Let me tell you about Demon's Souls...

[AgentPaper]

Me and my brother have been enjoying this game immensely over winter break, and I was wondering if anyone here has played it, and also to recommend it to those who have not. A word of warning, though: Demon's Souls is hard. It is not a game for those who give up easily, or don't like fighting the same damn boss over and over again because goddamnit it's a three-stories tall metal knight with an equally large tower shield and HOW AM I SUPPOSED TO FIGHT THATTHISISONLYTHESECONDBOSSAAAAGH!!!1!1 :smallfurious:

...

Right. Repressed memories aside, here's a good description originally from here (http://www.reddit.com/r/gaming/comments/acz2t/let_me_tell_you_about_demons_souls/):


Demon’s Souls is a game that will make you into a man. A scrawny fourteen-year-old, after two hours with this game, will be grooming his muttonchops and ready to ship off on the next boat to fight the Kaiser. If you are already a man, it will make you into some sort of bizarre double-man. What’s that you say? You’re a woman? You don’t want to be a man? Too bad. Too bad. That’s the Demon’s Souls way.

You’ve probably heard that Demon’s Souls is hard. Pshh. Lots of games are hard. Some are even harder than this one. The difficulty is not the point. What sets Demon's Souls apart is the way that it doesn't just kill you, but also stomps on your genitals when you’re down. And it will make you realize that that’s what you needed all along.

It’s a lot like life. Sometimes in life you win, and sometimes the giant armored skeleton stabs your face off because the flying mantis monster you didn’t even see shot you in the back with a spike at just the wrong time. And when that happens in life, do you respawn at the same spot and carry on like nothing happened? NO, *******. You go back to the beginning of the level, leaving all your hard-earned souls out there on the pavement, and you fight your way back. And you learn a lesson from the whole thing, because you should have been wearing your Thief’s Ring, now shouldn’t you? That’s life.

The trend in hard games these days is to unlock “Easy” mode for you once you’ve died enough times. Do you think Demon’s Souls does that? Do you think Demon’s Souls is so much as aware of the concept of “Easy” mode? NO IT IS NOT. If Demon’s Souls even knew we were talking about “Easy” mode, it would come over here and kick the **** out of all of us. And we would deserve it.

I’ll tell you what happens in Demon’s Souls when you die. You come back as a ghost with your health capped at half. And when you keep on dying, the alignment of the world turns black and the enemies get harder. That’s right, when you fail in this game, it gets harder. Why? Because **** you is why.

Have I told you about the online elements? At any time when you’re in Body form, another player from anywhere else in the world can invade your game and murder you to regain his own body, or just to keep you on your toes. This happens when you’re in the middle of fighting armies of unthinkable monsters that are probably already three-quarters of the way towards killing you. And no, you cannot opt out of this feature! This is what you signed up for when you agreed to be a man.

When this happened to me -- when a guy strolled into my game like it was Taco Bell and exploded my torso, costing me my body and all my progress in the level -- was I mad? No, because I was too busy being in awe at how ****ing hardcore the experience was.

Now, don’t let this dissuade you. Demon’s Souls is a pitiless master, but let it never be said that it is not fair. The game rewards handsomely those who stand up to it, and the greater the challenge, the greater the glory.

What the hell are you waiting for?



Anyways, for those who have played the game, care to share your build and experiences? My brother started out with a Soldier, using pretty much just a spear and a large shield, and it seems to be working pretty well for him, though the lack of a good ranged attack seemed to hurt a lot on some of the bosses. I myself went for a royal, with magic, rapier, and a smaller shield, focusing almost completely on the magic stat, even for my melee, since I've got a crescent rapier now.

We've also started a joint character, specifically a barbarian, which we're having a lot of fun with, since we swore off any type of shields or magic, and don't even have the dex to really use a bow to any real effect. We're having fun right now basically just running around with a nice big bastard sword relying on our dodging skills and the enemy being dead to keep us alive. We die a lot, but that's okay because we trade off control of the character every time it happens. (or when we beat a boss) We've actually been doing surprisingly well, killing the first two bosses in world 1, and the spider at the end of 2-1. The game is definitely harder with no ranged attack and especially with no shield, but it's just so satisfying when you beat down a huge boss knowing it was nothing but your skill and reflexes that kept you alive. And maybe a few handfuls of grass...:smalltongue:

[Kane]

I like the description. I'll have to look it up...

[Inhuman Bot]

I didn't really like it.

It's a game that's out to waste your time.

[AgentPaper]

I didn't really like it.

It's a game that's out to waste your time.

It's only wasted time if you're not having fun.

[Milskidasith]

It's like an MMO, sort of; it tosses fake difficulty (Everything gets harder as you lose! Other players get benefits from griefing you so the community sucks! Enemies aren't that complicated to defeat, they just have absurd amounts of HP so you have to concentrate as you repetitively hit the enemy until they die!) at you in place of skilled combat. I never felt like I had to think to beat the enemies, I just had to A: learn how they attacked, probably getting gibbed in the process and B: keep that in mind as I grinded away at their life.

I found it to be a horrible game, really. It's intent on making you grind through the game incredibly slowly, then restarting on the slightest mistake.

[Inhuman Bot]

It's only wasted time if you're not having fun.

I don't see how anyone COULD have fun with it.

It's like playing Nethack or something, but removeing all the deep thought, and makeing you pay 60$ for it.

[AgentPaper]

It's like an MMO, sort of; it tosses fake difficulty (Everything gets harder as you lose! Other players get benefits from griefing you so the community sucks! Enemies aren't that complicated to defeat, they just have absurd amounts of HP so you have to concentrate as you repetitively hit the enemy until they die!)

I found it to be a horrible game, really. It's intent on making you grind through the game incredibly slowly, then restarting on the slightest mistake.

Fake difficulty? I think you need to read up on what that actually is (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/FakeDifficulty). One of the best things about Demon's Souls is that it does NOT have any fake difficulty. If you die, it's your own fault. If you don't like the possibility of other people coming into your game and fighting you, then you can play it offline, and the game isn't any different. You also won't have anyone helping you out, of course.

There is also absolutely zero grind, unless you're also using a different definition for that. To me, grind is when you have to do some thing over and over again, usually to raise some stat or to gain some gear that will increase your character's power. Whereas in Demon's Souls, that doesn't really work. Sure, you can kill monsters over and over to get souls to gain levels and stats and power, but that will only help you so much, and even if you completely max out your level, you can still die to pretty much any mob in the game if you're not paying attention.

And I'm not sure what you're trying to get at with the bosses. Yes, they have a lot of HP. Yes, you have to hit them a bunch of times. What, you want the bosses to go down in a single hit or something? :smallconfused: What the hell kind of boss is that? :smallyuk:


I don't see how anyone COULD have fun with it.

It's like playing Nethack or something, but removeing all the deep thought, and makeing you pay 60$ for it.

Well, to each his own, but I will say that me and my brother at least have had and still are having a ton of fun with it, and many others are as well, apparently.

[Milskidasith]

Fake difficulty? I think you need to read up on what that actually is (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/FakeDifficulty). One of the best things about Demon's Souls is that it does NOT have any fake difficulty. If you die, it's your own fault. If you don't like the possibility of other people coming into your game and fighting you, then you can play it offline, and the game isn't any different. You also won't have anyone helping you out, of course.

No, I mean fake difficulty. The enemies are all absurdly powerful and you are pitifully weak. I can figure out the strategy for an enemy to keep me from dying before the enemy hits half HP, and spend the rest of the time doing the same repetitive action to kill the enemy. Plus, if you lose, the game forces you to redo the entire area with it constantly getting harder, which is both a grind and fake difficulty; if the enemies didn't have such absurd HP and if it didn't have such a terrible checkpoint system, it wouldn't be hard at all. It's the equivalent of making Mario difficult by forcing you to restart on world 1-1 and never be able to use powerups if you get hit by a goomba, and requiring you to bounce on them 10 times before they died.


There is also absolutely zero grind, unless you're also using a different definition for that. To me, grind is when you have to do some thing over and over again, usually to raise some stat or to gain some gear that will increase your character's power. Whereas in Demon's Souls, that doesn't really work. Sure, you can kill monsters over and over to get souls to gain levels and stats and power, but that will only help you so much, and even if you completely max out your level, you can still die to pretty much any mob in the game if you're not paying attention.

I call it a grind because you constantly need to do repetitive crap in order to advance. Even the basic mobs have such high HP it's boring as hell to fight them and mostly a chore where you take care not to waste life on predictable but annoyingly armored enemies, if you do die you have to repeat the same crap but with less health, and if you die more you repeat the same crap with the same enemies with predictable tactics, it's just they're even tougher.


And I'm not sure what you're trying to get at with the bosses. Yes, they have a lot of HP. Yes, you have to hit them a bunch of times. What, you want the bosses to go down in a single hit or something? :smallconfused: What the hell kind of boss is that? :smallyuk:

I never mentioned bosses. The basic enemy mobs have too much HP. The bosses themselves are even more annoying, but when the basic enemies are so absurdly simplistic in terms of AI but take as long as a boss or an elite mob in another game to slug out with, the game isn't fun, it's just being difficult for the novelty of it.


Well, to each his own, but I will say that me and my brother at least have had and still are having a ton of fun with it, and many others are as well, apparently.

And while we're using anecdotal evidence, all my friends hate the game and we got together and burned our copy publicly, and thousands of people came to watch and throw in their copies, cursing the publishers name. Because that kind of stuff is totally verifiable and relevant to a discussion.

[Comet]

And while we're using anecdotal evidence, all my friends hate the game and we got together and burned our copy publicly, and thousands of people came to watch and throw in their copies, cursing the publishers name. Because that kind of stuff is totally verifiable and relevant to a discussion.
They liked it, you didn't. Opinions are a grand thing.

I personally haven't tried it yet, but it does sound fun enough and I have heard a lot of praise for it. And isn't it made by Atlus? Those guys have made some of my favourite games in the past so I'll gladly give this game the benefit of the doubt.

Now if I could only get my hands on a PS3.

[AgentPaper]

...

Are we even playing the same game?

It's either that, or you, for some reason, decided that it'd be fun to never upgrade your weapons or increase your stats, because NOTHING should take that long to kill. Very rare is it that I find myself fighting something that takes more than 3-4 hits to kill, and it's never taken more than 30 seconds for a fight to end, whether I killed the enemy or was killed myself. And it's not a grind to go through the same level over and over because you keep losing. It's a grind when you have to fight the same mob over and over to get some rare drop or to level up. Which you never have to do in Demon's Souls, though there are a few places where you definitely can, if you really want to.

[Milskidasith]

They liked it, you didn't. Opinions are a grand thing.

I have no problem with that. The problem I have is that he said "me, my brother, and [vague] other people liked it" in response to somebody not liking it, which seems to imply less "I like the game" (which he already stated) and more "my friends and I like it, so you're wrong."

Thusly, my post was satirizing him.


Now if I could only get my hands on a PS3.

It's not worth $60, let alone $60+the cost of a PS3. You could get a game about as good by going into the command prompt on your favorite action game, lowering your health to 1/4th of normal or lower, and quadrupling enemy HP (roughly). Then remove the checkpoint system the game had, if it had one, and halve your health on death and increase the enemies stats every time you die as well.

[AgentPaper]

I have no problem with that. The problem I have is that he said "me, my brother, and [vague] other people liked it" in response to somebody not liking it, which seems to imply less "I like the game" (which he already stated) and more "my friends and I like it, so you're wrong."

Thusly, my post was satirizing him.

I was responding to your comment of "I don't see how anybody COULD like it", which is proven wrong by the fact that me, my brother, and many other people all enjoy it. It doesn't mean that you're wrong for not liking it, (as I said, to each his own) it just means you're wrong in saying that nobody could like it, because they obviously do.

[Milskidasith]

I was responding to your comment of "I don't see how anybody COULD like it", which is proven wrong by the fact that me, my brother, and many other people all enjoy it. It doesn't mean that you're wrong for not liking it, (as I said, to each his own) it just means you're wrong in saying that nobody could like it, because they obviously do.

It wasn't my comment.

[AgentPaper]

It wasn't my comment.

Oops, my bad. THE comment, then. :smalltongue:

[cha0s4a11]

For anyone interested:

Zero Punctuation's Demon's Souls review (http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/zero-punctuation/1321-Demons-Souls)

[Poison_Fish]

Now, Milskidasith, I will disagree with the fake difficulty on some level. But really, hitting the monster 10 times? I've played through the game and gone through a new game + nearly twice. Most of the regular monsters I've really never needed to hit more then 2-4 times, even in the first game. So I have absolutely no clue what your talking about there other then the fact that your wrong compared to my entire experience with the game. Hitting 2-4 times, which eats up your stamina bar once, really isn't that bad compared to most action RPG's. So, unless you were playing a bare bones starting character with nothing in strength or agility, and going around with a weapon badly statted for and not using other spells or abilities, I can't think of anything else.

Anyhow, my personal opinion of the game is that isn't that hard. But that might be I'm used to the old hard games of pixel perfect jumping (Hi Megaman). As long as you have basic spacial awareness and take it slow, it's a fairly simple game. My actual guess of why people find it hard is, no offense, most people just aren't use to that style of game play. With simple tutorials, easy modes, a "HEY LISTEN" fairy and spamming action commands, most games have been simplified. Most of the traps I've spotted ahead of time(Such as the one in 1-1 with the rocks), and just triggered them to crush enemies further ahead.

Overall though, I like the game and style. It proved to be pleasant entertainment that didn't quite coddle me.

[JabberwockySupafly]

Okay, I'm sorry to say this as I know it sounds cold-hearted, but to the complainers: You're Doing It Wrong.

This game isn't hard by a long shot, it simply rewards patience. If you can't wait for an opening on a monster, or use a better strategy than "Mash Attack Button Until It Dies", or deal with actual risk vs. reward, then you may want to play something a bit less punishing. I am quite possibly the worst gamer in the history of video games, and I loved this game and had no problems with it. Yes, I died about 20 times to the Penetrator, but in doing so I learned a strategy that now allows me to crush him on subsequent playthroughs on the first try with little effort.

"Fake Difficulty" nothing. This game isn't trying to be difficult. Demon's Souls is trying to be challenging. Big difference. A lot of today's gamers are far too used to having their hands held through games and have no idea what it was like playing old school RPGs where you had to hand-draw your maps and deal with things like Permanent Character Death. Ninja Gaiden is an example of Fake Difficulty. There's no arbitrarily stupid-hard moments that blatantly make it almost impossible to succeed without multiple tries and a great deal of blue words hanging in the air with Demon's Souls. It is possble to go through the entire game (yes, even the tutorial) without dying if you pay attention and use strategy when combating every enemy. I've done so on a fresh character myself.


And having no "Deep Thought"...? It's an Action RPG that requires strategic thought before every action. Saying this game doesn't require depth of thought is like saying a Michael Bay movie doesn't have enough explosions in it.

If you have issues with this game, I pray none of you ever try to play Monster Hunter...

[Milskidasith]

Okay, I'm sorry to say this as I know it sounds cold-hearted, but to the complainers: You're Doing It Wrong.

We're trying to have fun. If we don't have fun with a game, it's not us, it's the game.


This game isn't hard by a long shot, it simply rewards patience. If you can't wait for an opening on a monster, or use a better strategy than "Mash Attack Button Until It Dies", or deal with actual risk vs. reward, then you may want to play something a bit less punishing. I am quite possibly the worst gamer in the history of video games, and I loved this game and had no problems with it. Yes, I died about 20 times to the Penetrator, but in doing so I learned a strategy that now allows me to crush him on subsequent playthroughs on the first try with little effort.

Are you kidding me? The game rewards patience, sure, because it forces you to restart in a harder version of the game every time you die. It has the same risk versus reward as any other game, the enemies are just tougher (I exaggerated, but they still take more than normal mooks in most games), you get hurt more, and there are more ways to instantly die. Also, any game where you can die 20 times without a chance and then kill the guy with little effort isn't rewarding patience, it's being deliberately obtuse. Sure, it rewards patience to play "Boss McInstagib" 20 times after beating through the same enemies 20 times, but that's not fun.


"Fake Difficulty" nothing. This game isn't trying to be difficult. Demon's Souls is trying to be challenging. Big difference. A lot of today's gamers are far too used to having their hands held through games and have no idea what it was like playing old school RPGs where you had to hand-draw your maps and deal with things like Permanent Character Death. Ninja Gaiden is an example of Fake Difficulty. There's no arbitrarily stupid-hard moments that blatantly make it almost impossible to succeed without multiple tries and a great deal of blue words hanging in the air with Demon's Souls. It is possble to go through the entire game (yes, even the tutorial) without dying if you pay attention and use strategy when combating every enemy. I've done so on a fresh character myself.

Yes, it has fake difficulty. It says it's challenging, but no, it's just a normal action game with prettier graphics, online players who can attempt to kill you (or help you), and much higher enemy damage values (to the point of getting instantly killed, almost, at least by tougher enemies or when they ambush you in groups). You've even admitted there isn't any challenge; once you know what's there, the game is flat out easy. It's just that it takes forever to figure it out because it forces you to play through the same boring enemies every time you die just to get back to the point you haven't memorized.


And having no "Deep Thought"...? It's an Action RPG that requires strategic thought before every action. Saying this game doesn't require depth of thought is like saying a Michael Bay movie doesn't have enough explosions in it.


This directly contradicts what you just said about being able to effortlessly defeat bosses and beat through the entire game unscratched after knowing what happens. There's no deep thought involved; you just die to an enemy, know what he does, and then whack him a few times later, and hope you remember what the next enemy does so you can whack away at him.


If you have issues with this game, I pray none of you ever try to play Monster Hunter...

Thinly veiled insults, eh? I didn't have trouble beating the game; like you, if you grind through it once or twice (or 20 times) you can know what's going to happen and have no trouble. But after one playthrough, I have more trouble playing L4D2 (on Expert), a game not touted as being amazingly hard, than this, just because at least you can't predict everything ahead of time. That requires some thought, at least.

[Optimystik]

While I'm well aware Yahtzee tends to exaggerate, I'll stick with his opinion on this one.

Anyway, you PS3 folks have fun while I gear up for Mass Effect 2.

[AgentPaper]

We're trying to have fun. If we don't have fun with a game, it's not us, it's the game.

No, it's your fault. If I go into WoW and never equip a new weapon or try to do anything but auto-attack, then it's my fault that I'm not having fun.


Are you kidding me? The game rewards patience, sure, because it forces you to restart in a harder version of the game every time you die. It has the same risk versus reward as any other game, the enemies are just tougher (I exaggerated, but they still take more than normal mooks in most games), you get hurt more, and there are more ways to instantly die. Also, any game where you can die 20 times without a chance and then kill the guy with little effort isn't rewarding patience, it's being deliberately obtuse. Sure, it rewards patience to play "Boss McInstagib" 20 times after beating through the same enemies 20 times, but that's not fun.

Ok, first off, the difficulty of the game assumes that you're dead and at 50% health for the entire game. It's not nerfing you because you're bad, it's bringing you to the normal level. If you did manage to stay in body form through a whole level, that's something special and cool to do, not what you have to do to play a normal game. And seriously, it's not a big deal. 50% health sounds bad, but really, if you're taking enough damage that it matters, you're not doing it right, and would probably have died anyways.

And you don't have to fight the boss 20 times to beat him, nor do you have to die 20 times to the monsters in the level before him. You only have to die exactly as many times as it takes for you to figure out the strategy needed to beat him. I played this game after my brother, and with him giving me a few tips or telling me what the boss is going to do, I could beat most of the bosses with very few tries at all. Even with our crazy no-shield barbarian, we only took a handful of tries against each boss to beat them, and that was because we needed to learn a whole new strategy to fight them since we didn't have a shield to block their attacks.

And seriously, what games are you playing, that all of the normal mooks have less health than in Demon's Souls? If anything, most games have far MORE health in their normal mobs. I mean, just look at Bioshock or Fallout 3. :smallconfused:


Yes, it has fake difficulty. It says it's challenging, but no, it's just a normal action game with prettier graphics, online players who can attempt to kill you (or help you), and much higher enemy damage values (to the point of getting instantly killed, almost, at least by tougher enemies or when they ambush you in groups). You've even admitted there isn't any challenge; once you know what's there, the game is flat out easy. It's just that it takes forever to figure it out because it forces you to play through the same boring enemies every time you die just to get back to the point you haven't memorized.

Oh no, it's challenging. Even when you figure the enemies out, if you're not paying attention you're going to die. And the enemies kill you quickly, yes, but you can also kill them quickly. But that isn't the point. This game isn't about comparing your DPS to the enemy DPS and seeing who wins. It's about who can move around and use strategy to hit the other guy without letting them hit him. And really, even bosses don't generally 1-shot you, at least on the first play through. And if they do, you can bet that that attack is telegraphed to all hell, and if you didn't dodge it you can only blame yourself.

And no, there is not any fake difficulty. The closest thing to it is the online portion, which you can very easily turn off if you really want to with no real loss.


This directly contradicts what you just said about being able to effortlessly defeat bosses and beat through the entire game unscratched after knowing what happens. There's no deep thought involved; you just die to an enemy, know what he does, and then whack him a few times later, and hope you remember what the next enemy does so you can whack away at him.

I don't think he said "effortlessly", and if he did, he was wrong. You can get to level 512, max out all your stats, and have the best damn items in the game, and you could still die on the first boss if you don't pay attention. Actually going through the entire game is possible, for sure, and I'm sure some people have done it, but don't take that as a sign that the game is easy. And you don't have to die to learn the enemy's patterns.


Thinly veiled insults, eh? I didn't have trouble beating the game; like you, if you grind through it once or twice (or 20 times) you can know what's going to happen and have no trouble. But after one playthrough, I have more trouble playing L4D2 (on Expert), a game not touted as being amazingly hard, than this, just because at least you can't predict everything ahead of time. That requires some thought, at least.

Why did you play through the entire game if you really hated it that much? :smallconfused:


As for Yahtzee's review, I agree with him on many counts, (especially calling it Demon's Souls, which really is annoying to say, or even type :smalltongue:) but you still shouldn't take it too seriously. I actually get the feeling that he enjoyed that game, despite his ranting. But yes, I will not hesitate to admit that Demon's Souls is not without flaws, and yes, there are better games out there, but it's still a very solid, enjoyable game, and a welcome breather from the many brain-dead easy games out there. (Not that those can't also be fun, or that all games today are like that, of course)

[Milskidasith]

No, it's your fault. If I go into WoW and never equip a new weapon or try to do anything but auto-attack, then it's my fault that I'm not having fun.

If you want to strawman me, sure, be my guest.




Ok, first off, the difficulty of the game assumes that you're dead and at 50% health for the entire game. It's not nerfing you because you're bad, it's bringing you to the normal level. If you did manage to stay in body form through a whole level, that's something special and cool to do, not what you have to do to play a normal game. And seriously, it's not a big deal. 50% health sounds bad, but really, if you're taking enough damage that it matters, you're not doing it right, and would probably have died anyways.


The enemies hit hard, but are easy to dodge. And 50% health is a pretty big deal when the enemies hit as hard as they do.


And you don't have to fight the boss 20 times to beat him, nor do you have to die 20 times to the monsters in the level before him. You only have to die exactly as many times as it takes for you to figure out the strategy needed to beat him. I played this game after my brother, and with him giving me a few tips or telling me what the boss is going to do, I could beat most of the bosses with very few tries at all. Even with our crazy no-shield barbarian, we only took a handful of tries against each boss to beat them, and that was because we needed to learn a whole new strategy to fight them since we didn't have a shield to block their attacks.

I was mentioning the poster you are responding too; he claimed that he died to a boss 20 times and then knew exactly how to beat it and never had trouble again. I never died that much, but when I did it was a chore to beat through the enemies I already knew were there.


And seriously, what games are you playing, that all of the normal mooks have less health than in Demon's Souls? If anything, most games have far MORE health in their normal mobs. I mean, just look at Bioshock or Fallout 3. :smallconfused:


Err... in Bioshock, yeah, some of the enemies had more health... but that's because there were "elite" versions of the special splicers that were basically boss fights, but with no extra HP. You could easily OHKO normal splicers. As for fallout 3... what game are you playing? They die in one hit to any lategame weapon, excluding robots and the super ghouls (can't recall their names).


Oh no, it's challenging. Even when you figure the enemies out, if you're not paying attention you're going to die. And the enemies kill you quickly, yes, but you can also kill them quickly. But that isn't the point. This game isn't about comparing your DPS to the enemy DPS and seeing who wins. It's about who can move around and use strategy to hit the other guy without letting them hit him. And really, even bosses don't generally 1-shot you, at least on the first play through. And if they do, you can bet that that attack is telegraphed to all hell, and if you didn't dodge it you can only blame yourself.

Move around and use strategy? I didn't know dodging was a strategy, so much as common sense. The enemies hit harder than normal games, and may be a bit easier to dodge, but they're not challenging at all once you know them.


And no, there is not any fake difficulty. The closest thing to it is the online portion, which you can very easily turn off if you really want to with no real loss.

Forcing you to replay an entire level if you die is fake difficulty. Selling a game as deep and complex with strategy when it just adjusts your and the enemies HP but plays like other games is fake difficulty (and an outright lie).


I don't think he said "effortlessly", and if he did, he was wrong. You can get to level 512, max out all your stats, and have the best damn items in the game, and you could still die on the first boss if you don't pay attention. Actually going through the entire game is possible, for sure, and I'm sure some people have done it, but don't take that as a sign that the game is easy. And you don't have to die to learn the enemy's patterns.

He said he beat through it without ever dying, and considering the huge amount of damage enemies do and the ease of figuring out their patterns, that seems to indicate that you were beating them effortlessly. And really, "paying attention" to a game isn't exactly a huge qualifier for difficulty; maybe I'm just used to competitive online games, but honestly it requires more attention of me to see where people are on MW2 or to weigh my chances in a fight because of map control on League of Legends. Once you know what the enemies do so you can avoid/block them, it really was effortless; the only difficulty was the fact that it hurt you a crapload if you ever did get hit, and punished you for losing.


Why did you play through the entire game if you really hated it that much? :smallconfused:

Because I bought it and figured I might as well get my use out of it? So that I could fully argue why I disliked it on a forum (if I had said I didn't play it fully, I will guarantee you would say I had no right to have an opinion about the game)? Because I thought it might get better? Because it looked pretty and I didn't have anything else to do because my friends weren't on the other games I wanted to play? What answer do you want?


As for Yahtzee's review, I agree with him on many counts, (especially calling it Demon's Souls, which really is annoying to say, or even type :smalltongue:) but you still shouldn't take it too seriously. I actually get the feeling that he enjoyed that game, despite his ranting. But yes, I will not hesitate to admit that Demon's Souls is not without flaws, and yes, there are better games out there, but it's still a very solid, enjoyable game, and a welcome breather from the many brain-dead easy games out there. (Not that those can't also be fun, or that all games today are like that, of course)

Again, after figuring out what the enemies could do, it was just as brain dead as any action game, but with more of a penalty for yawning from boredom and getting hit. I still submit that L4D2 is, despite being casual friendly, still more capable of offering an actual challenge than Demon's Souls.

[AgentPaper]

If you want to strawman me, sure, be my guest.

How was I making you a strawman? Someone said you were playing the game wrong since it took you so long to kill things, you said that it was the games fault that you weren't having fun, I pointed out that yes, it is your fault that the games not fun if you do something like not ever upgrade your weapons. :smallconfused:


The enemies hit hard, but are easy to dodge. And 50% health is a pretty big deal when the enemies hit as hard as they do.

Except that it isn't a big deal, because you don't avoid dying by having a lot of health, you avoid dying by not getting hit. More health just means you have to mess up 3 times instead of 2 times to die. And if health is really that important to you, you can wear a ring that gives you 75% hp instead of 50% when you're in soul form.


I was mentioning the poster you are responding too; he claimed that he died to a boss 20 times and then knew exactly how to beat it and never had trouble again. I never died that much, but when I did it was a chore to beat through the enemies I already knew were there.

For me, the fact that you had to go through the whole level if you died added to the game. It made it so that dying actually meant something, as opposed to most games where you can just keep throwing yourself in head-first and know that it doesn't really matter if you die, because you'll come right back not 10 steps behind where you were.


Err... in Bioshock, yeah, some of the enemies had more health... but that's because there were "elite" versions of the special splicers that were basically boss fights, but with no extra HP. You could easily OHKO normal splicers. As for fallout 3... what game are you playing? They die in one hit to any lategame weapon, excluding robots and the super ghouls (can't recall their names).

Well, I was thinking especially of Big Daddies in bioshock, and must have mis-remembered from fallout 3, so sorry about that. My point stands, though. If you could point out one specific monster that you think took multiple minutes to kill just because it has so much health, I'd be more willing to take this point seriously.


Move around and use strategy? I didn't know dodging was a strategy, so much as common sense. The enemies hit harder than normal games, and may be a bit easier to dodge, but they're not challenging at all once you know them.

Dodging isn't strategy. HOW and WHEN you dodge, is. Or maybe I should have said tactics, but they're pretty similar. And no, the games does not suddenly become a cakewalk once you know what to do. It becomes easier, yes, but it is by no means easy.


Forcing you to replay an entire level if you die is fake difficulty. Selling a game as deep and complex with strategy when it just adjusts your and the enemies HP but plays like other games is fake difficulty (and an outright lie).

I agree, those are all outright lies about Demon's Souls you said right there. :smallamused:


He said he beat through it without ever dying, and considering the huge amount of damage enemies do and the ease of figuring out their patterns, that seems to indicate that you were beating them effortlessly. And really, "paying attention" to a game isn't exactly a huge qualifier for difficulty; maybe I'm just used to competitive online games, but honestly it requires more attention of me to see where people are on MW2 or to weigh my chances in a fight because of map control on League of Legends. Once you know what the enemies do so you can avoid/block them, it really was effortless; the only difficulty was the fact that it hurt you a crapload if you ever did get hit, and punished you for losing.

So, what, you'd rather that the game not punish you for dying, or messing up, so that dying is meaningless and there's no reason to dodge?


Because I bought it and figured I might as well get my use out of it? So that I could fully argue why I disliked it on a forum (if I had said I didn't play it fully, I will guarantee you would say I had no right to have an opinion about the game)? Because I thought it might get better? Because it looked pretty and I didn't have anything else to do because my friends weren't on the other games I wanted to play? What answer do you want?

Well, instead of making yourself into a strawman, you could tell me the actual reason you kept playing it. Or just refuse to tell me, which is entirely within your rights.


Again, after figuring out what the enemies could do, it was just as brain dead as any action game, but with more of a penalty for yawning from boredom and getting hit. I still submit that L4D2 is, despite being casual friendly, still more capable of offering an actual challenge than Demon's Souls.

Wait, what? You're contradicting yourself. One moment, the game is so brain-dead easy that you can play it with one hand tied behind your back, the next moment you have to be paying attention and thinking about what you're doing or you're going to get killed instantly. And anyways, I haven't played L4D2, but as has been said before, Demon's Souls isn't about being the hardest game it could possibly be. It's about challenging you in a way that is enjoyable and adds to the game, and not about getting lucky, or having pixel-perfect jumping skills, or having god-like reflexes. It's about being a game that will force you to slow down and think and take it seriously, and give you some very satisfying moments when you do beat that boss.

[Milskidasith]

How was I making you a strawman? Someone said you were playing the game wrong since it took you so long to kill things, you said that it was the games fault that you weren't having fun, I pointed out that yes, it is your fault that the games not fun if you do something like not ever upgrade your weapons. :smallconfused:

You were strawmanning me because I never said I didn't upgrade the weapons. Also, the 10 hits thing was an exaggeration, but the enemies in this game still have a solid chunk more HP than most games.


Except that it isn't a big deal, because you don't avoid dying by having a lot of health, you avoid dying by not getting hit. More health just means you have to mess up 3 times instead of 2 times to die. And if health is really that important to you, you can wear a ring that gives you 75% hp instead of 50% when you're in soul form.

It's still fake difficulty, regardless of how minimally it affects you.


For me, the fact that you had to go through the whole level if you died added to the game. It made it so that dying actually meant something, as opposed to most games where you can just keep throwing yourself in head-first and know that it doesn't really matter if you die, because you'll come right back not 10 steps behind where you were.

And for me, it didn't. It meant I had to grind through "Mooky McKillme" multiple times, long after 'ole Mooky stopped being any challenge at all.


Well, I was thinking especially of Big Daddies in bioshock, and must have mis-remembered from fallout 3, so sorry about that. My point stands, though. If you could point out one specific monster that you think took multiple minutes to kill just because it has so much health, I'd be more willing to take this point seriously.

I said it was an exaggeration. Also, comparing big daddies from bioshock (which can be OHKO'd with a few proximity minds even on the hardest difficulty), to the common enemies of this is a bad comparison... Big Daddies are essentially the games bosses (the only true "boss" is the final guy, and he sucked.)


Dodging isn't strategy. HOW and WHEN you dodge, is. Or maybe I should have said tactics, but they're pretty similar. And no, the games does not suddenly become a cakewalk once you know what to do. It becomes easier, yes, but it is by no means easy.

Once I knew the enemy attack patterns it was a cakewalk to avoid them. Knowing when and how to dodge likewise isn't a strategy or a tactic; it's common sense, or at the very least such simple tactics that it doesn't add any depth. It's like saying "Position archers two squares away from melee units with a meatshield guarding them in Fire Emblem" is a tactic. It's sound advice, but it's something so basic you'd never ignore it anyway.


I agree, those are all outright lies about Demon's Souls you said right there. :smallamused:


Clever. And pointless.


So, what, you'd rather that the game not punish you for dying, or messing up, so that dying is meaningless and there's no reason to dodge?

No, I'd rather the game not force me to grind through a long period the same repetitive BS when I die to get back to where I'm at. The checkpoint gaps were too long and the enemies were always just annoying distractions after one or two goes at them, so dying to the boss forcing me to beat through all the mooks again is boring as hell.


Well, instead of making yourself into a strawman, you could tell me the actual reason you kept playing it. Or just refuse to tell me, which is entirely within your rights.

All of the reasons I listed were valid reasons. Most of them were true, to a greater or lesser extent.


Wait, what? You're contradicting yourself. One moment, the game is so brain-dead easy that you can play it with one hand tied behind your back, the next moment you have to be paying attention and thinking about what you're doing or you're going to get killed instantly.

The two aren't mutually exclusive... it's incredibly easy, but it decides that even having to go to the bathroom, take a phone call, or yawn for a few seconds (*note: This is an exaggeration) are enough to kill you (finding out pausing didn't, you know, pause the game was a really annoying thing for me, since I had to go repeat the same area for something I had no clue about!) Basically, the only difficulty the game has lies in the fact that A: the repetitive enemies hurt you very badly if you forget their routine and B: the fact you have to grind through so many of them you're sure to take a hit or two. It's not difficult because it's challenging and fast paced, it's difficult because it's an endurance run.


And anyways, I haven't played L4D2, but as has been said before, Demon's Souls isn't about being the hardest game it could possibly be.

Actually, it was advertised to me as a game that was supposed to be incredibly difficult, and the quote on your first post indicates likewise. It never mentions anything about the good aspects or how it's tactically challenging or requires thought, it basically just says "Enjoy some fake difficulty where the game gets harder when you die, and be a REAL MAN who likes his games ****ING HARDCORE YEAHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"



It's about challenging you in a way that is enjoyable and adds to the game, and not about getting lucky, or having pixel-perfect jumping skills, or having god-like reflexes. It's about being a game that will force you to slow down and think and take it seriously, and give you some very satisfying moments when you do beat that boss.

I never really had to slow down or think to beat enemies. Dodge their predictable attack, hit them as much as possible-1 to be safe, dodge again, kill them.

[AgentPaper]

You were strawmanning me because I never said I didn't upgrade the weapons. Also, the 10 hits thing was an exaggeration, but the enemies in this game still have a solid chunk more HP than most games.

Okay, then, so if 10 hits was an exxageration, what amount did you really mean? Something more like 2-4 hits? That sounds about right, and I don't see how that comes anywhere near "fake difficulty because the normal mobs have as much health as bosses in most games". :smallamused:


It's still fake difficulty, regardless of how minimally it affects you.

That's like saying the amount of health you have in bioshock is fake difficulty, because it's punishing you because the developers decided to give you that amount and not twice as much. Fake difficulty is when the difficulty is because of random chance, or because the game requires such perfect reflexes that it basically comes down to luck for you to complete it.


And for me, it didn't. It meant I had to grind through "Mooky McKillme" multiple times, long after 'ole Mooky stopped being any challenge at all.

I never said it was for everyone. For me, the tedium of grinding through the old mobs was worth having that extra edge to death, especially because those old mobs are still a challenge to get through, even though you know how to fight them.


Once I knew the enemy attack patterns it was a cakewalk to avoid them. Knowing when and how to dodge likewise isn't a strategy or a tactic; it's common sense, or at the very least such simple tactics that it doesn't add any depth. It's like saying "Position archers two squares away from melee units with a meatshield guarding them in Fire Emblem" is a tactic. It's sound advice, but it's something so basic you'd never ignore it anyway.

Tactics came in on things like the skeletons, where you hold up your shield, let it roll into you, dodge back to avoid it's attack, and then move in to kill it.


No, I'd rather the game not force me to grind through a long period the same repetitive BS when I die to get back to where I'm at. The checkpoint gaps were too long and the enemies were always just annoying distractions after one or two goes at them, so dying to the boss forcing me to beat through all the mooks again is boring as hell.

To be fair, you rarely had to fight your way through the entire level. That happened a few times, of course, but only really on the shorter levels, like the storm one. More often, and especially on the long levels, like the tower of latria, you would only have to go through the whole place in it's entirety once, after which you would unlock some type of shortcut that would let you only have to fight a small number of enemies to get to the end. For example, the Tower Knight, you only have to kill 2 ghouls, 2 groups of archers and 2 knights to get to him, and of course dodge the dragon, which isn't actually very hard. The whole process takes about 5 minutes, tops, less if you've got a good weapon and have a good strategy for taking down the knights.


The two aren't mutually exclusive... it's incredibly easy, but it decides that even having to go to the bathroom, take a phone call, or yawn for a few seconds (*note: This is an exaggeration) are enough to kill you (finding out pausing didn't, you know, pause the game was a really annoying thing for me, since I had to go repeat the same area for something I had no clue about!) Basically, the only difficulty the game has lies in the fact that A: the repetitive enemies hurt you very badly if you forget their routine and B: the fact you have to grind through so many of them you're sure to take a hit or two. It's not difficult because it's challenging and fast paced, it's difficult because it's an endurance run.

Well, while there isn't a pause button, as long as you're not actually fighting something at the moment, or being shot at by archers, or standing in poison swamp goo, you can just sit there indefinitely and nobody will attack you. I've let the game just sit while I take a call, or use the bathroom, or even go eat dinner or sleep or something, and my character was still there, alive and well. There's nothing at all present in the game that says you absolutely must keep moving forward once you start a level. And yes, it might be nice to be able to pause a game in the middle of a long boss fight to go use the bathroom, but the loss of that doesn't exactly make the game unplayable. :smallwink:


I never really had to slow down or think to beat enemies. Dodge their predictable attack, hit them as much as possible-1 to be safe, dodge again, kill them.

That sounds like the strategy for a handful of monsters in the game, but most of them were a bit more complicated than that. :smallamused:


Anyways, it seems clear that this isn't your type of game, for reasons you've stated. Which is fine, but doesn't mean you can make up exaggerated claims of fake difficulty (To be fair, there is SOME fake difficulty, but no game is completely without that, and this one has less than most) and over-healthed monsters to try and convince people that they shouldn't like it too. You'll notice that we've never claimed that this game is something it's not, or that it'll appeal to everyone, so if you'll just kindly let us to enjoy our badwrongfun, that'd be great. :smallbiggrin:

[Milskidasith]

Okay, then, so if 10 hits was an exxageration, what amount did you really mean? Something more like 2-4 hits? That sounds about right, and I don't see how that comes anywhere near "fake difficulty because the normal mobs have as much health as bosses in most games". :smallamused:

Normal enemies are still far stronger and far tougher than enemies in most games. While they aren't as much as I said, they're still just normal mobs on steroids.


That's like saying the amount of health you have in bioshock is fake difficulty, because it's punishing you because the developers decided to give you that amount and not twice as much. Fake difficulty is when the difficulty is because of random chance, or because the game requires such perfect reflexes that it basically comes down to luck for you to complete it.


The difference here is that Demon's Souls was touted as a game that was difficult and tactically challenging, when in reality the only thing difficult about it is that A: online players can grief (or help) you, and B: the mobs are tougher than normal. And you have to backtrack, which is annoying.


I never said it was for everyone. For me, the tedium of grinding through the old mobs was worth having that extra edge to death, especially because those old mobs are still a challenge to get through, even though you know how to fight them.

Once I knew how to get through a mob it was cakewalk. Repeating the exact same thing (and I mean the exact same thing, they felt like they never changed even their attack routines) is not fun.


Tactics came in on things like the skeletons, where you hold up your shield, let it roll into you, dodge back to avoid it's attack, and then move in to kill it.

That's about the same level as saying that inputting a 6-2-3 punch when a guy jumps in on your Ryu is using tactics. It's not, it's just putting in a certain button combination guaranteed to succeed!


To be fair, you rarely had to fight your way through the entire level. That happened a few times, of course, but only really on the shorter levels, like the storm one. More often, and especially on the long levels, like the tower of latria, you would only have to go through the whole place in it's entirety once, after which you would unlock some type of shortcut that would let you only have to fight a small number of enemies to get to the end. For example, the Tower Knight, you only have to kill 2 ghouls, 2 groups of archers and 2 knights to get to him, and of course dodge the dragon, which isn't actually very hard. The whole process takes about 5 minutes, tops, less if you've got a good weapon and have a good strategy for taking down the knights.

Yes, there are shortcuts. It's still more time than I'd like to spend backtracking through the same enemies, though.


Well, while there isn't a pause button, as long as you're not actually fighting something at the moment, or being shot at by archers, or standing in poison swamp goo, you can just sit there indefinitely and nobody will attack you. I've let the game just sit while I take a call, or use the bathroom, or even go eat dinner or sleep or something, and my character was still there, alive and well. There's nothing at all present in the game that says you absolutely must keep moving forward once you start a level. And yes, it might be nice to be able to pause a game in the middle of a long boss fight to go use the bathroom, but the loss of that doesn't exactly make the game unplayable. :smallwink:

Saying "while there isn't a pause button, if you aren't doing anything anyway you won't get hurt" is kind of like saying "while the game sometimes glitches and doesn't let you attack, if you don't try to use the options that cause the glitch the game is fine." In that, sure, it's true, but that doesn't change how horrible it is.


That sounds like the strategy for a handful of monsters in the game, but most of them were a bit more complicated than that. :smallamused:

OK, fine, sometimes you dodge, sometimes you block, sometimes you dodge then block, sometimes you plink at them from afar, sometimes you block, dodge, breakdance for three measures of The Imperial March from Star Wars then summon Cthulhu to eat your enemies, whatever, the point is once you know how to hit a mob it's an exercise in muscle memory, not tactics.



Anyways, it seems clear that this isn't your type of game, for reasons you've stated. Which is fine, but doesn't mean you can make up exaggerated claims of fake difficulty (To be fair, there is SOME fake difficulty, but no game is completely without that, and this one has less than most) and over-healthed monsters to try and convince people that they shouldn't like it too. You'll notice that we've never claimed that this game is something it's not, or that it'll appeal to everyone, so if you'll just kindly let us to enjoy our badwrongfun, that'd be great. :smallbiggrin:

This game has far more fake difficulty than most. I can't see why you think there is more fake difficulty in this game than there is in, say, MW2, God Hand, Fallout, Bioshock, L4D2, Dragon Age (I'll admit this one has enemies that practically OHKO you with crowd control on higher difficulty settings, but that's only the bosses), or any number of good games. Honestly, the only games I know of with more fake difficulty are most sports games, Mario Kart, and IWBTG.

[AgentPaper]

Normal enemies are still far stronger and far tougher than enemies in most games. While they aren't as much as I said, they're still just normal mobs on steroids.

Yes, enemies are harder to kill than in most games. This is why Demon's Souls is a hard game. Would you rather have it that normal enemies are no real threat whatsoever? :smallconfused:


The difference here is that Demon's Souls was touted as a game that was difficult and tactically challenging, when in reality the only thing difficult about it is that A: online players can grief (or help) you, and B: the mobs are tougher than normal. And you have to backtrack, which is annoying.

Yes, the monsters that you kill being harder to kill would make the game harder. So, what, enemies that don't die in one hit and can kill you in less than 10 hits is fake difficulty now? :smallconfused:


Once I knew how to get through a mob it was cakewalk. Repeating the exact same thing (and I mean the exact same thing, they felt like they never changed even their attack routines) is not fun.

Yes, mobs of the same exact type tend to act alike. This is the same as in all games. Luckily, there are a good number of types of enemies in Demon's Souls, and even ones of the same type often have different weapons, which usually calls for different tactics.


That's about the same level as saying that inputting a 6-2-3 punch when a guy jumps in on your Ryu is using tactics. It's not, it's just putting in a certain button combination guaranteed to succeed!

...what? You DID play this game, didn't you? Go try it again. Fight one mob. Now, try to use that exact same sequence of motions to beat him again. Notice how you died? The enemy DOES react to what you do, they use different attacks, at different times, and most importantly, the terrain is always different. You never fight an enemy in an infinite featureless plain, there's always walls, pits, hazards, or even other mobs that you have to navigate around and take into account when deciding how to dodge, or where to move to attack.


Yes, there are shortcuts. It's still more time than I'd like to spend backtracking through the same enemies, though.

This is your opinion. It is why you don't like the game. It doesn't mean other people can't like the game.


Saying "while there isn't a pause button, if you aren't doing anything anyway you won't get hurt" is kind of like saying "while the game sometimes glitches and doesn't let you attack, if you don't try to use the options that cause the glitch the game is fine." In that, sure, it's true, but that doesn't change how horrible it is.

Actually, no, it's nothing at all like that.


OK, fine, sometimes you dodge, sometimes you block, sometimes you dodge then block, sometimes you plink at them from afar, sometimes you block, dodge, breakdance for three measures of The Imperial March from Star Wars then summon Cthulhu to eat your enemies, whatever, the point is once you know how to hit a mob it's an exercise in muscle memory, not tactics.

Except your muscles don't have eyes to see when the knight starts charging you with his lance, or when he walks towards you slowly with shield raised, and then makes a lunge when he gets closer. You (apparently) played this game, stop being intentionally obtuse.


This game has far more fake difficulty than most. I can't see why you think there is more fake difficulty in this game than there is in, say, MW2, God Hand, Fallout, Bioshock, L4D2, Dragon Age (I'll admit this one has enemies that practically OHKO you with crowd control on higher difficulty settings, but that's only the bosses), or any number of good games. Honestly, the only games I know of with more fake difficulty are most sports games, Mario Kart, and IWBTG.

I get it. You didn't like this game. You didn't like it so much that you decided to beat it all the way through so you could hate it more and tell other people exactly how much and why they should hate it too. I don't know WHY you hate this game so irrationally, but it's obvious you do. However, that doesn't mean you get to rant on and on any lie about the game (you call it "exaggerating") to make other people not play it.

[Lord Seth]

For anyone interested:

Zero Punctuation's Demon's Souls review (http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/zero-punctuation/1321-Demons-Souls)He goes into some more detail about it here (http://www.escapistmagazine.com/articles/view/columns/extra-punctuation/6923-Extra-Punctuation-Demons-Souls).

[Milskidasith]

Yes, enemies are harder to kill than in most games. This is why Demon's Souls is a hard game. Would you rather have it that normal enemies are no real threat whatsoever? :smallconfused:

No, I'd rather a hard game actually have some kind of challenge to it, not being the same as every other game but with enemies that deal more damage.


Yes, the monsters that you kill being harder to kill would make the game harder. So, what, enemies that don't die in one hit and can kill you in less than 10 hits is fake difficulty now? :smallconfused:

No... seriously, read what I am saying. I am complaining about the fact it was supposed to be a tactical challenge, and I got a generic hack and slash with a bit more polish and enemies that deal far more damage.


Yes, mobs of the same exact type tend to act alike. This is the same as in all games. Luckily, there are a good number of types of enemies in Demon's Souls, and even ones of the same type often have different weapons, which usually calls for different tactics.


L4D2. Bioshock. Fire Emblem. All of these games are challenging and have encounters that are different every time.



...what? You DID play this game, didn't you? Go try it again. Fight one mob. Now, try to use that exact same sequence of motions to beat him again. Notice how you died? The enemy DOES react to what you do, they use different attacks, at different times, and most importantly, the terrain is always different. You never fight an enemy in an infinite featureless plain, there's always walls, pits, hazards, or even other mobs that you have to navigate around and take into account when deciding how to dodge, or where to move to attack.

Yeah, there are small details that change, but it's pretty much muscle memory. I never thought "what do I do here?"



This is your opinion. It is why you don't like the game. It doesn't mean other people can't like the game.

OK, and? You're the one who's arguing with me for saying I didn't like the backtracking. Why are you telling me to drop it?



Actually, no, it's nothing at all like that.

Yes, it is. You're essentially saying "this feature is entirely broken, but if you use it in situations it doesn't matter anyway, then it's fine." It's a feature that should be in the game, there's no reason not to have it there.


Except your muscles don't have eyes to see when the knight starts charging you with his lance, or when he walks towards you slowly with shield raised, and then makes a lunge when he gets closer. You (apparently) played this game, stop being intentionally obtuse.


I'm not. Minor differences like that exist, yes. That doesn't make them suddenly a challenge to navigate around. I'm suprised you didn't just say "your muscles don't have eyes to know what enemy you're fighting" because that's essentially what you're saying. You see the enemy attack with attack A, you do response A. Attack B, response B. It's all very simple.


I get it. You didn't like this game. You didn't like it so much that you decided to beat it all the way through so you could hate it more and tell other people exactly how much and why they should hate it too. I don't know WHY you hate this game so irrationally, but it's obvious you do. But if you're saying Mario Kart has a ton of fake difficulty...I just don't know how to respond to that. :smallconfused: :smallsigh:

Mario Kart's entire basis is that as you fall behind the enemies get exponentially more powerful items (to the point where braking before item boxes is a common strategy in matches), and the computers have karts that are essentially always under the effect of a speed boost and don't slow down on terrain unless they are in front of you. That's a crapload of fake difficulty. And my dislike of the game (not hatred; it's not terrible, just far below what it's hyped to be) is as irrational as your like for the game.

[AgentPaper]

No, I'd rather a hard game actually have some kind of challenge to it, not being the same as every other game but with enemies that deal more damage.

What game is it exactly similar to? And how do you propose they have made it harder while having enemies take 10 hits to kill you and you 1-shot everything but bosses? Would you have liked it more if the enemies were ultra-quick? If it was near to impossible to dodge their attacks so you always got hit by a couple each enemy? Do you want healing items severly nerfed or removed?


No... seriously, read what I am saying. I am complaining about the fact it was supposed to be a tactical challenge, and I got a generic hack and slash with a bit more polish and enemies that deal far more damage.

What, exactly, did you want them to do to add more tactics? And no, it is NOT a generic hack and slash. I have played those. Those are the ones where the entire combat system boils down to mash X until they stop slashing back. Dodge if you want to, or just take 1% damage to your massive health. The fact that the enemies have more HP and do more damage forces you to use your brain. Thus, it is not a generic hack and slash. Yes, there is hacking and/or slashing involved. Also thrusting. This does not preclude the game from tactics.


L4D2. Bioshock. Fire Emblem. All of these games are challenging and have encounters that are different every time.

Haven't played the first, but Bioshock and Fire Emblem? Really? Those are the games you're going with? The former especially is a very dull and drudging point and shoot until it dies while backpedaling. And it has all of six (I counted) types of enemies in the game. And the enemies get more difficult by *gasp* increasing their stats and HP! Oh and the main, mean enemies? Those Big Daddies? They're challenging only because *gasp!* they have truckloads of HP so it takes a minute straight of shooting just to kill them! Not to mention how they hit like a truck! You know, all those things you were complaining about Demon's Souls for!

Fire emblem is, of course, a completely different type of game, and so irrelevant to the discussion.


Yeah, there are small details that change, but it's pretty much muscle memory. I never thought "what do I do here?"


Yes, fighting a skeleton on a narrow ledge with a cliff on one side and a 100-foot drop on the other isn't THAT different from fighting it in a field while an archer skeleton shoots at you, but it's different enough that you need to think about it instead of just pressing a set sequence of keys to defeat the enemy based on what it is.


OK, and? You're the one who's arguing with me for saying I didn't like the backtracking. Why are you telling me to drop it?

I don't have anything against you not liking it. I only was arguing against it being fake difficulty or always a bad thing. I thought it was done just enough to make the game more enjoyable. You thought it could use a bit more. It's a matter of taste.

I mean, you could say the same thing about a boss. I got the boss down to 20% HP, and then died. Damn, now I have to fight the first 80% of the HP of the boss again! Stupid game and it's fake difficulty! :smalltongue:


Yes, it is. You're essentially saying "this feature is entirely broken, but if you use it in situations it doesn't matter anyway, then it's fine." It's a feature that should be in the game, there's no reason not to have it there.

No, I'm saying that you don't NEED to pause the game to go use the bathroom. At most, you'll have to wait 30 seconds to beat the current enemy, or 3-4 minutes to beat a boss (unless it's one of the ones with a safe place you can hide in) before you take your break. I'm saying that the lack of a pause feature isn't nearly as bad as you're saying it is, and by no means are you forced to sit down and play for an hour straight just to get through a level.


I'm not. Minor differences like that exist, yes. That doesn't make them suddenly a challenge to navigate around. I'm suprised you didn't just say "your muscles don't have eyes to know what enemy you're fighting" because that's essentially what you're saying. You see the enemy attack with attack A, you do response A. Attack B, response B. It's all very simple.

What the hell are you even complaining about? That the same tactic will work twice in the same circumstances? You want it so that, randomly, the enemy will attack in the same way it always does, but this time it also does something else at the same time, without warning you, so you die doing the same thing that worked last time?


Mario Kart's entire basis is that as you fall behind the enemies get exponentially more powerful items (to the point where braking before item boxes is a common strategy in matches), and the computers have karts that are essentially always under the effect of a speed boost and don't slow down on terrain unless they are in front of you. That's a crapload of fake difficulty. And my dislike of the game (not hatred; it's not terrible, just far below what it's hyped to be) is as irrational as your like for the game.

Yeah, my bad. :smallredface: I thought about that for about 30 seconds, responded, thought about it for about 30 more seconds, and remembered how the single-player basically consisted of fake difficulty with opponents that sped up when you got ahead and were always faster than you and turned better than you because the AI wasn't good enough to challenge you otherwise. Pure unadulterated fake difficulty there. I edited my response as quick as I could to correct this grievous error, but it seems I was not fast enough. Good catch. :smalltongue:

[Milskidasith]

What game is it exactly similar to? And how do you propose they have made it harder while having enemies take 10 hits to kill you and you 1-shot everything but bosses? Would you have liked it more if the enemies were ultra-quick? If it was near to impossible to dodge their attacks so you always got hit by a couple each enemy? Do you want healing items severly nerfed or removed?

No, I want a game you can't beat through rote memory easily.


What, exactly, did you want them to do to add more tactics? And no, it is NOT a generic hack and slash. I have played those. Those are the ones where the entire combat system boils down to mash X until they stop slashing back. Dodge if you want to, or just take 1% damage to your massive health. The fact that the enemies have more HP and do more damage forces you to use your brain. Thus, it is not a generic hack and slash. Yes, there is hacking and/or slashing involved. Also thrusting. This does not preclude the game from tactics.

But the fact there aren't any tactics needed to do the simple "Avoid enemy attack with whatever combo works on that enemy, kill it" precludes that.


Haven't played the first, but Bioshock and Fire Emblem? Really? Those are the games you're going with? The former especially is a very dull and drudging point and shoot until it dies while backpedaling. And it has all of six (I counted) types of enemies in the game. And the enemies get more difficult by *gasp* increasing their stats and HP! Oh and the main, mean enemies? Those Big Daddies? They're challenging only because *gasp!* they have truckloads of HP so it takes a minute straight of shooting just to kill them! Not to mention how they hit like a truck! You know, all those things you were complaining about Demon's Souls for!


Please read what I said before strawmanning. Actually, apply this to everything in this post, because you seem to have ignored me to argue what you think I'm saying everywhere so far. Yes, Bioshock is easy. However, it does something Demon's Souls doesn't: Even the same enemy types are vastly different encounters depending on the environment, compared to the minor changes in Demon's Souls. Demon's Souls may very well have five times as many enemies and barely scratch the surface of the variety of tactics you can use in Bioshock.


Fire emblem is, of course, a completely different type of game, and so irrelevant to the discussion.

Yes, it would be, wouldn't it? I was giving these as examples when you asked what I would want for a game with tactics available to you, not as a direct comparison.


Yes, fighting a skeleton on a narrow ledge with a cliff on one side and a 100-foot drop on the other isn't THAT different from fighting it in a field while an archer skeleton shoots at you, but it's different enough that you need to think about it instead of just pressing a set sequence of keys to defeat the enemy based on what it is.

It's not enough to matter, nor is it nearly as much as the terrain and tactical changes of any other game I listed.


I don't have anything against you not liking it. I only was arguing against it being fake difficulty or always a bad thing. I thought it was done just enough to make the game more enjoyable. You thought it could use a bit more. It's a matter of taste.

Then why are you the one insulting me personally, accusing me of not playing the game, and taking every argument as if I personally insulted you, and making it a point to "win" by strawmanning me instead of really reading what I'm saying and thinking about it?


I mean, you could say the same thing about a boss. I got the boss down to 20% HP, and then died. Damn, now I have to fight the first 80% of the HP of the boss again! Stupid game and it's fake difficulty! :smalltongue:

There's a difference between having to fight a boss again because you lost and having to fight the boss and the five to ten minutes of enemies required to get there because you lost.


No, I'm saying that you don't NEED to pause the game to go use the bathroom. At most, you'll have to wait 30 seconds to beat the current enemy, or 3-4 minutes to beat a boss (unless it's one of the ones with a safe place you can hide in) before you take your break. I'm saying that the lack of a pause feature isn't nearly as bad as you're saying it is, and by no means are you forced to sit down and play for an hour straight just to get through a level.


It's still bad. Thirty seconds is far too long if anything more urgent than going to the bathroom comes up; if you get a phone call, it's a choice between losing or being incredibly rude.


What the hell are you even complaining about? That the same tactic will work twice in the same circumstances? You want it so that, randomly, the enemy will attack in the same way it always does, but this time it also does something else at the same time, without warning you, so you die doing the same thing that worked last time?

No, I want it so that there is a variety, as I've stated. Make it so the enemies are more varied. Even adding one of the following would be sufficient to make the game less boring for me: terrain being important enough to define your strategy and allowing multiple routes through the same area (Bioshock), enemies not always spawning in the same spot (L4D2), or enemies not being so predictable when they do attack you (though this is a problem with all games, the other two effectively solve it by altering things that not directly related to the enemies.)

[AgentPaper]

No, I want a game you can't beat through rote memory easily.

Except you can't. Even against the same enemy in the same level approaching it from the same angle, there are multiple different things it can do. Take, for example, the very first enemy you encounter, a weird ghoul thing. It might lunge at you the moment you see it, in which case you need to sidestep and kill it once it's past you. Or, it might randomly decide to shuffle towards you, in which case you need to either kill it before it attacks, or wait until it attacks, dodge, and then kill it. Enemies DO have a certain amount of randomness to them, so you can't just memorize exactly what you do in each case.


But the fact there aren't any tactics needed to do the simple "Avoid enemy attack with whatever combo works on that enemy, kill it" precludes that.

So, then, what tactics does, for example, Bioshock have that Demon's Souls does not?


Please read what I said before strawmanning. Actually, apply this to everything in this post, because you seem to have ignored me to argue what you think I'm saying everywhere so far. Yes, Bioshock is easy. However, it does something Demon's Souls doesn't: Even the same enemy types are vastly different encounters depending on the environment, compared to the minor changes in Demon's Souls. Demon's Souls may very well have five times as many enemies and barely scratch the surface of the variety of tactics you can use in Bioshock.

First of all, don't make me into a strawman by claiming that I'm making you into one. I've been very careful to read everything you've said, admitted you were right on a couple counts, and responded to everything you said in the most clear way I could. And how does fighting a splicer in Bioshock come down to ANYTHING but "Shoot it with weapon of your choice until it falls over"? Heck, even Big Daddies don't have any more strategy than that.


It's not enough to matter, nor is it nearly as much as the terrain and tactical changes of any other game I listed.

Again, give me an example. How is fighting a giant troll across a rickety bridge not different from fighting a giant troll on an island in a swamp of goop that will poison you if you stand in it too long?


Then why are you the one insulting me personally, accusing me of not playing the game, and taking every argument as if I personally insulted you, and making it a point to "win" by strawmanning me instead of really reading what I'm saying and thinking about it?

I only doubted you had played the game after you threw out a blatantly false and ridiculous statement that you admitted yourself was a bald-faced lie.


There's a difference between having to fight a boss again because you lost and having to fight the boss and the five to ten minutes of enemies required to get there because you lost.

There is. That difference it the difference in our opinion. I think that having to fight the boss and a few monsters leading up to him makes the boss more serious. You think it's just tedious. Neither opinion is "right" except to ourselves. I've admitted that your stance is valid, you don't seem to be able to admit that mine is valid as well.


It's still bad. Thirty seconds is far too long if anything more urgent than going to the bathroom comes up; if you get a phone call, it's a choice between losing or being incredibly rude.

Yes, and as I said, a pause feature would have been nice. Again, to be fair, the reason they didn't have it is because, when playing with other people online, it really wouldn't be fair to them if you just stopped the game for half an hour to have a chat with your mom. Or to wait out that black phantom until he gets bored and goes away. This doesn't mean they couldn't have added the feature solely to offline mode, but it's not that big a deal. It's perfectly acceptable in any online game, for example World of Warcraft or LfD2, so I don't see why you think it's such an unbearable sin here.

Anyways, I admit that it is a flaw with the game, if a minor one. Unless you feel the need to convince me that it's a huge, irredeemable flaw, we may as well drop this part of the discussion.


No, I want it so that there is a variety, as I've stated. Make it so the enemies are more varied. Even adding one of the following would be sufficient to make the game less boring for me: terrain being important enough to define your strategy and allowing multiple routes through the same area (Bioshock), enemies not always spawning in the same spot (L4D2), or enemies not being so predictable when they do attack you (though this is a problem with all games, the other two effectively solve it by altering things that not directly related to the enemies.)

Enemies being in different spots might be nice, actually, but I don't think it would add that much. Terrain already feels very important and game-changing to me. Enemies don't seem very predictable, everything from the beginning mooks to the final boss have somewhat predictable patterns (used long-ranged attack when you're far, shield slam when you're close, PBAOE when you're between his legs, sword slash at mid-range, etc) but there's always a degree of variety, more or less, and you can't say at any moment for 100% sure what the enemy is going to do in the next moment, unless it's halfway through one of it's attacks at the moment.

[Lord of Rapture]

First of all, don't make me into a strawman by claiming that I'm making you into one. I've been very careful to read everything you've said, admitted you were right on a couple counts, and responded to everything you said in the most clear way I could. And how does fighting a splicer in Bioshock come down to ANYTHING but "Shoot it with weapon of your choice until it falls over"? Heck, even Big Daddies don't have any more strategy than that.


How is anything in life not like that? :smalltongue:

[AgentPaper]

How is anything in life not like that? :smalltongue:

Well, everything before the invention of guns, at the very least. :smalltongue:

[Demented]

Tanks don't fall over.

On that note, I really wish games had more weapon variation.
These days their arsenal consists of a sword, bullet-spitter, and noobtube. Even the venerable, if not once excessively ubiquitous, shotgun is on its way out.

[Lord of Rapture]

Well, everything before the invention of guns, at the very least. :smalltongue:

The principle remains. "Use weapon (physical, mental, whatever) to attack enemy until it bows to your will."

Of course, bow to your will doesn't necessarily means it can bow. Or stay alive, even.

[AgentPaper]

Tanks don't fall over.

On that note, I really wish games had more weapon variation.
These days their arsenal consists of a sword, bullet-spitter, and noobtube. Even the venerable, if not once excessively ubiquitous, shotgun is on its way out.

Well, you should try Demon's Souls then! :smalltongue: It has daggers, straight swords, large swords, extra large swords, curved swords, katanas, rapiers, axes, large axes, maces, large maces, picks, fist weapons, polearms, spears, bows, crossbows, relics and catalysts, just to name the basic weapon categories. And they are all used differently and have their own two unique ways of being swung around.

Edit: Oh, and many also have a different type of attack that they do after you roll, or when you press forward/backward and attack, though the latter seems to be mostly useless as far as I've seen.

[Raistlin1040]

I'm willing to overlook flaws in games. Really, I'm not that picky about them. One of the most important things for me is Developer Intent. This sounds like sort of an odd things to pick out, but here's what I mean. I can generally figure out if I'm going to like a game or not by imagining a developer sitting next to me and watching me play. When I die, the Dev looks at me and gives me advice. Example: I'm playing Modern Warfare II and I run ahead of the trucks and scope for the gang myself. I see one guy, shoot him, and instantly alert everyone to my position. I am swiftly killed. The Dev leans over at me, wincing. "Hey, sorry about that man. I know it's a bit slow sometimes, but just stay with the group. Trust me, it's safer." Next time, I stay with the group, the gang is easily overtaken. Yeah, it's not at the pace I want always, but the reasons I died make sense to me. I can learn something from how I died.

Example 2: Ocarina of Time. One of my all-time favorite games. I'd forgotten most of it when I picked it up last summer, and when I made it to the final boss, I made the mistake of trying to climb the sides of the pillar while he was blasting me. After losing a sizable chunk of health from falling damage and having to blow one of my faeries, I learned it was better to just run and roll away from the attacks. I imagined this Dev as sitting behind me, frowning slightly. "Don't you remember? You can get knocked off the walls easily. Remember what you've learned from the other fights. Defense is better than offense, because if you wait for an opening, you'll get one." Again, I understood why I was being beaten and I could draw on my previous game experiences to help me.

I didn't feel like that with Demon's Souls. I don't own a PS3, so I've only played it for a short time, but here's what I felt like the Dev was saying while I played. "Hey man, look, there's no one here, just walk on through." I walk into the area and am attacked by something I didn't see and die. I glare at the Dev. "Hey, just a practical joke man. Relax." I forgive him and keep playing. The enemies are tougher than I expected, but I manage to get them out of the way so I can progress. "Alright, so just run down this castle ledge." I do so, and am burned to a crisp. The dev covers his mouth to hide laughter. I go back and deal with the mooks again, a bit annoyed that I have to. I watch for the fire this time and manage to get past it. And then I die. The dev is on his cell phone now. "Yeah, this guy is such a joke. Like, he totally bought the castle wall thing. Oh yeah. Turned to ashes. No chance. You should've seen it."

Demon's Souls strikes me as the kind of game where the Developers aimed for difficulty over balance, fairness, and enjoyment factor. Honestly, it seemed like they wanted me to die. I could've eventually beaten the game, but really, after all of that, I didn't want to. I just stopped at that point. Intentionally or not, I didn't feel like playing a game where so much seemed to be designed in a "how can I frustrate the player and make him fail" sort of way.

Not going to get into a long quote-war thing, but those are my thoughts.

[Demented]

Well, you should try Demon's Souls then! :smalltongue: It has daggers, straight swords, large swords, extra large swords, curved swords, katanas, rapiers, axes, large axes, maces, large maces, picks, fist weapons, polearms, spears, bows, crossbows, relics and catalysts, just to name the basic weapon categories. And they are all used differently and have their own two unique ways of being swung around.

That would be, in my parlance, swords, blunt swords, thrusty swords, and four kinds of bullet-spitters. As you can see, my dilemma runs deep. :smallbiggrin:

I'm watching a review of Demon's souls... The way they described death, it made me think of Diablo II in Hell difficulty. Only easier, since it's possible to live.

[AgentPaper]

Demon's Souls strikes me as the kind of game where the Developers aimed for difficulty over balance, fairness, and enjoyment factor. Honestly, it seemed like they wanted me to die. I could've eventually beaten the game, but really, after all of that, I didn't want to. I just stopped at that point. Intentionally or not, I didn't feel like playing a game where so much seemed to be designed in a "how can I frustrate the player and make him fail" sort of way.

Not going to get into a long quote-war thing, but those are my thoughts.

I didn't really get that. I got more of a "Hey, you gotta pay attention or you're gunna die. This isn't a game you mess around with. You run in swords swinging, you're gunna die. Tough. Take it careful and be smart, and you'll be fine though."

The fire-breathing dragon did kinda come outta the blue, but I don't see how you could die to it unless you're not paying attention. You're chopping through one of the many mobs on said rampart, see the dragon come up in the distance, and at least my immediate response was to run the F**K away because it's a goddamn DRAGON. Even if you wait long enough for the thing to start breathing fire, you should be okay. The second time they pull the dragon-breathing trick, you can hear the dragon in the distance, and they've already done this before, so again, you shouldn't be fooled. Though the second time I admit it might be easier to miss, since the dragon is off in the distance and once you know it's coming your way, it's too late to get out of the death-zone. But even then, that one is right after a checkpoint, so you don't really lose anything for it.

If anything, I actually applauded this game for the stuff you apparently like in other games. It was very clear, whenever you died, it was your fault, and you almost always immediately knew what you did wrong, and how to not die like that again, though it might take some practice to get it right. The ghouls leaping out to ambush you from right behind a doorway, for example, you should have had your shield up, and been moving in slowly. That's one of the things I like about how there's so few checkpoints: You know its going to be a pain if you die, so you're really, truly *scared* of the monsters you're fighting. Makes it more immersive and real for me. :smallbiggrin:


That would be, in my parlance, swords, blunt swords, thrusty swords, and four kinds of bullet-spitters. As you can see, my dilemma runs deep. :smallbiggrin:

I'm watching a review of Demon's souls... The way they described death, it made me think of Diablo II in Hell difficulty. Only easier, since it's possible to live.

Where does the Halberd fit on your list there? Oh, and go ahead and try to treat a greatsword like you do a falchion or dagger. Tell me how that works out for ya. :smalltongue:

[Inhuman Bot]

You don't really need to argue over if this game is good or not, as we all have opinions.

Unless you're haveing a niggling doubt that you're not haveing as much fun as you're convinceing yourself you are, and the thought won't go away no matter how hard you try to ignore it. :smalltongue:

[Belobog]

Just a note that if you die as a ghost (you know, the part where you're at half health), the game does not keep getting harder if you keep dying. Enemies only get tougher if you die as a human being consecutive times without beating a boss or helping someone else beat a boss...which means you've been doing tons of player killing. Which makes the game harder. 'Cuz you're a jerk.

The only sin in this game is the Swamp. There is no excuse for that.

[chiasaur11]

You know its going to be a pain if you die, so you're really, truly *scared* of the monsters you're fighting. Makes it more immersive and real for me. :smallbiggrin:




Haven't played, so I can't say much, but this bit's interesting.

Most reviews of horror games I've read, along with general recommendations, have said this to not encourage fear. It separates the player from internal "I'm going to die, oh no" responses, and leaves "I'm going to have to play this stupid bit over again, aren't I? Why am I playing this?" emotional responses.

[AgentPaper]

You don't really need to argue over if this game is good or not, as we all have opinions.

Unless you're haveing a niggling doubt that you're not haveing as much fun as you're convinceing yourself you are, and the thought won't go away no matter how hard you try to ignore it. :smalltongue:

No, I have no problem with people not liking the game or even saying it's bad. I only have a problem with people saying it is loaded with fake difficulty, for one, when it's actually one of the best points about the game that it doesn't, or when people blatantly lie about it, such as saying the normal mobs take 5-6 minutes to kill because they have a crapton of health, when most enemies go down in 2-3 hits.


Just a note that if you die as a ghost (you know, the part where you're at half health), the game does not keep getting harder if you keep dying. Enemies only get tougher if you die as a human being consecutive times without beating a boss or helping someone else beat a boss...which means you've been doing tons of player killing. Which makes the game harder. 'Cuz you're a jerk.

The only sin in this game is the Swamp. There is no excuse for that.

Very true, good point. And yes, the Swamp was the one level I just plain didn't like. There was no excuse, but the awesomeness of the Tower of Latria makes up for it, at least. Nothing like staging a level in a prison full of crazed ghouls with mind-flayers as prison-keepers. I especially loved how you could hear the bells of the mind-flayers before you saw them, or a glow in the distance. Creepy. :smallbiggrin:

[Lord of Rapture]

Well, some people obviously do believe it has fake difficulty.

Seeing as we're never going to get the two parties to agree, I suggest we just drop the subject.

[Lord of Rapture]

Haven't played, so I can't say much, but this bit's interesting.

Most reviews of horror games I've read, along with general recommendations, have said this to not encourage fear. It separates the player from internal "I'm going to die, oh no" responses, and leaves "I'm going to have to play this stupid bit over again, aren't I? Why am I playing this?" emotional responses.

QFT. Horror is about the atmosphere, the crushing fear that you're going to die alone and horribly by nightmarishy creatures beyond your understanding. Dying makes you realize it's all fake, and that you're really just an average guy sitting on the couch playing a game.

[AgentPaper]

QFT. Horror is about the atmosphere, the crushing fear that you're going to die alone and horribly by nightmarishy creatures beyond your understanding. Dying makes you realize it's all fake, and that you're really just an average guy sitting on the couch playing a game.

Well, yah, dying always does that. But dying and having real consequences seems like it would make the game more immersive than if you just showed up where you were 10 seconds ago.

[Demented]

Where does the Halberd fit on your list there? Oh, and go ahead and try to treat a greatsword like you do a falchion or dagger. Tell me how that works out for ya. :smalltongue:

Halberd: Why, a sword, of course.
Based on the presumption that you swing or stab it at things. The sword is the most iconic stabbing/swinging weapon... Hence, even a halberd, if it does nothing but swing and stab, is essentially just a sword of a different flavor in game terms.

What IS the difference between a greatsword and a dagger, in Demon's souls?

Conceptually, the former is for hewing your way through lightly armored opponents, while the latter is easily concealed and optimal for close-in stabbing. Though, Demon's Souls' reputation suggests a paucity of lightly armored opponents, and combat appears to allow any weapon the benefit of close-in stabbing if you get behind the intended victim.

[AgentPaper]

Halberd: Why, a sword, of course.
Based on the presumption that you swing or stab it at things. The sword is the most iconic stabbing/swinging weapon... Hence, even a halberd, if it does nothing but swing and stab, is essentially just a sword of a different flavor in game terms.

What IS the difference between a greatsword and a dagger, in Demon's souls?

Conceptually, the former is for hewing your way through lightly armored opponents, while the latter is easily concealed and optimal for close-in stabbing. Though, Demon's Souls' reputation suggests a paucity of lightly armored opponents, and combat appears to allow any weapon the benefit of close-in stabbing if you get behind the intended victim.

Greatsword attacks very slowly, so you have to be careful when you attack, that you don't miss and leave yourself open for a counter. It hits a huge area, making it great for taking out groups, and of course hits like a truck. It takes a lot of endurance, so you have to be careful not to run out. It's also very heavy, so characters without much endurance might have trouble rolling while holding it, and it also requires a good amount of strength just to wield.

The dagger is small, and attacks quickly, making it great for getting behind someone and stabbing them in the back, or for making a counter-attack after parrying their attack. It doesn't hit all that hard, compared to bigger weapons, but the quick attacks makes up for that, and it also uses less stamina per swing. It's also very light, which is nice because then you don't need any extra endurance to wield it and wear armor, while still being able to roll and move as quickly as you can.

The most important differences are the speed of the swing and the area the swing hits, which change the way you go about attacking at a pretty fundamental level. With the dagger you need to get in real close, which means you absolutely need to be able to move in quick and roll out faster, while with the great sword you can hit things from farther away, which means you're not quite so reliant on being fast to stay alive, though you still definitely want to be quick on your feet, at the very least for bosses, because rolling is still your number 1 form of defense.

The size of a dagger also makes it more usable with a shield, and especially a small shield would be useful since you can parry with it, giving you an opening to stab with the dagger. A greatsword, on the other hand, attacks even slower than normally if you use it in one hand, and requires phenomenal strength to use that way, but you can if you want to. And of course if you use it with a heavy shield, that's even more endurance you need to still be able to roll around quickly.

[Lord of Rapture]

Well, yah, dying always does that. But dying and having real consequences seems like it would make the game more immersive than if you just showed up where you were 10 seconds ago.

But's it's just not scary anymore.

[Demented]

The most important differences are the speed of the swing and the area the swing hits, which change the way you go about attacking at a pretty fundamental level.
That's probably the problem. Games feature many weapons that have the same function but rely on a minor difference such as speed or area or damage type as the differentiating factor. It may change your tactics, but at a more fundamental level you're still looking for an opening where you can swing your melee weapon until you break a cranium. There's not a fundamental difference between stabbing or swinging, or making three strikes in place of one.

That said, the difference between using a two-handed sword (or polearm) and a sword-and-board is probably more pronounced, if only due to the functionality of the shield.

You can blame Doom for all of this. Ever since I replayed it, I've noticed that many FPS games have not really been advancing and innovating in gameplay (especially weapons), only reflavoring and refining it. This may also apply to RPGs, but you could also say that they're innovating by increasingly copying aspects of FPS games. :smallbiggrin:

[AgentPaper]

But's it's just not scary anymore.

It is for me. Especially on the Tower of Latria level, which is so dark and spooky just from the atmosphere that it doesn't even matter how many times I die.

And actually, the way dying works in Demon's Souls it doesn't even necessarily break immersion. The most fundamental idea of the game is that your soul is bound to the nexus, and whenever you die you return there. Whenever you die, you just get shunted to the nexus, leaving any un-used souls behind, and then the game skips the part where you walk back to the stone and teleport to the start of the dungeon you were in. Or maybe you just only get drawn back to the archstone and not all the way to the nexus in the first place.

[Milskidasith]

Except you can't. Even against the same enemy in the same level approaching it from the same angle, there are multiple different things it can do. Take, for example, the very first enemy you encounter, a weird ghoul thing. It might lunge at you the moment you see it, in which case you need to sidestep and kill it once it's past you. Or, it might randomly decide to shuffle towards you, in which case you need to either kill it before it attacks, or wait until it attacks, dodge, and then kill it. Enemies DO have a certain amount of randomness to them, so you can't just memorize exactly what you do in each case.

So it's either "Dodge and attack" or "attack from afar because it's not attacking, then dodge and attack?" That's not variety at all. Yes, some enemies have two attacks, or three, or four (I wouldn't count the ghoul as one, seeing as it's lunge, or shuffle then attack, which is basically just a delay in how long it takes ti get attacked). That doesn't mean it's a huge variation; in Assassins Creed, enemies had 20 different animations for their attacks and you could solve all of your problems without tactics (still a fun game, especially 2, just because the free running is fun and, like a previous poster said, the developer intent seems to have been "have fun being an awesome assassin" not "I want you dead."


So, then, what tactics does, for example, Bioshock have that Demon's Souls does not?

Anything regarding the enviornment? You can hack health stations to kill splicers who use them, get up and personal with wrench tonics, set tripwires, light gasoline on fire, shock people, hack the robots sent to attack you, stealth in and turn a camera against the enemies so you don't even have to fire, call in a big daddy with a certain tonic and watch the bloodbath, etc.

In Demon's Souls, I felt like the only real tactics were minor (relatively speaking) differences between weapons, and the choice to attack from ranged or up close.


First of all, don't make me into a strawman by claiming that I'm making you into one. I've been very careful to read everything you've said, admitted you were right on a couple counts, and responded to everything you said in the most clear way I could. And how does fighting a splicer in Bioshock come down to ANYTHING but "Shoot it with weapon of your choice until it falls over"? Heck, even Big Daddies don't have any more strategy than that.

Stand still and shoot a Big Daddy on nightmare. Then revive, and keep shooting it. Unless you've got a fully upgraded shotgun with a lot of electric buckshot (and I mean, the max amount) you aren't going to kill the Big Daddy without getting hit. Sure, you can do it, and if you run around and kite the thing (hard to do, but possible if there is a ledge or something to jump down, or a desk to jump over or something), then you might get away with it, but there are a thousand other options that are safer and more unique.


Again, give me an example. How is fighting a giant troll across a rickety bridge not different from fighting a giant troll on an island in a swamp of goop that will poison you if you stand in it too long?


Because it's not? Don't stand in the dangerous terrain is a fairly simple concept to understand.
c


I only doubted you had played the game after you threw out a blatantly false and ridiculous statement that you admitted yourself was a bald-faed lie.

Strawman again. I exaggerated, yes, but the enemies in this game still hit as hard as bosses in other games, have more HP (to some degree, not as much as I said), but still use the same simplistic "I have two attacks" tactic, but with nothing else to back it up.


There is. That difference it the difference in our opinion. I think that having to fight the boss and a few monsters leading up to him makes the boss more serious. You think it's just tedious. Neither opinion is "right" except to ourselves. I've admitted that your stance is valid, you don't seem to be able to admit that mine is valid as well.


You were the one who has been arguing over this point. I never once said you couldn't enjoy it; I simply said that I didn't enjoy it, yet you continue to attack me by saying I'm wrong.


Yes, and as I said, a pause feature would have been nice. Again, to be fair, the reason they didn't have it is because, when playing with other people online, it really wouldn't be fair to them if you just stopped the game for half an hour to have a chat with your mom. Or to wait out that black phantom until he gets bored and goes away. This doesn't mean they couldn't have added the feature solely to offline mode, but it's not that big a deal. It's perfectly acceptable in any online game, for example World of Warcraft or LfD2, so I don't see why you think it's such an unbearable sin here.

L4D2 has a pause button. The fact this doesn't have a pause button even in offline mode is a pretty terrible thing. Not having it in online mode is OK, I suppose, but I'd rather have it even in online mode, and not just to wait out griefers.


Enemies being in different spots might be nice, actually, but I don't think it would add that much. Terrain already feels very important and game-changing to me. Enemies don't seem very predictable, everything from the beginning mooks to the final boss have somewhat predictable patterns (used long-ranged attack when you're far, shield slam when you're close, PBAOE when you're between his legs, sword slash at mid-range, etc) but there's always a degree of variety, more or less, and you can't say at any moment for 100% sure what the enemy is going to do in the next moment, unless it's halfway through one of it's attacks at the moment.

Terrain feels less important than in Bioshock (which actually does have tough enemies on the hardest difficulty, if you just run and gun), and enemies being in the same spot further reinforces the terrain's unimportance because it begins the same part of rote memory as the enemies attack patterns. Since it's always the same enemies and always the same terrain on the level, it's just more things to memorize.

[AgentPaper]

Okay, I'm done arguing with you. :smallyuk:

[Poison_Fish]

You were strawmanning me because I never said I didn't upgrade the weapons. Also, the 10 hits thing was an exaggeration, but the enemies in this game still have a solid chunk more HP than most games.

I'm going to focus on this point again, they don't have a solid chunk more HP then most games like it. Take most other action games or action RPG's, and I'm pretty sure you'll see that enemies take more then 4 hits to kill and takes either just as long or more. For instance, God of War games, your swinging your blades around like crazy on some enemies at least for 15-30 seconds to bring up your action commands. Infamous, your having to zap or melee certain enemies significantly more then just one or two two handed chops. Now while the complexity of demon's souls leveling and stats is higher then those games, it's ultimately an action RPG. They aren't normal monsters on steroids.

[Lord Seth]

Haven't played, so I can't say much, but this bit's interesting.

Most reviews of horror games I've read, along with general recommendations, have said this to not encourage fear. It separates the player from internal "I'm going to die, oh no" responses, and leaves "I'm going to have to play this stupid bit over again, aren't I? Why am I playing this?" emotional responses.I actually remember that from a pretty interesting article on The Escapist. Here's the article (http://www.escapistmagazine.com/articles/view/columns/experienced-points/6715-You-Dont-Scare-Me) for those interested.

[AgentPaper]

I actually remember that from a pretty interesting article on The Escapist. Here's the article (http://www.escapistmagazine.com/articles/view/columns/experienced-points/6715-You-Dont-Scare-Me) for those interested.

That's a pretty well-written article. I agree with it on all counts. The only thing it doesn't mention is that, while being too difficult can be a problem, being too easy can be just as bad or worse. If you get hit by the enormous claw of a giant monster, and barely take any damage, that kind of disconnect is going to break your immersion just as quickly as if you had died. You definitely need a certain amount of difficulty to be able to have a scary game, or at the very least perceived difficulty, which Demon's Souls has in spades. Of course it varies by person, but for me it's just before the point where it's so hard that you stop being afraid because it's "just a game".

The absolutely terrific (and more often than not terrifying) atmosphere of the game in general helps that a lot too. I'd place it as better than Bioshock, actually, if only because it has more variety in atmosphere than that game does. Don't get me wrong, Bioshock has great atmosphere in it, but even environments that well designed can get old after 4 hours of the same thing. :smalltongue:

[Knaight]

I'm going to focus on this point again, they don't have a solid chunk more HP then most games like it. Take most other action games or action RPG's, and I'm pretty sure you'll see that enemies take more then 4 hits to kill and takes either just as long or more. For instance, God of War games, your swinging your blades around like crazy on some enemies at least for 15-30 seconds to bring up your action commands. Infamous, your having to zap or melee certain enemies significantly more then just one or two two handed chops. Now while the complexity of demon's souls leveling and stats is higher then those games, it's ultimately an action RPG. They aren't normal monsters on steroids.

The God of War games are terrible about that. Look at Legend of Zelda instead, most enemies take a few efficient swings, basically you deal with 1 attack then strike back and they die. Sure, it might take more than 1 strike, but it is just time variation. Bosses are harder.

On another note, the increasing difficulty thing was also seen in a much better game, Galapagos. Basically you screw with the environment to help an AI being escape, and it learns gradually, getting better and better. It also requires thought and strategy. However, on death it basically loads up into a new body, but now has a new phobia or neuroses to make things more difficult for you. Hardly fake difficulty given the premises, and dying has consequences in the long run. Yet it is still a fun game, and requires tactics.

[JabberwockySupafly]

Apologies for my delayed response, been out of town all weekend.


We're trying to have fun. If we don't have fun with a game, it's not us, it's the game.



Are you kidding me? The game rewards patience, sure, because it forces you to restart in a harder version of the game every time you die. It has the same risk versus reward as any other game, the enemies are just tougher (I exaggerated, but they still take more than normal mooks in most games), you get hurt more, and there are more ways to instantly die. Also, any game where you can die 20 times without a chance and then kill the guy with little effort isn't rewarding patience, it's being deliberately obtuse. Sure, it rewards patience to play "Boss McInstagib" 20 times after beating through the same enemies 20 times, but that's not fun.


Okay, so you're complaining about people taking what you're saying out of context and strawmanning you, and then you take what I say out of context?...

If you don't have fun with the game, it's not that the game is bad or isn't fun at all for anyone else ever, it's just not your kind of game. Saying a game is inherently bad simply because you don't like it is bad cricket. You don't like the game? Bully for you, play something else. I can't stand Bayonetta, does that mean it's a bad game? No, it means it's not my style or I just don't care for it. If that game had terrible design flaws, massive game-killing bugs, a terrible story, and poisoned my Beagle while I was at work? Then it would be a bad game, or possibly the Anti-Christ.

Maybe I didn't clarify enough: I died to the Penetrator several times (20 was a gross exaggeration, it was more like 5) because of my own stupidity and impatience, not because the game makes itself harder every time. And it doesn't actually make itself harder by any reasonable amount every time you die unless you die a lot. You're also neglecting to mention things like when you're in Soul Form you have a higher stealth rating so it's easier to sneak attack enemies, which deals more damage, or how you can not only block, but also riposte which is an almost guaranteed One Hit Kill, or how one of the rings gives you 75% max health instead of 50% in Soul Form.

As for enemies dealing crazy damage, that's also not entirely true. Most enemies on par with your level (ie as long as you're not jumping the gun into an area you really shouldn't be yet) deal minimal damage even when you're in Soul Form. As long as you invest a few points into Vitality once in a while you're perfectly fine. The Ghouls in the first level, for example deal maybe 1/5th of your life in damage when you first start out, and that's if you have a rubbish Vit stat and you're in Soul Form. Most of the Soldier mobs deal little more than that.

The mooks do not take more than the average to kill than any other Action RPG I've played, either. When you first start the game? Yes, things take a while to kill because, no real surprise here, you're using starting gear. Upgrade your weapons and suddenly the same ghouls that took 4 hits earlier can be one-shotted. Just like any other game that you can upgrade you gear in, like... say... Bioshock.



Yes, it has fake difficulty. It says it's challenging, but no, it's just a normal action game with prettier graphics, online players who can attempt to kill you (or help you), and much higher enemy damage values (to the point of getting instantly killed, almost, at least by tougher enemies or when they ambush you in groups). You've even admitted there isn't any challenge; once you know what's there, the game is flat out easy. It's just that it takes forever to figure it out because it forces you to play through the same boring enemies every time you die just to get back to the point you haven't memorized.

I never said that it was flat-out easy. Please, show me exactly in my post where I said it was flat-out easy. I didn't put words in your mouth, so please don't put them in mine. I simply said the game can be completed without dying if you're careful. How is that different from any other game in history? One important caveat to this question: "Any Other Game In History" does not include I Wanna Be The Guy. That is not a game, that is a sadistic alien weapon sent from the future to destroy mankind, leaving our planet desolate so they can descend like locusts and strip it of it's most precious resources.



This directly contradicts what you just said about being able to effortlessly defeat bosses and beat through the entire game unscratched after knowing what happens. There's no deep thought involved; you just die to an enemy, know what he does, and then whack him a few times later, and hope you remember what the next enemy does so you can whack away at him.


Again, taking what I said entirely out of context. I said I could effortlessly defeat The Penetrator, I didn't say I walked through the rest of the game with a blindfold on and only a pointed stick. I got my backside handed to me by the very next boss, The False King. I got owned like a franchise until I worked out the proper strategy on defeating him.




Thinly veiled insults, eh? I didn't have trouble beating the game; like you, if you grind through it once or twice (or 20 times) you can know what's going to happen and have no trouble. But after one playthrough, I have more trouble playing L4D2 (on Expert), a game not touted as being amazingly hard, than this, just because at least you can't predict everything ahead of time. That requires some thought, at least.

Thinly veiled insult? No, if I'm going to insult you, I will come right out and insult you to your face, I'm far more honest than that. I was being sincere. I actually hope you don't try playing Monster Hunter because if this game frustrates you so much, Mohan will make you put holes in your wall.

I didn't grind the game. I'm on my third New Game + with only playing through each level once with my initial character. And you really cannot predict everything ahead of time in Demon's Souls, that is serious hyperbole. There is a great deal of randomness to the game in terms of what enemies can do, what events can take place and how the game itself reacts to your actions. A good example of this is fighting a Blue-Eyed Lance Knight, which is an uncommon non-boss enemy. It can react almost exactly like a player would to your attacks. It will wait for openings to attack, and attempts to dodge, block and riposte your attacks if you're too hasty. It will even back off and regroup/heal if it feels too threatened or in danger. It's not a matter of memorising move sets or even locations of monsters (a lot of them wander), it's a matter of knowing how to best react to a given situation and plan ahead of time what your next action will be, which, if memory serves, is called strategy.

Long story short, this is your opinion, and I respect that but I do not agree with it. My opinion is different and while you obviously disagree, I hope you can respect that, but please, please, please stop making it sound like your opinions are factually based in concrete science and we're just plugging our ears whilst shouting "La La La" at the top of our lungs. And whilst I can see how my initial post made it sound like I was trying to do the same, I really wasn't. I just happened to have posted it at a time when I wasn't in the position to elaborate as extensively as I have now. Apologies if you believe I was being blindly zealous, because I really was not.

[Milskidasith]

If you don't have fun with the game, it's not that the game is bad or isn't fun at all for anyone else ever, it's just not your kind of game. Saying a game is inherently bad simply because you don't like it is bad cricket. You don't like the game? Bully for you, play something else. I can't stand Bayonetta, does that mean it's a bad game? No, it means it's not my style or I just don't care for it. If that game had terrible design flaws, massive game-killing bugs, a terrible story, and poisoned my Beagle while I was at work? Then it would be a bad game, or possibly the Anti-Christ.

The game does have design flaws, and it was advertised as something it's not. Those are both reasons to consider it a bad game. Yes, I don't like it. Yes, some people do like it. Does that mean I have to think it's a good game? No, for the same reason you don't have to think that it's a bad game because I don't like it.


Maybe I didn't clarify enough: I died to the Penetrator several times (20 was a gross exaggeration, it was more like 5) because of my own stupidity and impatience, not because the game makes itself harder every time. And it doesn't actually make itself harder by any reasonable amount every time you die unless you die a lot. You're also neglecting to mention things like when you're in Soul Form you have a higher stealth rating so it's easier to sneak attack enemies, which deals more damage, or how you can not only block, but also riposte which is an almost guaranteed One Hit Kill, or how one of the rings gives you 75% max health instead of 50% in Soul Form.


Yes, there are a bunch of things I didn't mention. That doesn't change the problem I pointed out: You die to something until you figure out the strategy, and then it's a cakewalk. You pointed this out yourself.


As for enemies dealing crazy damage, that's also not entirely true. Most enemies on par with your level (ie as long as you're not jumping the gun into an area you really shouldn't be yet) deal minimal damage even when you're in Soul Form. As long as you invest a few points into Vitality once in a while you're perfectly fine. The Ghouls in the first level, for example deal maybe 1/5th of your life in damage when you first start out, and that's if you have a rubbish Vit stat and you're in Soul Form. Most of the Soldier mobs deal little more than that.

Mobs tended to deal a lot more than that; I am fairy sure you are underexaggerating a lot.


The mooks do not take more than the average to kill than any other Action RPG I've played, either. When you first start the game? Yes, things take a while to kill because, no real surprise here, you're using starting gear. Upgrade your weapons and suddenly the same ghouls that took 4 hits earlier can be one-shotted. Just like any other game that you can upgrade you gear in, like... say... Bioshock.

Yes, and? You can curbstomp lower level enemies with high level gear, whee. That's like saying MMOs aren't grindy because you can curbstomp level 1 mobs at level 80. Anyway, again, look at the Legend of Zelda: enemies (non bosses, anyway) take one or two hits and can be moved and dodged around. They are great action games, and the enemies in those games are almost always able to be one-shotted.


I never said that it was flat-out easy. Please, show me exactly in my post where I said it was flat-out easy. I didn't put words in your mouth, so please don't put them in mine. I simply said the game can be completed without dying if you're careful. How is that different from any other game in history? One important caveat to this question: "Any Other Game In History" does not include I Wanna Be The Guy. That is not a game, that is a sadistic alien weapon sent from the future to destroy mankind, leaving our planet desolate so they can descend like locusts and strip it of it's most precious resources.

Beating through it without dying is generally a sign that the game doesn't present that much of a challenge, at least once you know everything's tricks.


Again, taking what I said entirely out of context. I said I could effortlessly defeat The Penetrator, I didn't say I walked through the rest of the game with a blindfold on and only a pointed stick. I got my backside handed to me by the very next boss, The False King. I got owned like a franchise until I worked out the proper strategy on defeating him.

This is exactly the problem I was pointing out... you get owned by the bosses, then once you know the strategy, they are cakewalks.


Thinly veiled insult? No, if I'm going to insult you, I will come right out and insult you to your face, I'm far more honest than that. I was being sincere. I actually hope you don't try playing Monster Hunter because if this game frustrates you so much, Mohan will make you put holes in your wall.

Sincerely telling somebody not to play a game because you don't think they could handle it, when that game has no relation to the discussion, is an insult. Don't try to deny that.


I didn't grind the game. I'm on my third New Game + with only playing through each level once with my initial character. And you really cannot predict everything ahead of time in Demon's Souls, that is serious hyperbole. There is a great deal of randomness to the game in terms of what enemies can do, what events can take place and how the game itself reacts to your actions. A good example of this is fighting a Blue-Eyed Lance Knight, which is an uncommon non-boss enemy. It can react almost exactly like a player would to your attacks. It will wait for openings to attack, and attempts to dodge, block and riposte your attacks if you're too hasty. It will even back off and regroup/heal if it feels too threatened or in danger. It's not a matter of memorising move sets or even locations of monsters (a lot of them wander), it's a matter of knowing how to best react to a given situation and plan ahead of time what your next action will be, which, if memory serves, is called strategy.

Excluding certain rare enemies (The Lance Knight), every enemy in the game is so repetitive once you've killed one, you can kill all of them, excluding massive changes in terrain or getting mobbed up.


Long story short, this is your opinion, and I respect that but I do not agree with it. My opinion is different and while you obviously disagree, I hope you can respect that, but please, please, please stop making it sound like your opinions are factually based in concrete science and we're just plugging our ears whilst shouting "La La La" at the top of our lungs. And whilst I can see how my initial post made it sound like I was trying to do the same, I really wasn't. I just happened to have posted it at a time when I wasn't in the position to elaborate as extensively as I have now. Apologies if you believe I was being blindly zealous, because I really was not.

Please, please do not assume I don't understand your opinions. I know they are opinions. However, you are the one who seems to believe that I have to think the game is good because you like it (See: the first paragraph I quoted), whereas the horror that having me believe the game is bad is obviously untrue (see: the first paragraph, again.)

[JabberwockySupafly]

I had this large, lengthy response to your post, but in all honesty, I'm tired of trying to reason with someone who refuses to be reasonable. You complain about people strawmanning you and taking what you say out of context, yet you continullay do so yourself. Im just going to address the recurring themes in your posts.

You complain about enemies taking forever to kill, yet you neglect to mention that by sneak attacking and riposting (counterattack after a good block-blash) you can one-shot any non-boss in the game, which is quite like Zelda, the game you keep referring to in your posts in terms of combat.

You complain you can't run past or dodge enemies, when in fact there are items specifically designed for that express purpose. In soul form wearing a sneak ring you can run past an entire level of enemies with few if any taking notice, for example. And those who take notice will generally stop giving chase after a brief few seconds. You also get this ring, along with one that boosts your maximum health in soul form to 75%, on the first level.

You complain about repetitive enemies and the game being a cakewalk after figuring out the strategy to beat them, but fail to realise, or at least admit, that is kind of the point to strategy. Once you figure out the strategy to any boss in an action-oriented game, be it God of War, Zelda, Soul Reaver, Dark Siders and so on you're meant to have an eaiser time with it. That's the point to strategy in games like these. Play through any Zelda again after beating it, and guess what? The boss is going to require the same strategy. In subsequent playthroughs of Demon's Souls, the bosses change their tactics.

I'm just going to leave it at this. Reply all you like to this post, I'm done trying to debate something that you clearly believe so fiercely as to ignore all common sense and reasonable argument.

I never said the game was the greatest, I never said you had to like it because I think it's good. I simply said it was fun for myself and others. Simply because you don't like it doesn't mean it is an inherently bad game.

One last thing, though: Simply because you don't like a feature of a game doesn't make it a flawed design. I have played through this game numerous times as I have stated previously and haven't seen a design flaw. I haven't read any reviews, be they professional or player-made, that state this game suffers from some massive design flaw either. So, unless you can reveal these flaws you feel are present, that aren't simply mechanics you don't care for, I'm afraid that I have to disagree with that point.

[AgentPaper]

@Milskidasith
The main problem seems to be that you think we're trying to convince you that you should like the game, which we aren't. I, for one, couldn't care less whether you liked the game, and if you'd just come in here and said "I think this is a terrible game and didn't like it" then I wouldn't have given it a second thought. But when you start to lie about things to make the game sound bad, or declare things you don't care for as obvious flaws and obviously the work of douchebag programmers who want to frustrate you, then I start to have issues with what you're saying.

How you you like it if, for example, I went into a thread about bioshock and said, "I found it was a terrible game, because you never get any ammunition for any of your guns. for 95% of the game, I was without ammunition for my weapons and was forced to use my wrench. It also had HUGE design flaws, for example you were forced to fight against all the monsters, and couldn't negotiate with them peacefully." Would you feel the need to point out how you have plenty of ammo provided, to the point where you have more than you could ever really use by the end of the game? Would you want to point out that being able to negotiate with the splicers would actually negatively impact the game?

[valadil]

Sorry for bringing up an old thread. I didn't think it was necromancy since the last post is (barely) less than a month old.

I finally got Demon's Souls and I'm loving it. I'm a little disatisfied with this thread, but whatever. The game is hard and frustrating, but in a good way. Once I've been killed by something I don't get killed that way again. Repeating the levels can be obnoxious, but I've gained skill for having done so. Yes, you can use the same tactics over and over, but why would you? My first time through 1-1 I blocked and then struck. That was inefficient so I went for the parry-riposte instead. Worked well until I got to enemies with more reach than me, so I started using R2 for a lunge. Still blocked a lot, but the lunge worked great. Once I got up the blue knight blocking didn't work so well anymore so I tried dodging rather than blocking. Once I could beat him down without getting hit I finished the rest of 1-1 using all those techniques at once. For 1-2 I experimented with different weapons. As long as I have a new weapon to learn, "grinding" through a level again still has something new for me to do.




The fire-breathing dragon did kinda come outta the blue, but I don't see how you could die to it unless you're not paying attention.

I actually liked getting burnt up by the dragon. I'm so used to games (and this goes for tabletop too) where everything you encounter is beatable. I knew Demon's Souls was hard, but when I saw the dragons I figured they were either NPCs or were beatable. Why else would the developer put them in? Getting roasted in one shot taught me that this is a game where it's okay to run away. You're not expected to fight everything.

With regard to running into a cruel developers traps, most of those traps are avoidable if you're cautious. It's something the game rewards. On my first attempt through 1-2 I got all the way to the last blue knight. There were plenty of ambushes, there was a dragon roasting the only path, and there were new enemies. Going slowly and observing the level let me avoid all those hazards no problem.

I think that's what I like about this game. It rewards caution. Everytime I edge around a corner instead of running into the room, I'm rewarded for it. I feel like I've outsmarted the game each time I avoid a trap, especially if it's one I haven't seen before.