|
Klaus Kinski posted:I really don't think making the bosses, which are the main roadblocks of any souls game, easier would be erasing the point of the game. Summoning already makes boss fights (a lot) easier though. There can be issues with getting a summon (a player new to the series isn't going to be flush with Humanity in DS1), but it's probably the one area of the series where the player can actually control the difficulty.
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2016 00:47
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 30, 2024 16:21 |
|
|
I can't see the letters VVVVVV without thinking of that one Shiny Thing that was unbelievably aggravating
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2016 00:47
|
|
|
Ciaphas posted:I can't see the letters VVVVVV without thinking of that one Shiny Thing that was unbelievably aggravating Doing things the hard way?
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2016 00:48
|
|
|
Klaus Kinski posted:What? DS combat system isn't advanced at all and an easy mode where you don't get 3 shot by every boss past the early stages would make the game appeal to more players. i think 3 is the only one where you really get into 3 shot and dead issues and even then its really not often. the boss fights though are all about the combat system, much like the rest of the game. the boss fights and how hard they are rests entirely on how good you are at the combat, and so to change that balance what you really have to do is change the combat system. health and damage changes wont really help unless they are to the point where you are able to take ridiculous amounts of damage or can kill bosses in 4 hits.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2016 00:49
|
|
|
I spent 30 minutes getting the doing things the hard way trinket and it literally made me a better person
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2016 00:49
|
|
|
Can't remember the name, it was the one with the five or six screen vertical jump with spikes everywhere I know it was just a memorization thing but god that infuriated me like nothing else
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2016 00:49
|
|
|
Klaus Kinski posted:I really don't think making the bosses, which are the main roadblocks of any souls game, easier would be erasing the point of the game. You say this but I think DS2 would have been greatly improved by cutting a ton of superfluous and trivial bosses.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2016 00:50
|
|
|
Klaus Kinski posted:I really don't think making the bosses, which are the main roadblocks of any souls game, easier would be erasing the point of the game. the boss fights are the highlights of the game idgi
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2016 00:51
|
|
|
Phantasium posted:You say this but I think DS2 would have been greatly improved by cutting a ton of superfluous and trivial bosses. Post your DS2 hours played. ^^: Well, yes. But so are they in Gears of War etc, where they are not a difficulty spike compared to the rest of the game?
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2016 00:52
|
|
|
Klaus Kinski posted:Post your DS2 hours played. As a joke I looked up my stats on Steam and lol the top three games are just DS1, DS3, and then DS2. And no, they're not crazy hours (68,49,49) as I rarely play games more than once anymore. I think I started a new playthrough of DS1 though at some point, no idea where that was.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2016 00:54
|
|
|
Phantasium posted:As a joke I looked up my stats on Steam and lol the top three games are just DS1, DS3, and then DS2. That's still multiple replays of relatively short games.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2016 00:56
|
|
|
Klaus Kinski posted:Post your DS2 hours played. i think there are some bosses which are difficulty spikes in some of the games. i also think there are some areas that are difficulty spikes in some of the games. i dont think bosses are as a general rule a difficulty spike. at all.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2016 00:57
|
|
|
The boss fights in ds3 really do skirt the line between fun and a loving muscle memory slog. Pointiff, dancer, twins, nk, too many mega aggressive bosses with endless combos. Once you get them down they're fun but sheesh I say this a a seasoned veteran of the series/superior human being
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2016 00:58
|
|
|
n/m
Phantasium fucked around with this message at 01:17 on Dec 30, 2016 |
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2016 00:59
|
|
|
Stux posted:i think there are some bosses which are difficulty spikes in some of the games. i also think there are some areas that are difficulty spikes in some of the games. i dont think bosses are as a general rule a difficulty spike. at all. From personal anecdotes and casual googling/forum reading, I'm pretty sure bosses are where most people get stuck. Not necessarily bosses themselves, but the tedious loving corpserun on alot of them. DMC3 was really loving dumb when you had to replay they entire stage when you lost to the boss, the SE fixed that and it's generally considered the best DMCBAYONETTA ever.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2016 01:00
|
|
|
Klaus Kinski posted:That's still multiple replays of relatively short games. They're only "short" in the sense that people can speed run them in a matter of hours (or less). Taking 40-60 hours to play through any of them for the first time is the average.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2016 01:00
|
|
|
Doctor Spaceman posted:They're only "short" in the sense that people can speed run them in a matter of hours (or less). No, people do not take 40-60 hours to play through DS 1, 2 or 3 on average.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2016 01:01
|
|
|
Klaus Kinski posted:No, people do not take 40-60 hours to play through DS 1, 2 or 3 on average. http://howlongtobeat.com/game.php?id=2224
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2016 01:03
|
|
|
If you say so.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2016 01:03
|
|
|
Klaus Kinski posted:No, people do not take 40-60 hours to play through DS 1, 2 or 3 on average. https://howlongtobeat.com/game.php?id=2224 https://howlongtobeat.com/game.php?id=2225 https://howlongtobeat.com/game.php?id=26803 Are you sure? DS3 is the shortest one and it still averages at 30.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2016 01:03
|
|
|
I think I'm near as damnit up to a thousand hours between Path of Exile and Final Fantasy 14 I need help
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2016 01:03
|
|
|
Klaus Kinski posted:No, people do not take 40-60 hours to play through DS 1, 2 or 3 on average. Yeah they do.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2016 01:04
|
|
|
Now, if you want something to really laugh at, the game with the next most hours on my list is Lords of Shadow 2. It was bad but I liked it for some reason, idk.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2016 01:05
|
|
|
Klaus Kinski posted:From personal anecdotes and casual googling/forum reading, I'm pretty sure bosses are where most people get stuck. that great but dark souls isnt a DMC style game
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2016 01:11
|
|
|
Klaus Kinski posted:No, people do not take 40-60 hours to play through DS 1, 2 or 3 on average. lol
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2016 01:11
|
|
|
Stux posted:i just dont think its a feasible request without making an almost parallel game where the controls and combat are entirely different, and i think any easy mode wouldnt actually be any help to getting to the point of playing the game normally because it would need such huge changes to be viable. it's like desert solitaire
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2016 01:26
|
|
|
People using howlongtobeat to prove a point. Site in question says 15 hours for doom 2016 
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2016 01:38
|
|
|
It's a self reporting website
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2016 01:38
|
|
|
Klaus Kinski posted:No, people do not take 40-60 hours to play through DS 1, 2 or 3 on average. I takes me about 60 hours to beat each soulsgame the first time, and I'm a reasonably veteran soulsgamer. Subsequent runs take a lot less.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2016 01:39
|
|
|
Klaus Kinski posted:People using howlongtobeat to prove a point. Site in question says 15 hours for doom 2016 I spent about 12 hours on Doom.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2016 01:41
|
|
|
Klaus Kinski posted:People using howlongtobeat to prove a point.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2016 01:41
|
|
|
I spent 50 hours playing Dark Souls 1 with advice on stats. "Don't raise resistance, place some points into dex." and proceeded to throw firebombs at the Tauros Demon and never used a plunging attack against it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2016 01:44
|
|
|
you're wrong on this klaus, just give up 60 for DS1, 80 for DS2. another 60 for DS3, maybe 50-60 for BB? i forget
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2016 01:45
|
|
|
I spent 15 hours on Central Yharnam in Bloodborne
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2016 01:48
|
|
|
I think you're proving the point well enough. I don't think I've ever spent more than 20h on a souls game, beaten them all and I'm the one advocating for a more lenient option e: not bloodborne. sadly.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2016 01:50
|
|
|
now you're just plugging your ears and going lalalalalala
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2016 01:53
|
|
|
My first playthrough of bloodborne was 15 hours and I felt v good
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2016 01:53
|
|
|
Re Dark Souls difficulty chat, the worst part is how the influence of Dark Souls has caused a whole bunch of indie devs to go "we're going to make it hard and have no difficulty options too!" but then being a small team and knowing the game inside out they're in a kinda clueless bubble about how difficult to make the game and while Dark Souls might have the draw to pull people through difficulty and therefore get away with being hard only, John Q Indie Game probably doesn't. Anyway, adjustable difficulty is cool and good.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2016 01:55
|
|
|
did you really beat it in 15 hours, fresh and blind?? jesus gently caress y'all must have been some genius children or something, I'm not the fastest soul player but cmon son E: adjustable difficulty is cool and good in games with lovely mechanics or boring gameplay
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2016 01:55
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 30, 2024 16:21 |
|
|
lazorexplosion posted:Re Dark Souls difficulty chat, the worst part is how the influence of Dark Souls has caused a whole bunch of indie devs to go "we're going to make it hard and have no difficulty options too!" but then being a small team and knowing the game inside out they're in a kinda clueless bubble about how difficult to make the game and while Dark Souls might have the draw to pull people through difficulty and therefore get away with being hard only, John Q Indie Game probably doesn't. yes this
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2016 01:56
|
|