In the
Edit:
Woops, my bad!
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Something about Dark Souls II on GameTrailers, next week?
- Thread starter UrbanRats
- Start date
In the
Edit:
Woops, my bad!
They just need to make backstabbing and parrying less prominent. It shouldn't always be a canned animation and huge damage against players. Maybe limit it to a normal hit with a slight to moderate bonus damage unless they have very low stamina or something.
This made me laugh. Kudos!
.Baraka in the White House
2-Terms of Kombat
Dealing with back stabbing would definitely help but I think it needs something more. The thing I remember most about the majority of my PvP time in Dark Souls is that from the start of a battle it was obvious within milliseconds which one of us was fucked. There was rarely any real battling going on. You either had the right weapons/gear to beat your foe or you didn't. And since an enchanted bleed damage weapon trumps just about everything save maybe a OHK power weapon that can knock them on their ass you mostly get invaded by people wielding either an uchigatana or a claymore.
Another big problem is that as the game has aged pretty much the only way to have a competent PvP character now is to get the master key and sequence break like crazy. That's how you get invaded at the first Undead Burg bonfire at SL 10 by someone with Silver Knight gear and a +15 weapon. Want to tackle the game in relative order? Better stay hollow then.
Lost Fragment
Obsessed with 4chan
Parrying could stand to be a little riskier in PvP but I think it's fine for the most part. Backstabbing is kinda dumb in its current implementation though. They should shrink the backstab window so it's much harder to pull off or something.
1v1s are already super legitimate and competitive for a game that has as much customization as Dark Souls. The only way they could get rid of the "gear check" problem entirely is to make everybody use the same handful of gear/magic setups in PvP, and that would be pretty lame.
1v1s are already super legitimate and competitive for a game that has as much customization as Dark Souls. The only way they could get rid of the "gear check" problem entirely is to make everybody use the same handful of gear/magic setups in PvP, and that would be pretty lame.
sssstententen
Member
If youre one of the lucky people to have been able to invade/connect at the release or dark souls, or played at the release of demons souls, it was very much like that. I even remember harrowing fights spanning entire sections of world 1 in demons souls, some of my best experiences. More about a players mastery of the game and its levels than their weapons/equipment. Then it got f'ed by second chance, miridan hammers and endless hitstun.
Good times.
Psycho_Mantis
Banned
Parrying is fine maybe make the window a bit smaller but they should seriously consider taking backstabbing out of the game or at least some mechanic like if you have our shield on your back you cannot be backstabbed. I like you idea too that if you hit an enemy in the back you get a damage boost by not some animation that takes away 70% of your life.
I think making the way stats and covenants work easier to understand would improve the game.
As it stands, you have no idea what they do unless you read a wiki and that shouldn't be a requirement to enjoying a game to its fullest.
The melee combat is what makes the D Souls series great. I'm sure they won't mess that up since they improved it between Demon's Souls and Dark Souls.
As it stands, you have no idea what they do unless you read a wiki and that shouldn't be a requirement to enjoying a game to its fullest.
The melee combat is what makes the D Souls series great. I'm sure they won't mess that up since they improved it between Demon's Souls and Dark Souls.
D Souls to Dark Souls both were made by the same guy in the captain's seat. Now it's these new guys who already stated they wanted to move it into a new direction and make it easier to undertstand. Then they tried to walk that back later. But they said it, an' the fact that they said it means something. That's why everyone's so nervous.
H_Prestige
Banned
So what? Why can't games have secrets anymore? Not everything has to be spelled out explicitly. Fact is you can beat and enjoy the game fully without ever joining a covenant.
I don't recall FFVII or other old school RPGs explaining what each stat did and no one seems to hold that against em. Not sure why there is a different standard for Dark Souls.
And combat is not the only reason Dark Souls is great. It's just one of many.
They should know better not to put stuff like Bed of Chaos and Lost Izalith and Blighttown (console versions) in their game. If you like Bed of Chaos you're probably insane.
Being needlessly cryptic and insanely poor at explaining the basic mechanics of the game isn't the same as having secrets. I want to discover the intricacies of the game on my own, yes. But having to hit a wiki almost immediately to cover the gaping holes in its explanations of basic mechanics sucks. Who cares if it's 'old school' ... it sucks.
Distance fog, warping textures and poor translations are also 'old school'. Let's bring them back.
Lost Izalith was a bit of a drag but I enjoyed Blighttown and Bed of Chaos. Other than the awful frame rate in Blighttown (PC version here)
H_Prestige
Banned
Covenants actually are secrets. They are not basic mechanics of the game and are not required any way, shape, or form.
What basic mechanics aren't explained? In the beginning level there are messages sprinkled over the ground telling you how to run, block, attack, etc.
Stats? Yeah, the game doesn't explain them. JRPGs hardly ever do. It's something you figure out as you go along.
Graphics limitations and translation errors aren't by design so that's a poor analogy.
Blighttown level design is fine, the framerate I experienced in the PS3 version was not fine. I played through the level on PC at 60fps and had a wonderful time. I even invade people there at low levels from time to time ^_^
As a true Scotsman, i disagree.
You're obviously not a true fan!
Spirit Icana
Member
I'm hoping for Motoi Sakuraba to compose the music again. Dark Souls' music was okay (Nameless Song=fav), but I know he can do even better.
Morrigan Stark
Arrogant Smirk
Yes. Yes it would. Fuck love interests. I hope that girl isn't one. I want to make a non-lesbian female character anyway.
I doubt she is though, or that they'll even have love interests period. I trust From.
SatelliteOfLove
Member
Silly H_Prestige! The internet is for bitching, not self-betterment!
Seriously, this generation is so Agoraphobic Gamer-slanted its comedy by this point.
Well, they should do something about the covenants so they're easier to find and get into, accessibility so people play online is vital.
However, any chances that I'd enjoy I don't know about. As is I just don't want it dumbed down, but will gladly take any good surprises they have in mind.
I hope they keep a couple of them as very hidden, like Darkwraiths or the Gravelords.
Boss Man
Member
Bed of Chaos had no place in the game IMO.
I'm glad to hear that they're restructuring online ala Demon's Souls. People like talking about Dark Souls PvP, but I think it was nearly unplayable. Teleporting back stabs ruined any fight where one player was willing to sink low enough to use them, and most of the time that's what happened. It was also annoying that you couldn't coordinate co-op play correctly because people would randomly be on other servers.
I'll be honest, I have a bad feeling about Dark Souls II though. It'll probably still be a good game, but after seeing the direction it started heading after Demon's Souls I can only imagine that if you pull the creator off of it the 'streamlining' is going to be a lot more drastic this time. I really, really hope I'm wrong.
JehutyRunner
Banned
Namco's held an event in New York recently. Similar to the LevelUp events in 2010 and 2011.
So that I can get grave-lorded twice in 200 hours of gameplay again (both times it was over before I could even meet a bp)? I don't mind things being hidden, but there's a middle ground between a covenant being unmissable and one being so hidden/poorly explained literally no-one uses it (the covenant of the dragon is the one that suffers the most from this, since you can only interact with other members of the same covenant).
The dark wraith covenant is a good example of a covenant that is better by being hard to find though.
Robot Pants
Member
Well whatever they do, even if the game is great, I really doubt it will be better overall than Dark Souls.
It's a game that I doubt will ever be matched for a very long time.
It's a game that I doubt will ever be matched for a very long time.
H_Prestige
Banned
That's not because the gravelord covenant is hidden. It's because the gravelord covenant sucks and the conditions required to spawn BP mobs are absolutely idiotic.
I actually like the hard stuff in the game, even the occasional unfair moment. And, by the way, I think Tomb of Giants was more terrifying and difficult than any of those you mentioned. Blighttown, I'd argue, isn't even that bad, other than the performance issues. Blighttown is a big character building experience (as in, building your character as a human being) to prepare for the challenges ahead. I say that because the first time through, I, like most people, thought it was pure suffering and pain. But nowadays I can breeze through any aspect of blight town on any character with little danger.
My argument for certain areas being very difficult, or for the game being occasionally a bit unfair in its punishment of you -- Instances like this are somewhat rare, but their existence in the game's design adds tension to the experience. This is one of the many ways Dark Souls puts its middle fingers up to the game design rulebook and does things that add together to make their game uniquely better.
Tomb of Giants was nightmarishlyl overwhelming for me, it was so dark, so scary, such a DRAIN on me as a human being -- But, you know what? I was so invested in it that I pressed on and I beat it, and that's what Dark Souls is all about.
We already have enough games like uncharted or fable or whatever. Why can't we just keep our Dark Souls the way it is? If you want games that hold your hand or explain everything or assume you'll succeed, we have many many many many games for that. As in, pretty much every game being made except Dark Souls. Why not just let us have this one game? In the Souls franchise, people who like it have this one game, this one miracle, to enjoy. Why let the casuals come in and ruin it. I beg you, FS.
Bed of Chaos isn't even difficult, it's just full of trial and error bullshit for your first run, is horrendously boring, and caps off the worst zone in the game. Pre-patch Izalith was incredibly bad.
Bed of Chaos and Lost Izalith are garbage game design, nothing difficult about them. Blighttown I mentioned for the framerate being damn near unplayable, not the difficulty. If they thought it was "adding to the difficulty" to have such a bad framerate, that's garbage game design as well.
why can't you just accept that its not your type of game?
if these aspects don't appeal to you, its not the type of game you'll enjoy
not really sure why people keep insisting that the game be changed......so that its a game that does appeal to them
what the hell would it be then? sure as hell wouldn't be dark souls
This. The game isn't even based on trial and error, there are very few things that'll kill you without a warning.
Yes we have read that, but we've been burned too many times now.
I have faith, but after watching some of my favorite developers go down the drain this generation, From could be the next victum
Agree a thousand times over. Dark Souls rarely is unfair to the player; And there isn't as much "trial and error" as some people seem to claim. The game rewards players for being cautious and observant.
Furthmore, the way the world is heavy with ambience and lore around every nook and cranny, but rarely ever overtly says anything with dialogue or exposition -- This is part of Dark Souls as well. We don't need a bunch of dialogue and exposition. If you need those things, try 99% of games.
Clearly there are people who love the style of game taht Dark Souls is, and there are very few games that do it and do it well. If it's not for you, it's not for you. I think no less of you. Not every game has to be for you. I just hope FS understands this.
FROM has been mostly shit outside Soul series this gen anyways, so they have already made a strange exception by making something good.
In the end, everything from the new director as well as the old one, left me with 0 fears and 100% faith, when they explained in depth the kind of things they wanted to change and the stuff they'd leave alone, I felt they get it.
Phonomezer
Banned
Whenever I start a new game, Blighttown is the place I'm most weary of regarding invasions >_>
I know you said this gen but the souls games aren't some fluke or anomaly. I don't see them suddenly changing what's served them well since the psx. And who directed those?
Phonomezer
Banned
People seemed to love Chromehounds.
Honestly, I don't think Dark Souls is that much different from their other games. It still has its fair share of jank, it's just a slightly less rushed project that really plays to their strengths.
What I find remarkable is how similar Dark Souls is to their older games. If you play King's Field: The Ancient City or Shadow Tower Abyss, everything feels extremely familiar if you've already played the Souls series. They're not that different at all, just in third person with multiplayer and more polish.
ElfArmy177
Member
Dark souls is my favorite game of the generation, and its original form is still my all time favorite game (kings field).
however I think people are going to be very disappointed.
1. Changing the core game to appeal to a wider fan base is never a good sign.
2. A new director to helm the game is almost always a bad idea, especially if the first words out of his mouth include "more action"
3.. God damnit I hope its good..
however I think people are going to be very disappointed.
1. Changing the core game to appeal to a wider fan base is never a good sign.
2. A new director to helm the game is almost always a bad idea, especially if the first words out of his mouth include "more action"
3.. God damnit I hope its good..
ElfArmy177
Member
you're out of your damn mind. Chromehounds was by far the best multiplayer game I played this Gen.
Armored core games have a huge fan base, and I love every single one.
"if I don't like it, then its shit" right?
edit: oops, on phone didn't mean to add another post
ripastraea
Member
I'll be disappointed if I can't play with Japanese and other players around the world
I think the game will be good
I think the game will be good