Support NeoGAF

[Opa-Pa]

I think they're indeed difficult games, but having Namco Bandai market them as "ULTRA HARDCORE GAMERS™ ONLY MATERIAL" and people acting like the only point of the game is to be hard is what bothers me.

These games are well designed and as such, you can overcome their challenges with patience and strategy, and eventually you get so used to what they throw at you that you stop losing, even in areas you've never been before... The thing is, that's the case with literally every well designed hard game ever.

I also don't like when people act like they're stupidly easy because they've clearly played thousands of hours of them, I find them kind of easy now too, but I know they're actually hard. The worst part is that both these attitudes is what make it so hard to get people I know into them, and it sucks because it's my favorite modern series.

 

[MajinSweet4]

Meh, until you've sunk hours of tedium and grind in and carve thru everything like butter anyway... a little less of that wouldn't sink the entire experience, and certainly wouldn't actually change things like the soundtrack or the setting. I mean that's just, come on man level of ridiculous.

Couldn't disagree more. In fact, I'm almost positive if Demon's Souls was a little easier, had difficulty modes, options to turn off invasions etc, Dark Souls wouldn't even exist.

 

[KLoWn]

This. I've beaten DS 1 and 2. But they're hard. Yeah patience is a virtue. But these people who act like they're not hard are full of crap.

I would say that they're hard, but not as hard as most people seem to think they are.

 

[R0ckman]

I hate my fellow fans more than the games.

The community makes me feel like I cant take advantage of easy boss tactics or exploits in a game that is happy to exploit me when im stuck at an obstacle or something. I personally place the "git gud" crowd as astronomically more annoying than any COD or Halo multiplayer meme person

These people are jokes when you actually play a game with them. I ran into one in a Monster Hunter G Rank Room in 4U. We were fighting the Chameleon monster. He carted and stayed at the entrance for a carry the rest of the battle. Too bad I was not leader, would have booted his ass.

 

[swazzyswess]

I remember the pre-release discussions of Demon's Souls: the game is super hard, but also innovative in a lot of ways. you suffer through and learn from the difficult parts because the game rewards you for it in a variety of ways.

each game in the series stuck with that, with less innovation in some games, more difficulty in others.

not sure why people try to argue the games aren't difficult. it has always been the defining *gameplay* aspect of these games.

 

[MetaCircular]

Nothing, Your not playing (or playing, but definitely not playing in that case) has no effect on me at all, something all the git gud gatekeepers don't get.

Thanks for fighting the good fight here. A lot of posters are being completely irrational.

1) Asking for an easy mode is NOT "entitlement." People aren't saying "I deserve to play on easy." Instead, people are saying "I would be more likely to play if it was easier." There is a very obvious difference.

2) No one is claiming that easy mode would be the exact same experience as normal mode. It obviously wouldn't be. BUT, it would still be enjoyable for the people who want it, and wouldn't affect the normal mode players at all. Why do you care so much how other people play?

 

[swazzyswess]

Dark Souls is not that hard. It's obtuse. That's the biggest barrier to entry, in my opinion.

it's both. someone could explain exactly how to beat anything in the game, removing the obtuseness, and a new player still couldn't do it.

 

[RocketRacoon]

I think the people saying it's obtuse instead of hard are dead on. The game is very straight forward in it's difficulty, i.e.: Enemies hurt you. This is the same as Call of Duty. If you stand and get shot a bunch, you die, so Dark Souls isn't exactly rebuilding difficulty.

I do think die-hard DS fans have created a bit of the conception though, so people think its a super tough grind. I played all Souls games at launch (DeS crushed me and I didn't come back for years), and I can't see the grind. If you want to play them as a Zelda game, and put your exp into Health/Stamina/Strength, you should have absolutely zero issues with 90% of the games.

 

[Menitta]

I would say that they're hard, but not as hard as most people seem to think they are.

I'd say this is true.

 

[theRizzle]

I try so hard to be open-minded and really try to understand opposing viewpoints on things, but as soon as someone starts talking about Souls needed a pause button or difficulty levels I dismiss their entire opinion about this series instantly because they clearly have a fundamental lack of understanding of what the games are striving for, and I am not a Souls zealot by any stretch.

I think if some of those people applied their arguments in reverse they might see how asinine they are.

For example, I find Minecraft dreadfully dull. It's easy, and there's nothing fun to do. Should Mojang/MS add difficulty modes to Minecraft? What would that look like? I think any reasonable person would understand that doesn't really jive with what that game is. My brother plays an insane amount of Crusader Kings 2 and it looks cool to me, but in my short time with it, I found it to be impenetrable. Do I want them to make it more accessible? Of course, but I also understand that doing so may affect their vision for the game. If they don't make it more accessible, I will never buy a Crusader Kings game. And I think both sides are fine with that.

I don't know why it's so difficult for people to accept that not everything (especially in art/media) is going to align with their sensibilities and desires... or why they'd even want it to.

 

[Aters]

People have different definition for "hardness" in videogames. I never have problem with permanent death in FE but some people just can't do it.

Personally, I think RPGs are always manageable. You can make your character stronger and stronger, which is not the case for action games and shooters where only the player can improve, not the in game character.

 

[MajinSweet4]

Thanks for fighting the good fight here. A lot of posters are being completely irrational.

1) Asking for an easy mode is NOT "entitlement." People aren't saying "I deserve to play on easy." Instead, people are saying "I would be more likely to play if it was easier." There is a very obvious difference.

More likely to play, but less likely to enjoy. This is kind of the main point that people always want to ignore. These games are designed with difficulty in mind. When you take away the difficulty, so many aspects of the game don't even make sense anymore. The whole game would need to be redesigned for an easy mode to work.

2) No one is claiming that easy mode would be the exact same experience as normal mode. It obviously wouldn't be. BUT, it would still be enjoyable for the people who want it, and wouldn't affect the normal mode players at all. Why do you care so much how other people play?

How can you possibly know that? How can you seriously claim that "game I don't like" would be enjoyable if it was drastically changed? But more importantly, why do you even want that? Plenty of games exist that are easy, or have easy modes. In fact, they are the vast majority. I mean, this doesn't even address the potential problems that an easy mode would bring. Can easy mode players be invaded by normal mode players? If not, do we just divide the player base up even more? How would optional pvp moves like an arena work? Can you just use easy mode to build your character then go to the arena? Or do we again divide players? Way too often people try to imply that an easy mode would be this thing From Software could so easily throw into the game. It shows a lot of naivety on how complex games can be.

 

[Sad Affleck]

Keeping your cool over long periods of heightened stress is a big part of the games. I bet more players have died to vanity and greed than to bad skills.

I know, but those periods could stand to be shorter.

 

[SpecialAgentDaleCooper]

For example, I find Minecraft dreadfully dull. It's easy, and there's nothing fun to do. Should Mojang/MS add difficulty modes to Minecraft? What would that look like?

Sure, why not, options are never bad. As long as people who wanted the original experience still had access I have no idea what they'd have to complain about.

 

[KLoWn]

but as soon as someone starts talking about Souls needed a pause button

It seriously needs a fuckin pause button.

 

[Soapbox Killer]

Wait. So its not really that hard and I suck that bad since I died , (like a lot ) the first time I played it? Also Bloodborne killed me something terrible the first and only time I played it. I wanna like it since my son goes hard on dark souls 2 Remastered. Maybe it's not my kinda game.

 

[afternoon delight]

What you get from playing the base game should be more than enough to tackle the DLC. There is a difficultly spike though, that's for sure.

With that being said each area has an encounter designed to be done by multiple people do don't feel bad about skipping those.

and

broke me. I'm soloing on PC with a melee build. I felt great beating the game as it was, but feel absolutely no need to progress further. The only reason I probably haven't gone back obsessively is that I'm waiting to play DS 3's GOTY and after that I'll end up returning for a complete Scholar run... But I'd consider these fuckers hard as nails and I enjoy Contra.

 

[SmoothRunningGun]

The games are difficult though not impossible. It's not a misconception. It's overcoming the challenge that makes them feel so rewarding.

 

[nailbombxx]

I kind of roll my eyes when people talk about how they're impossible to play because they're so hard. But they are challenging games, and the hardest aspect of them is learning how to play them. Learning the game mechanics is the barrier of entry, and I think that when people talk about how they die over and over at the beginnings its because they haven't fully learned the mechanics, the strategies you should be employing, how to upgrade your weapons/armor and whatnot. Without that knowledge its very easy to get stuck because you may not be doing something that's vital to make the game more manageable. For example, when I first played Dark Souls 1 I was stuck in the first area for 10 hours until I realized that upgrading your weapons and armor should be more of a priority than leveling up your character.

It seriously needs a fuckin pause button.

It doesn't because the online co-op/pvp component is meant to be seamless with the single player game.

 

[SpecialAgentDaleCooper]

Thanks for fighting the good fight here. A lot of posters are being completely irrational.

1) Asking for an easy mode is NOT "entitlement." People aren't saying "I deserve to play on easy." Instead, people are saying "I would be more likely to play if it was easier." There is a very obvious difference.

2) No one is claiming that easy mode would be the exact same experience as normal mode. It obviously wouldn't be. BUT, it would still be enjoyable for the people who want it, and wouldn't affect the normal mode players at all. Why do you care so much how other people play?

My favorite is that instead of there being an option that's more inclusive and lets more players enjoy the game, those players should not play the game at all and substitute that with watching others play... lol Wut?

 

[smashballTaz]

It seriously needs a fuckin pause button.

Start > Quit to main menu

Serves exactly the same function as a pause button would, and takes about 3 seconds. Part of the appeal is that you're never not in potential danger, unless it's a cutscene or a loading screen. Like in System Shock 2, it adds a fair bit to the oppressive atmosphere of the game, and, in my opinion, is better for it.

 

[bananafactory]

No. Because I think it is brutally hard

 

[Kieli]

Yea, I think people feel it's a game to just put your balls in a vice and crush them and it's not. It's not about being difficult to be difficult

Absolutely disagreed. Dark Souls 3 was hard to be hard in certain places.

There were design decisions that forced artificial difficulty. Like their homogenization of weapons and armor. They didn't want you playing the way you wanted to play, but the way they wanted to play. And the inclusion of mega-mooks that had super-poise while we could be hulking all up in dat sweet Havel fortress-armour and get staggered by someone's fart.

Bosses now have these ridiculous 10-hit chain combos that make 'em look like silly ballet dancers out of Fate Stay Night. This ain't no Bloodborne with them uber-fast hunters, this is Dark Souls.

 

[Adam_Vania]

problem is an easy mode is going to still be hard because of level design. look at Blighttown, half damage isn't going to make that any easier. you are still going to get toxic poison. you are still going to fall off ledges. what about other traps, the kind with enemies hiding around corners or dropping from the ceilings? look at all the traps and stunlock enemies like rats, dogs, etc. do they remove those in easy mode? we can't have players stuck on a difficult part now, can we? gonna have to entirely cut the minotaur fight.

Dark Souls 3 already makes tons of series concessions to players for ease of use. you always fight bosses in a large arena. the skeleton wheels are actually a walk in the park rather than your ultimate nightmare. the bonfires are all very plentiful and close to the boss gates. skeletons are more managable. getting cursed doesn't permanently half your health. etc.

i have a friend that was a noob for Bloodborne. i watched him play his first run, and he was actually hiding behind scenery from the standard enemies. he stuck with it and ended up nearly beating the game by himself. he has a very demanding full time job and his skills as a player generally aren't all that amazing. somehow he was able to get into these games without wanting them to come down to his skill level.

 

[More_Badass]

My favorite is that instead of there being an option that's more inclusive and lets more players enjoy the game, those players should not play the game at all and substitute that with watching others play... lol Wut?

Do you feel a movie like 2001 needs to be changed and edited to be easier to understand? Why does a game have to be more inclusive? Why can't one adapt to the game, like one has to if they're reading Grapes of Wrath versus a Jack Reacher novel? Like if I'm reading a book and there are things I don't understand or words I don't know the definition of, I don't ask that the author makes it less advanced. Does that mean not everyone will be able to get into the book or grasp the plot? Sure, but that doesn't mean the work needs to change so it can be more inclusive

 

[Hollywood Hitman]

Absolutely disagreed. Dark Souls 3 was hard to be hard in certain places.

There were design decisions that forced artificial difficulty. Like their homogenization of weapons and armor. They didn't want you playing the way you wanted to play, but the way they wanted to play. And the inclusion of mega-mooks that had super-poise while we could be hulking all up in dat sweet Havel fortress-armour and get staggered by someone's fart.

Bosses now have these ridiculous 10-hit chain combos that make 'em look like silly ballet dancers out of Fate Stay Night. This ain't no Bloodborne with them uber-fast hunters, this is Dark Souls.

Souls 3 is the easiest of the bunch tho, big time

 

[mstevens]

and



broke me. I'm soloing on PC with a melee build. I felt great beating the game as it was, but feel absolutely no need to progress further. The only reason I probably haven't gone back obsessively is that I'm waiting to play DS 3's GOTY and after that I'll end up returning for a complete Scholar run... But I'd consider these fuckers hard as nails and I enjoy Contra.

That bottom screen shot gave me PTSD flashbacks. My most frustrating experience with the series, but in classic souls fashion it was also one of the most rewarding victories.

 

[Skii]

People want an easy mode? What an absolute tragic waste of time and resources. Those could be better spent on level design, atmosphere etc.

 

[guyssorry]

and



broke me. I'm soloing on PC with a melee build. I felt great beating the game as it was, but feel absolutely no need to progress further. The only reason I probably haven't gone back obsessively is that I'm waiting to play DS 3's GOTY and after that I'll end up returning for a complete Scholar run... But I'd consider these fuckers hard as nails and I enjoy Contra.

For the feline, go two-handed melee weapon with no shield. Get the dodges down well. When I first fought her, I thought it was impossible. Then, I went shieldless, two-handed, super dodge-y, and I defeated her in a few tries. also, you're not fighting her while she's invisible, right?

For the trio, keep moving. Utilize hit-and-run tactics, and be patient. The archer will stay far away while the other two chase you, but the Havel dude is fat and slow, so take out his friend first. good luck, friend. you can do it!

 

[RainForce]

Not really. Learning curves can be hard for some even if it's just a different way of playing than what people are used to.

 

[psynergylover]

It's a shame because people won't consider the game because they think the game is designed to make you die. It annoys me when they call it bullshit if they die, souls is one of the franchises in which I can see the exact reason I died. You rarely die the same way again if your playing it and recognising errors.

this right here!

the Souls game are basically learning from you mistakes, being aware of your surrounding, with a few "didn't seeem that coming mements"

ever since playing Demon Souls I pretty much know what's the come, sword and shield will ret you to the ending(well except for Bloodborne)

from what I've seen watching clips and bloodstains/echoes are people treating this game like you typical "Hack n' slash" they either try and take on too many enemies, or use up all their stamina leaving them with none to shield or dodge roll

seriously sword + shield + bow and arrow = end credits

 

[pretty done]

Souls 3 is the easiest of the bunch tho, big time

No it's not, it's just the third game in the series so you know how to play it and you know FROM's tricks. Demon's Souls is far easier than any of the three Dark Souls games or Bloodborne. There's a couple of hard black phantom fights but that's about it.

 

[MajinSweet4]

Sure, why not, options are never bad. As long as people who wanted the original experience still had access I have no idea what they'd have to complain about.

I hate when people say this. It's such a common thing to just say, but it's so obviously not true. I mean hell, if it were true why even have game designers? Just throw in every option and let the player decide what's best. I'll give an example. Many modern games now a days have several difficulty modes. Something like Easy, Normal, Hard and Very Hard. I can not stand this, it's terrible. Because now, before I even play the game, I have to try and figure out what difficulty mode is "right" for me, with nothing to go on. Maybe I assume that the game is super easy, so I should just jack it up to Very Hard. The only problem with that is most games with these options are not intended to be hard. So the Very Hard mode is an unbalanced mess of design. It might be "challenging" but it's not fun at all. So I end up playing the first hour of the game with that setting and hate it. The game could have had one difficulty mode, been easier, and still way more fun. Because the designers could have put all their energy into that one setting. This isn't to say no games should ever have difficulty modes, but it depends on the game. And in my case, games with tons of different options are a huge turn off to me. It tells me that the game doesn't have a focus on tight, balanced and intricate design. Which is what I more than anything really. This also ignores the fact that players can easily ruin a game for themselves. For example, save scumming the hell out of a game with quick load/quick save. Certain game mechanics simply do not work with that feature. That option limits your design space. It's easy to say "oh, players that don't want to ruin those mechanics will just not use it." But that simply isn't how the human mind works. We are competitive by nature and try to beat games, this is true for the majority of people. It's up to a designer to determine how a game works. As a player I don't want to do that work while playing. I want to engross myself in the experience. I don't want to ask myself "Oh, did the designer just not care? Will I break the game by doing this?"

 

[Novocaine]

How does an easy mode in anyway affect current players

Spending development time and money on adding variable difficulty would come out of the games budget. Assuming From has a strict budget then something else would have to get cut out of the game.

 

[theRizzle]

It seriously needs a fuckin pause button.

I will concede that if the player chooses 'Play Offline' from the main menu, there is no reason they couldn't enable that functionality. But if you are playing the "full/actual" game, absolutely not.

 

[Zafir]

i don't think it's a bad thing to add something in totally optional. but once that option is in the are no longer enjoying "the great experience that is the Souls games", they are enjoying the experience that is whatever game has an easy mode. this will not be the same "great experience" that one has when legit playing through Souls games. they will not be as punished for bad actions like attacking early, giving them less weight. they will not be punished for missing boss dodges, so maybe they will not need to learn them at all. the result is something that looks like a Souls game but in experience is not.

if failing and doing content over is a concern, there is no way a noob is going to one-shot any Souls game, even with half damage. at that point yes, consider watching speedrun.

But it only takes away one aspect. Yes the difficulty amplifies the atmosphere and aesthetics, but it doesn't get rid of it entirely.

Not to mention no one is saying to get rid of difficulty entirely. You can have some difficulty, without over facing people.

Build people up to the difficulty instead.

At the moment it drops people in the deep end and expects people to sink or swim. Those of us already initiated are fine, of course, but I'm not surprised people can't get into it.

 

[HomerSimpson-Man]

Difficulty misconception?

Nah. I do find them hard. I've beaten Dark Souls with full DLC and Bloodbourne, put 30 hours into Dark Souls 2:SOTF before putting that one done, will probably revisit down the line, but got burnt out as DS2 enemy placements, combat, stats for I-frames, level designs, and boss battles are ho-hum in comparison that it feels so tedious, feels like hard for sake of hard more often then I found with DS1 and BB.

With these games I use summons as needed, still find them plenty hard. It's okays guys, the game is difficult for many people and I don't see what's wrong with that.

 

[Red Liquorice]

Thanks for fighting the good fight here. A lot of posters are being completely irrational.

1) Asking for an easy mode is NOT "entitlement." People aren't saying "I deserve to play on easy." Instead, people are saying "I would be more likely to play if it was easier." There is a very obvious difference.

2) No one is claiming that easy mode would be the exact same experience as normal mode. It obviously wouldn't be. BUT, it would still be enjoyable for the people who want it, and wouldn't affect the normal mode players at all. Why do you care so much how other people play?

As is said over and over - You already have an easy mode. It's called co-op.

Co-op completely breaks the game and confuses the boss AI to the point where all challenge in the game is non-existant. Enjoy.

 

[More_Badass]

Souls games are basically the Groundhog Day or Edge of Tomorrow of ARPGS. You know how in those movies, the protagonist will die or fail, but then later they can pull off things with trained honed perfection due to practice and experience?

That's the pacing of a Souls game. Each death is a lesson

Spending development time and money on adding variable difficulty would come out of the games budget. Assuming From has a strict budget then something else would have to get cut out of the game.

Also difficulty acts in the same way new skills and gates work in Metroidvanias. In Dark Souls, your paths from Firelink are open, but after getting wrecked by skeletons or specters, you realize "oh, my stats and gear isn't ready for this" and the game subtly guides you to the easier way so you can progress. If suddenly the way health and damage and whatnot were restructured, that careful design and those natural level-design barriers don't work as intended.

 

[KLoWn]

It doesn't because the online co-op/pvp component is meant to be seamless with the single player game.

So should I be able to pause the game if I'm hollowed? Can't invade me then.

Start > Quit to main menu

Serves exactly the same function as a pause button would, and takes about 3 seconds. Part of the appeal is that you're never not in potential danger, unless it's a cutscene or a loading screen. Like in System Shock 2, it adds a fair bit to the oppressive atmosphere of the game, and, in my opinion, is better for it.

I disagree. I shouldn't be in danger in-game just because I need to go and take a shit, or whatever other irl stuff that might need sudden attention.

So let me just fix this:

Start > Quit to main menu

There we go =D


And I have had way too many discussion about this in the past to know it is going nowhere, so let's just agree to disagree.

 

[SpecialAgentDaleCooper]

Do you feel a movie like 2001 needs to be changed and edited to be easier to understand? Why does a game have to be more inclusive? Why can't one adapt to the game, like one has to if they're reading Grapes of Wrath versus a Jack Reacher novel?

No I dont feel like those things need to happen. Though if they did, and I wasn't interested in those, I'd just go on watching the original cut of the movie have have lost nothing.

It doesn't *have* to be more inclusive, I'm a fan of the game as it is. But I'm not going to sit here and pretend that I'd be out something if it were more inclusive. None of this *has* to be anything lol. I just am of the opinion that if more people got to enjoy playing DS1 and got to learn that world and its intricacies with a little less of the tedium and repetition I'd be ok with that.

 

[Adam_Vania]

So let me just fix this:

There we go =D

And I have had way too many discussion about this in the past to know it is going nowhere, so let's just agree to disagree.

this is where we are. people too lazy to push one button.

 

[Opa-Pa]

Miyazaki himself, at one point, considered adding an easy mode to these games to make them more inclusive (and obviously to give them a wider appeal, which is in everyone's best interest because they need to sell), and that alone is a good enough reason to accept it IMO.

I mean I'd approve of it regardless, but you can't argue that it goes against the original vision or whatever. Miyazaki has said that they don't make Souls games hard on purpose, but that they aim to make them rewarding experiences and that they end up being challenging because of it. So if they found a way to make these easier without affecting that original intention then why not?

My guess is that one of their similar projects will include this. Provided Namdai isn't publishing, I guess.

 

[KLoWn]

this is where we are. people too lazy to push one button.

Why push the buttons twice if pushing it once has the same effect?

 

[SpecialAgentDaleCooper]

As is said over and over - You already have an easy mode. It's called co-op.

Co-op completely breaks the game and confuses the boss AI to the point where all challenge in the game is non-existant. Enjoy.

Its a poor substitute, the only answer to perhaps too much difficulty is none at all?? really??

 

[SpecialAgentDaleCooper]

I hate when people say this. It's such a common thing to just say, but it's so obviously not true. I mean hell, if it were true why even have game designers? Just throw in every option and let the player decide what's best. I'll give an example. Many modern games now a days have several difficulty modes. Something like Easy, Normal, Hard and Very Hard. I can not stand this, it's terrible. Because now, before I even play the game, I have to try and figure out what difficulty mode is "right" for me, with nothing to go on. Maybe I assume that the game is super easy, so I should just jack it up to Very Hard. The only problem with that is most games with these options are not intended to be hard. So the Very Hard mode is an unbalanced mess of design. It might be "challenging" but it's not fun at all. So I end up playing the first hour of the game with that setting and hate it. The game could have had one difficulty mode, been easier, and still way more fun. Because the designers could have put all their energy into that one setting. This isn't to say no games should ever have difficulty modes, but it depends on the game. And in my case, games with tons of different options are a huge turn off to me. It tells me that the game doesn't have a focus on tight, balanced and intricate design. Which is what I more than anything really. This also ignores the fact that players can easily ruin a game for themselves. For example, save scumming the hell out of a game with quick load/quick save. Certain game mechanics simply do not work with that feature. That option limits your design space. It's easy to say "oh, players that don't want to ruin those mechanics will just not use it." But that simply isn't how the human mind works. We are competitive by nature and try to beat games, this is true for the majority of people. It's up to a designer to determine how a game works. As a player I don't want to do that work while playing. I want to engross myself in the experience. I don't want to ask myself "Oh, did the designer just not care? Will I break the game by doing this?"

You may have taken that just a little too literally bud.

 

[GeordieMark]

I think there is a difference between unforgiving and hard. The Souls games are the former, but not the latter. The mechanics and strategy are really simple, but if you don't pick them up, you will struggle. The combat is mostly very straightforward and basic.

 

[Adam_Vania]

It doesn't *have* to be more inclusive, I'm a fan of the game as it is. But I'm not going to sit here and pretend that I'd be out something if it were more inclusive. None of this *has* to be anything lol. I just am of the opinion that if more people got to enjoy playing DS1 and got to learn that world and its intricacies with a little less of the tedium and repetition I'd be ok with that.

an easy mode in DS1 is impossible. it would require re-designing levels and replacing enemies. should they get rid of toxic enemies in Blighttown? just remove that whole level, it's too hard to get through without falling off. the Minotaur battle is mostly hard bc of level design. just get rid of that too. an easy mode with half health damage isn't going to get you very far when you get stunlocked by 3 or 4 base-level undead. i guess we should reduce the number of them.

so in that case you aren't "learning the world and its intricacies" because they have been dumbed down for you. it isn't that i as a OG Souls player am missing out on anything, i've already beaten the hard games, nobody's going to take away those experiences. it's that the new Easy Souls is a markedly different experience, one that is not the same.

 

[MajinSweet4]

Miyazaki himself, at one point, considered adding an easy mode to these games to make them more inclusive (and obviously to give them a wider appeal, which is in everyone's best interest because they need to sell), and that alone is a good enough reason to accept it IMO.

I mean I'd approve of it regardless, but you can't argue that it goes against the original vision or whatever. Miyazaki has said that they don't make Souls games hard on purpose, but that they aim to make them rewarding experiences and that they end up being challenging because of it. So if they found a way to make these easier without affecting that original intention then why not?

My guess is that one of their similar projects will include this. Provided Namdai isn't publishing, I guess.

Actually no, Miyazaki didn't say that. If memory serves, Edge magazine had a story based on a bad translation.

Found a link

http://kotaku.com/5941602/yeah-so-about-that-easy-mode-for-dark-souls-

Edit:

You may have taken that just a little too literally bud.

So what did you mean?

 

[Skii]

So should I be able to pause the game if I'm hollowed? Can't invade me then.


I disagree. I shouldn't be in danger in-game just because I need to go and take a shit, or whatever other irl stuff that might need sudden attention.

So let me just fix this:

There we go =D


And I have had way too many discussion about this in the past to know it is going nowhere, so let's just agree to disagree.

It's all about the tension. When you pause the game in an unknown area with no bonfire close by, you don't know if you're close to being ambushed or if you're accidentally in an area that has an enemy walking close by. That's why finding a bonfire is so important because you can do all of that stress free knowing that no enemy will harass you.

Also, this will prevent people from switching builds/items mid battle which again maintains the tension. If you want to switch something, you'll have to juggle the fight and the pause screen at the same time.

And you won't be in danger at all if you just quit the game.