-online requirements, I dislike how some games like Dead Rising only support HDTVs, and I prefer good optimization for PC ports). I agree that making Dark Souls easier is not the way to go.
Dark Souls would not be memorable without the amount of time it takes to understand it. I understand there are some players who want to play the game without taking that much time, but to me adding an easy-mode is going remove more fun from the game.
Dark Souls would not be memorable without the amount of time it takes to understand it. I understand there are some players who want to play the game without taking that much time, but to me adding an easy-mode is going remove more fun from the game.
lol, i love this, people still say "dont make easy mode" just because they want to brag,im sure people really respect you for winning dark souls, you know like people buying you drinks and girls giving you their phone numbers (oh wait they dont, they dont care, since either they dont have the skill or the time to win this game, they dont give a shait, so instead of them winning dark souls (giving the company more money to make bigger and better games) and you bragging about the difficulty and they understanding it (like one of the obove posters says), they answer is: so you have a lot of free time then)
I only partially agree. Stealth may require some thought at the start but quickly becomes so overpowered that any strategy becomes unnecessary. Skyrims melee was inferior to Dark Souls melee. As i didnt play archery in either game i can't comment on that.Ryotknife said:
Magic on the other hand is superior in Skyrim.
The majority fears that it wouldnt be the same game anymore and people would find it boring without the challenge. Only a very small part truly cares about the bragging factor.sonofliber said:
The bragging rights is really not what this thread is about. It had been actually frequently mentioned by the people defending the existence of an easy mode, but most of the arguments against the easy mode are not of this nature (at least in this thread).sonofliber said:
Yeah, the bragging do exist, but it simply has zero value for many players.