|
Vavrek posted:the 60fps recording was quite nice for the one episode in which we got to see it YouTube's supported 60fps videos for a while now...?
|
#
?
May 24, 2016 21:25
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 11, 2024 10:04 |
|
|
Laputanmachine posted:In DS3 you get 30% max health penalty from dying once. It actually isn't that bad and the game showers you with embers (aka human effigies) so unless you're incredibly bad and always use an ember immediately after dying and then die again, you should be fine. Of course, there are the co-op/pvp options on top of that all. You can see it as a penalty, but the way it's presented makes it feel more like you have a 30% bonus to HP when in "Human" form. It's a psychological thing that makes it feel less punishing than the HP penalty from this game and even Demon's Souls. MiniFoo posted:YouTube's supported 60fps videos for a while now...? Does Firefox do 60fps yet? Because if not, then it's pretty much Chrome only.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2016 21:31
|
|
|
ChaosArgate posted:You can see it as a penalty, but the way it's presented makes it feel more like you have a 30% bonus to HP when in "Human" form. It's a psychological thing that makes it feel less punishing than the HP penalty from this game and even Demon's Souls. Oh no, I might have to install an extension that adds an "Open In Chrome" option to my right click menu. Youtube is basically the only reliable, reasonable unencumbered video host on the internet. It's already a lot of work to record and edit an LP, there's no reason for Geop to go out of his way to spend more time and money so a couple hundred people can hoard copies of a video LP for the rest of time.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2016 21:40
|
|
|
ChaosArgate posted:Does Firefox do 60fps yet? Because if not, then it's pretty much Chrome only. I believe it has for some time now, actually. I remember the first while when Youtube introduced 60fps video it didn't work and had a lot of stutter in firefox. But I am pretty sure it works now. Laputanmachine posted:In DS3 you get 30% max health penalty from dying once. It actually isn't that bad and the game showers you with embers (aka human effigies) so unless you're incredibly bad and always use an ember immediately after dying and then die again, you should be fine. Of course, there are the co-op/pvp options on top of that all. It's basically a similar case to Demon's Souls. And in both cases (as far as I can tell) both games are balanced around your minimum health value rather than your Ember/Physical health value. Honestly it's better to think of "full health" as the lower Ashen/Soul health and the increased health as a bonus instead. Unlike Dark Souls 2 where enemy damage is balanced around your max health so eventually getting down to half your full health pool is extremely punishing and terrible because enemies will blow through the whole thing in like two hits. Oh, and fall damage is a linear absolute value and doesn't care how much less max health you have when hollowed. Because Dark Souls 2. MGlBlaze fucked around with this message at 22:01 on May 24, 2016 |
|
#
?
May 24, 2016 21:58
|
|
|
DS3's case is absolutely a 30% bonus to HP while embered, and it does feel like a bonus because your normal HP will almost always be enough. It's not like Demon's Souls or DS2 where the lost health is always there, taunting you, and you feel like you've been reduced to paper without it.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2016 21:59
|
|
|
That's actually a good point. Though for Demon's Souls' case it tends to make your reduced health feel more punishing than it is. Then again I suppose you're also sort of goaded into using the Cling Ring all the time too as a result, which eats one of your two ring slots, even if your 'half health' state is also usually enough. It might have been better if Demon's Souls didn't show your health as being half of the health bar.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2016 22:05
|
|
|
DS3 felt more punishing but then again in DS2 even in the base game my first time through I almost never was more than at 90% of my max hp. I missed being invaded while hollow too.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2016 22:07
|
|
|
I think DeS has a huge justification in all the stuff that was built around the body form/soul form status; not even Dark Souls (1)'s Humanity bonuses were close to as involved. At least from the stuff I gathered, haven't yet been able to play DeS. They really wanted helping/invading people be a Big Deal because it could give you your body back, and in order for that to be enticing, the penalty needed to be huge. Additionally, the whole world tendency thing depends heavily on dying - or not - in body form, another huge "don't you loving dare lose your body" incentive. Or even "do get it back but then die immediately to trigger Dark world tendency". Death has never mattered more than in DeS, and I think that's mostly due to the fact that they wanted to push their admittedly incredibly inventive online systems. I mean, world tendency is also an online thing, after all (with global shifts and such).
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2016 22:11
|
|
|
Everything does way too much damage in DS3 so I have no idea where anyone could get the impression that it's balanced around not being embered up. 2 feels like it hits a sweet spot, like with Demon's Souls, where it's more like you're supposed to be around 75% health, so basically Soul/Maximum Hollow Form but with the Cling Ring/Ring of Binding. DS2 is a little more forgiving because you aren't forced into that 50/75% range immediately, so the Ring of Binding is more of a last resort thing for when you pass that threshold.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2016 22:13
|
|
|
"Feels right" depends very, very heavily on if you are the kind of guy who treats Vigor like a dump stat or someone who doesn't leave Firelink without at least 30 points in it, and a bunch of other factors. Shield user yes/no? Did you know about Adaptability in DS2? Did you even, like me, change grudgingly away from "low vigor but greatshield" in DS1 to "I guess hitting the vigor softcap midgame DOES make things easier" in DS3? It's honestly kind of a moot argument.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2016 22:19
|
|
|
I hated the World Tendency system, personally. Especially because it reset to +1 White every time you turned the game off unless it was a special event, which was infuriating. Pure Black you could get by using stones of Ephemeral Eyes and suicide a bunch, but white world tendency was a whole lot harder to get. I think the only things that pushed World Tendency to white were killing bosses (limited supply) and I think maybe killing an invading black phantom? There were killing pure-black specific NPCs but the problem there is that it requires you to already be in pure black world tendency. I mean it had its moments, but it generally just put up a pretty annoying barrier to getting and/or seeing everything. MGlBlaze fucked around with this message at 22:23 on May 24, 2016 |
|
#
?
May 24, 2016 22:21
|
|
|
What most people also either forget or didn't know, Soul form it Demon's Souls had advantages dependent on character and world tendency. At pure white world and character tendency you did 40% more damage. In ng+ and further I often preferred to be in soul form only to kill everything faster.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2016 22:23
|
|
|
Why are you guys talking about Dark Souls 3 mechanics in this, a blind spoiler-free Dark Souls 2 LP
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2016 22:23
|
|
|
DS2 would generally give you a decent amount of Human Effigies up front, and that's before considering that Scholar significantly buffed the rate at which they were being handed out as treasure. And if you're new to the game, then you can generally just ration them out to be used when the penalties get too severe. In addition, DS2 has your health pool (regardless of hollowing level) scale pretty quickly, what with easier access to levels* and each level not in Vigor still giving a bit more maximum health. For the hell of it I decided to make a new character just a few days ago on original DS2, and even with low investment in Vigor I still have a decent pool of health when proceeding into the latter portion of the base game. *Every Souls game except DS2 has used the same fast-scaling cubic formula to determine level costs, such that the soft cap for your level before grinding costs become prohibitive (even despite stacking buffs to increase souls gained) is somewhere in the low 200s. DS2 instead uses a slow-scaling exponential formula with which grinding costs become prohibitive perhaps somewhere in the 500s to 700s. (Of course Geop has almost certainly noticed the different leveling costs already!) @Mighty Dicktron: Isn't that a bit of a spoiler at this point, or did I miss that in the videos? NGDBSS fucked around with this message at 22:26 on May 24, 2016 |
|
#
?
May 24, 2016 22:24
|
|
|
Junkozeyne posted:What most people also either forget or didn't know, Soul form it Demon's Souls had advantages dependent on character and world tendency. At pure white world and character tendency you did 40% more damage. In ng+ and further I often preferred to be in soul form only to kill everything faster. Edit; I am dumb and didn't notice character tendency also affected damage. MGlBlaze fucked around with this message at 22:28 on May 24, 2016 |
|
#
?
May 24, 2016 22:25
|
|
|
MGlBlaze posted:I hated the World Tendency system, personally. Especially because it reset to +1 White every time you turned the game off unless it was a special event, which was infuriating. Pure Black you could get by using stones of Ephemeral Eyes and suicide a bunch, but white world tendency was a whole lot harder to get. I think the only things that pushed World Tendency to white were killing bosses (limited supply) and I think maybe killing an invading black phantom? Junkozeyne posted:What most people also either forget or didn't know, Soul form it Demon's Souls had advantages dependent on character and world tendency. At pure white world and character tendency you did 40% more damage. In ng+ and further I often preferred to be in soul form only to kill everything faster.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2016 22:28
|
|
|
JT Jag posted:Why are you guys talking about Dark Souls 3 mechanics in this, a blind spoiler-free Dark Souls 2 LP Because this is a Geop thread, and nothing's ever on-topic.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2016 22:30
|
|
|
MiniFoo posted:Because this is a Geop thread, and nothing's ever on-topic. Never mind the note in the op telling people not to talk about it. It is the first sentence in it and it's not very hard to not talk about a thing. I liked this thread better when I could argue like an idiot over durability and other things I liked, disliked about Dark Souls II, the video game this thread is dedicated to instead of constantly having it locked because of various reasons. Like... maybe talking about Dark Souls III despite a very clear line from the op? Hell, knowing this thread it will be locked due to people talking about talking about Dark Souls III IGgy IGsen fucked around with this message at 22:48 on May 24, 2016 |
|
#
?
May 24, 2016 22:42
|
|
|
JT Jag posted:Why are you guys talking about Dark Souls 3 mechanics in this, a blind spoiler-free Dark Souls 2 LP They're afraid of the dark souls 3 topic I guess.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2016 22:45
|
|
|
So Souls games have always had the difficulty curve somewhat backwards, where being better at the game makes it easier, and dying a lot actively punishes you. Everything should just adopt the God Hand dynamic difficulty system IMO so the game kicks your rear end exactly as much as possible at all times without actually brickwalling your progress  Laputanmachine posted:Also when I think of a possible underwater area in the From Software Game, I think of the dam level in TMNT, but in 3rd person 3D. Now that I think about it NES TMNT was pretty much the Dark Souls of its day. Non-linear stages, multiple paths, semi-perma-death and retarded difficulty unless you already knew where to go and what to do. I probably couldn't do it now but when I was 11 I had the critical path to each bomb memorized and could blow through that stage without breaking a sweat  The next stage, with the turtle van, that was some Blighttown poo poo level of 'getting lost and dying your first time through'.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2016 22:56
|
|
|
Takes No Damage posted:So Souls games have always had the difficulty curve somewhat backwards, where being better at the game makes it easier, and dying a lot actively punishes you. Everything should just adopt the God Hand dynamic difficulty system IMO so the game kicks your rear end exactly as much as possible at all times without actually brickwalling your progress : Gonna have to disagree with this since God Hand really did that since the entire games design is a straight line with dudes to fight, while Dark Souls is basically Symphony of the Night in 3d where if you get smashed by an enemy in one hit, alarm bells should go off telling you that maybe you should go down another route. Well for the most part anyway.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2016 23:17
|
|
|
I think my main complaint with Dark Souls would be alleviated if I didn't lose all my goddamn souls on death. Because nothing turns me off to a game faster than when I've played for a half hour and then died and lost all my goddamn progress forever. I've been playing Dark Souls for years and I've never beat any of them and probably never will, because apparently "getting good" at the game is beyond me.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2016 23:51
|
|
|
You aren't really supposed to feel comfortable carrying 10,000 souls or whatever around. Once you get to that point it's a sign to go back and spend them on something.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2016 00:14
|
|
|
^^^ Yeah not caring about souls is just something you have to learn to accept in these games, if losing them bothers you every time then the games would be constantly annoying. Although one of my greatest DS experiences was beating the Gaping Dragon, then trying to run back up to the bonfire to level up. Think this was during my very first game so I got lost and fell down one of those holes into a basalisk nest and got cursed. Losing 30somethingTHOUSAND souls felt like a huge deal at the time, so I was sweating bullets as I painstakingly crawled back through the sewer at 50% health praying to find a path down to wherever my souls dropped. I eventually did find them and make it back upstairs, I don't know if I would call it a fun time but it sure as hell was memorable  Fabulousvillain posted:Gonna have to disagree with this since God Hand really did that since the entire games design is a straight line with dudes to fight, while Dark Souls is basically Symphony of the Night in 3d where if you get smashed by an enemy in one hit, alarm bells should go off telling you that maybe you should go down another route. Well for the most part anyway. Right I didn't mean exactly the same where everything gets weaker when you die a lot, but something like if you're kicking rear end then your max HP starts to drop but enemies drop more souls/loot or something, and if you start getting stomped then your health fills back up but you lose the 'bonus' drops. That would at least help maintain some kind of risk/reward dynamic to fighting the same dudes over and over. The system they use now makes sense with the lore of the world but as a gameplay mechanic I feel it could be improved. Basically what some people have already mentioned, don't punish me for dying, instead reward me for living. edit: I forgot, in DS2 there's even a way to cheese dropping your souls on death, unless they changed it in SotFS. So if anything DS2 should be the one you can push through. Takes No Damage fucked around with this message at 00:17 on May 25, 2016 |
|
#
?
May 25, 2016 00:15
|
|
|
Takes No Damage posted:^^^ Yeah not caring about souls is just something you have to learn to accept in these games, if losing them bothers you every time then the games would be constantly annoying. Although one of my greatest DS experiences was beating the Gaping Dragon, then trying to run back up to the bonfire to level up. Think this was during my very first game so I got lost and fell down one of those holes into a basalisk nest and got cursed. Losing 30somethingTHOUSAND souls felt like a huge deal at the time, so I was sweating bullets as I painstakingly crawled back through the sewer at 50% health praying to find a path down to wherever my souls dropped. I eventually did find them and make it back upstairs, I don't know if I would call it a fun time but it sure as hell was memorable Also, that edit is the definition of a Dark Souls 2 spoiler, btw
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2016 00:19
|
|
|
Well the problem for me isn't losing massive amounts of souls, it's hemorrhaging a couple grand over and over again because I never seem to get appreciably better at the game. Over time that all adds up.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2016 00:22
|
|
|
Alt+F4 on death isn't a dark souls 2 spoiler.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2016 00:23
|
|
|
Anyways here's the late game item in dark souls 2 that I really hate, and what it does, and where to get it, and the moveset of the boss you have to beat to access it:
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2016 00:24
|
|
|
I actually kind of enjoy how tense it can get carrying several thousand souls in new areas knowing I can lose everything in about a second if don't stay completely aware. It's me I'm that guy.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2016 00:30
|
|
|
The further you play thru a Dark Souls, the less you care about losing souls. So you've lost a couple thousand souls? So what; the next boss can be beaten at level 1, and once you're past him, the next area will turn your couple grands worth of souls into chump change. You'll get it back without even trying.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2016 01:20
|
|
|
Eh it was only a few hundred thousand souls.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2016 01:22
|
|
|
Gimbal lock posted:The further you play thru a Dark Souls, the less you care about losing souls. So you've lost a couple thousand souls? So what; the next boss can be beaten at level 1, and once you're past him, the next area will turn your couple grands worth of souls into chump change. You'll get it back without even trying. This has not been my experience with DS1. I'm currently stalled at the Duke's Archives for like the third playthrough working towards my second lord soul and it's not getting any easier. Never beaten the game yet.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2016 02:35
|
|
|
100 HOGS AGREE posted:This has not been my experience with DS1. I'm currently stalled at the Duke's Archives for like the third playthrough working towards my second lord soul and it's not getting any easier. Never beaten the game yet. To be fair the point of the game is that the game is suppose to be fairly difficult throughout. If it got easier toward the end, that'd kind of take away from that point. I'm not saying you aren't wrong for not liking certain aspects of the game, though; Dark Souls is very much a game that isn't for everyone. If you're having a lot of trouble getting souls, one thing I could recommend is white soap stoning - you get souls from everything you or the host kills (including bosses!), and if you die you lose nothing and get to keep all of your souls. The only issue is that I'm not sure if DS1's mp is very active anymore, but DS2 clearly still has a player base so who knows?
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2016 03:14
|
|
|
I've intentionally gotten my souls lost before so they wouldn't distract me during a super fun fight
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2016 03:27
|
|
|
Although really after you get over the first difficulty hurdle in Dark Souls, it tends to get easier, not because the gameplay has gotten easier (and later in the game it does get more difficult) because you get used to the Dark Souls way of playing. You get familiar with the physicality of your character, know how to observe the movements and actions of enemies to learn how to deal with them, and you become familiar with how to evaluate the layout of a landscape and when to expect an ambush. You learn how to Dark Souls, rather than the particular levels. That's why when I first played Dark Souls, I rage quit a few times, thinking it was downright impossible for me, and my progress was generally slow. Then in Dark Souls II and III, I moved through the games a lot faster and with a lot more confidence. Dark Souls becomes a state of mind, so to speak.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2016 03:28
|
|
|
Takes No Damage posted:^^^ Has a Souls game ever had an underwater area? Can no one at FROM swim? People who semi-glitch speedrun DS1 have found a way to run through New Londo without de-flooding it, so kinda?
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2016 05:37
|
|
|
Takes No Damage posted:So Souls games have always had the difficulty curve somewhat backwards, where being better at the game makes it easier, and dying a lot actively punishes you. Everything should just adopt the God Hand dynamic difficulty system IMO so the game kicks your rear end exactly as much as possible at all times without actually brickwalling your progress I haven't put a lot of thought into this as far as Dark Souls goes, but I kind of love games where being very good leads to exponential benefits for the player. I can't think of many, but say, Ninja Gaiden on XBOX. If you were good enough to kill tons of bad guys without being hit, you could basically multiply the amount of [souls equivalent] you got, and therefore could level up everything more quickly. In Onimusha games, if you knew the exact timing, you could 1-shot any enemy basically, and kill bosses in seconds - those kills giving you more [souls]. Godhand was similar. It made it harder, but being better at the game yielded more power for you. I love games like that. Probably most Platinum games too. Godhand was made by those guys, right? You get the idea...
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2016 06:03
|
|
|
Nihilarian posted:I've intentionally gotten my souls lost before so they wouldn't distract me during a super fun fight Wouldn't it have been easier to just buy all the titanite you could afford?
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2016 06:39
|
|
|
100 HOGS AGREE posted:I think my main complaint with Dark Souls would be alleviated if I didn't lose all my goddamn souls on death. Because nothing turns me off to a game faster than when I've played for a half hour and then died and lost all my goddamn progress forever. You do know you can still get those souls back by going where you died and touching your bloodstain? Those situations are where the game really becomes alive, when you've died in some really distant place surrounded by monsters and there's a couple of hundred thousand souls there because hubris and you try to figure out how to get there and possibly get back as well. (Homeward boning is for wimps  )
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2016 07:16
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 11, 2024 10:04 |
|
|
Laputanmachine posted:You do know you can still get those souls back by going where you died and touching your bloodstain? Counterpoint: Losing all your souls because while on your way back to pick them up you die in some stupid manner, such as missing an easy jump or dying to an enemy you have breezed past because it manages to nick you with a grab attack you never knew it had because you have always dodged it previously can be extremely frustrating.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2016 07:36
|
|
