TheCongressman1
Member
huh? NG+(+++++) and PvP adds tons of replay value. You crazy.
Pvp adds good replay, but NG+ feels kind of pointless. I want experiences to vary rather than numbers to change.
huh? NG+(+++++) and PvP adds tons of replay value. You crazy.
A friend outright told me he wouldn't help me at all in my first run of DeS, only after my first, solo playthrough. We just finished a co-op 2nd run and now I can understand why he told me that.
guess this warrants posting https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GvKXOUHxJZc
Pvp adds good replay, but NG+ feels kind of pointless. I want experiences to vary rather than numbers to change.
It's called pyro and int spells. All those super skilled speedrunners just mash their pyro, no wonder they beat the game in an hour.
Lost it at 420 Blaze It.guess this warrants posting https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GvKXOUHxJZc
I run pyro but never use my pyro spells unless I am invaded. I run full dex pyro, but rely on my weapons and shield more then my spells. Never buff my weapons either.
Man, Dark Souls is anything but predictable. Yes, I'm aware enemy locations and such stay the same, but I've never adapted fully to certain boss fights (Artorias), there are still battles which I would much rather not play, and going into human form with the looming problems of PvP (given that I tend to play builds that are bad for PvP), the game hasn't gotten old yet. Yes, I know what's coming around the corner, but that doesn't mean it's bad or has no replay value.This is why I wish Dark Souls was less predictable. It's so easy to learn every nook in the game after a few playthoughs. All the enemies stay in the same exact spot. The replay value is not great at all. All it's really good for is trying different character builds, and I'm not interested in that.
I've never heard a PR person use the term 'balls-deep' before.
You should try casters, they demolish the game. My sorc made a joke out of the game's hardest stuff. Spells are awfully expensive tho.
I'm not worried. I don't trust namco as far as I can throw them, but the fact that they only handle western publishing tells me that they aren't all that close to the actual product. It's Fromsoftware's baby; Namco are just going all in on their investment.
Man, Dark Souls is anything but predictable. Yes, I'm aware enemy locations and such stay the same, but I've never adapted fully to certain boss fights (Artorias), there are still battles which I would much rather not play, and going into human form with the looming problems of PvP (given that I tend to play builds that are bad for PvP), the game hasn't gotten old yet. Yes, I know what's coming around the corner, but that doesn't mean it's bad or has no replay value.
Replay value is in the base mechanics and exploring what's there. This game is made for that. And it's wonderful for it.
Guys, they just mean pouring money into things like that awesome VGA CG trailer. That thing probably cost a lot.
Oh god, they will dumb it down, invest in corny live-action trailers and stuff and after it fails to set the charts on fire, triple A style, they will swiftly kill off the franchise.
Jesus Christ some of you are idiots. This story is about marketing and has nothing to do with the game itself.
Worst part about it is that the KINGS OF OVERPRICED DLC (bandainamco) are in control of this. AAA obviously means DLC UP THE ASS.
BOHICA gentlemen.
/semi-joking but genuinely concerned.
I have always worried when From became buddies with Namco that something bad might happen. I hope my fears aren't put to reality. If anything happens with Dark Souls II that gets the community pretty peeved, I wouldn't put it past the idea that Namco did something. Weren't they the ones who shoved Hidetaka Miyazaki out of leading development for this game?
$10 for 10 Humanity.
I'm imagining this but more Dark Souls like:
Too true.Can't wait for the Inception horn!
Why do you invest heavily into marketing? Because you want to sell more of your product. "Widening the net" as the guy said. In order to sell more of your product you must broaden your target group, make it more accessible. I mean they hope to attract some Skyrim players.Jesus Christ some of you are idiots. This story is about marketing and has nothing to do with the game itself.
I wouldnt say buddies, more like got bought out.
If sony was smart they never should have let go of the series.
This better not fucking touch the development of this game.
Why do you invest heavily into marketing? Because you want to sell more of your product. "Widening the net" as the guy said. In order to sell more of your product you must broaden your target group, make it more accessible. I mean they hope to attract some Skyrim players.
You better be worried, since they control the paychecks.
We are all worried about the sequel.
Myself I'm worried about the director's talk about having fewer enemies in the first half of the game. Running through things is easy enough as it is and by the looks of it the first half of the game will be nothing but a lap. If anything they should address how effective running is instead of making it easier.
Wasn't everyone positive when the gameplay video came out? They also said they weren't dumbing it down. Why is everyone freaking out now?
Given they're not EA and other series are floundering some they'd probably keep going but slash marketing down to just above Dark Souls's next time.Oh god, they will dumb it down, invest in corny live-action trailers and stuff and after it fails to set the charts on fire, triple A style, they will swiftly kill off the franchise.
ITT: People shocked that a publisher/developer wants people to play their game
Oh God this is not good, Namco why do you keep wanting to publicly talk about messing with your winning formula?
Hope in this case the marketing budget does not go out of control to the point where an massive number of sales is required to cover its cost along with its development.
There was a rationale behind the decrease in enemies, though. He said it was to make sure people to by on their toes about hidden and lurking enemies, like the dragon skeleton and the cyclops behind the door. It's part of their broader plan to incorporate scenarios that bring up real life phobias, like tight space, heights, etc.
Honestly, I'd be very happy with an overall lower enemy density, given the enemies that are present are smarter and tougher. Even some of my favorite areas of Dark Souls could get pretty clusterfuck-y with enemies getting aggro'd because you stepped too close to a wall they were behind, small rooms full of enemies with wildly flailing area attacks, and random awkward lunge attacks that come out of nowhere. If there's anything Dark Souls can be fairly criticized for, it's completed areas where the guy in charge went nuts with the "place enemy" tool. Darkroot Garden/Basin, Demon Ruins, Lost Izalith, Crystal Cavern and the wooded area outside of it, etc.
"Well, to each his own. I chose my path, you chose the way of the hero. And they found you amusing for a while, the people of this city. But the one thing they love more than a hero is to see a hero fail, fall, die trying. In spite of everything you've done for them, eventually they will hate you. Why bother?"
That sounds very good in paper but considering even in those you call dense areas (which I don't agree btw) its easy to run past everything half of dk2 might be reduced to nothing but pretty walls.
I don't know if you tried but you can run from the last bonfire to the boss in all these areas without killing a single enemy except perhaps one golem but that one doesn't respawn.