Google+

We Recommend By ZergNet

57 comments

  • Rub3z - December 15, 2012 5:17 a.m.

    To those of you who immediately cried foul at the idea of an easy mode: Guys, you know that difficulty settings are a thing now, right? Further, did you actually bother to read on to the second paragraph of that minor, reasonable suggestion? It actually seems like a great idea when put in that way, and seems very fitting of the game's proclivity for punishing the n00b player. And the game's online mode certainly wouldn't have suffer if that were implemented.
  • BladedFalcon - December 15, 2012 11:44 a.m.

    I did read the paragraph in question. Now let me ask you this, have you actually read the counter arguments of those of us who STILL are against an easy mode? It's simply a matter of altering the franchise's filosophy and nature for the sake of pandering to a crowd that was never interested in the series to begin with. Difficulty settings are a thing, yes, and they fit fine with almost most other games, but that doesn't mean it fits with everything, and again, having it in Dark souls speaks of a willingness to bend over to accommodate the player... Which goes against the basis of what the game stands for.
  • Edias - December 15, 2012 12:20 p.m.

    I agree. The time spent on easy mode would be better spent polishing the game, because it most likely would not draw in enough new customers to be worth the asset expenditure. They're best off sticking to what they do best, in the hopes of drawing in more customers that way.
  • stadisticado - December 15, 2012 1:45 p.m.

    I love the narrow-mindedness of the above comments. Pandering to a crowd not interested in the series to begin with? Yes, because only super-hardcore AND skilled players would enjoy a deep, atmospheric game experience. Most likely wouldn't draw in enough customers? How much work do you think it would really take to change some variables such as monster health or item drops. Seriously? Basically all the arguments, save the online PvP concerns, are just variations on a theme, that somehow allowing more people to enjoy the game - and thus buy it and allow more games like this to come into being - will somehow lessen your own personal connection with the franchise. Which is ridiculous on its face.
  • BladedFalcon - December 15, 2012 3:50 p.m.

    "How much work do you think it would really take to change some variables such as monster health or item drops. Seriously?" Except that isn't what the new directors said they want to do. They said they want to make the experience more "straightforward" and "More accessible", so it's not just about changing difficulty levels, but that they potentially could dumb the game down and increase hand holding. Once you start doing that, you're making not just more accessible, you're removing part of the deepness and the charm. And you're missing the point of the criticisms. The thing is, the people that are truly devoted and love the series? they want the next game to build up, expand, and Capitalize on what made the series great to begin with. Not worry that they start making changes that no one interested in the series asked for in the first place.
  • fullmetallegend - December 16, 2012 9:43 p.m.

    What the new directors say is slightly frightening depending on how you take it, (Could just mean things like Covenants will be more accessible.) but what Gamesradar is suggesting isn't. If they add an easy mode, just don't play it, simple as that. And they easy mode they are suggesting doesn't interfere with any other mode, anyways. Sounds perfect to me.
  • ParagonT - December 15, 2012 8:01 p.m.

    I won't call other peoples opinions stupid or the like, but I do agree that creating an easy mode should be embraced, not criticized. An easy mode will just open up the game, as long as they stop at that and do as the article suggestion explained. I understand that people do not want a favorite IP to be destroyed by catering/steering the game away from the main fan-base, but people are being blinded by their personal wants. There is a difference between whats best for the developer and whats best for you, the customer. I'm all for protecting the customers interest, but this subject is non-issue. Nothing bad would happen to the game if they just add an easy mode as the article suggested and explained. People are just afraid that something bad could come of it, which I understand, but they need to understand that they are hindering the developer. Nothing is worse than a developer that must take a hit-or-sink approach to developing games. It makes them "sell out", the very thing people against an easy mode are afraid of in order to ensure they don't sink. So why not support their very slow conscious effort to expand instead of expecting them to cater to the same group over and over again and hope they don't sink the company? As long as its a slow and very gradual effort without estranging the main fan-base, then as I said, this is a non-issue. But if not, well... negate what I said.
  • BladedFalcon - December 15, 2012 8:52 p.m.

    "the very thing people against an easy mode are afraid of in order to ensure they don't sink. " Um.. you're making it sound as if the Souls series wasn't profitable enough as it is, or that the profits of Dark souls hadn't significantly increased from the ones of Demon Souls. The first game made more than million and a half, the second game made more than 2 million and probably even more now with the PC port. those sales are pretty damn big for a game of it's kind. Sure, it doesn't sell like CoD or GTA does, but let's face it, even with easy mode and all the pandering in the world, they would never get near. What I'm trying to say is, the series as it is, with these two games has proven to be quite profitable with no need to make itself more approachable whatsoever. And of course I understand the reasoning behind a developer to want to make it more accessible to sell more, but you're also risking to alienate the quite big enough install base you have and eventually lose more money than you can make. That, and you also mentioned selfish wants from the part of the consumer. And you know what? you're right, i AM being selfish, but I am being like that, because this is one of the few series that i feel has been made for people like me in mind, and I've seen what has happened to other series I loved when they seek to become more "accessible". And I'll say it again, it's not like the series is a super niche, super obscure franchise that barely sells.
  • ParagonT - December 16, 2012 8:52 a.m.

    "Um.. you're making it sound as if the Souls series wasn't profitable enough as it is, or that the profits of Dark souls hadn't significantly increased from the ones of Demon Souls. The first game made more than million and a half, the second game made more than 2 million and probably even more now with the PC port. those sales are pretty damn big for a game of it's kind. Sure, it doesn't sell like CoD or GTA does, but let's face it, even with easy mode and all the pandering in the world, they would never get near." Demon's Souls moved 1.67m units, and Dark Souls moved 1.96m. So your right in that aspect, but here's some other considerations: Demon's Souls made a huge profit, that much is true. But alas it's still not as much as people would like to believe if you calculate production costs, publisher, employee, engine, and other costs into the mix as well. But none the less Demon's souls made out like a bandit. (for the publisher anyway) As for Dark Souls, that's a different story. Marketing was more existent, it was no longer an exclusive, multi-platform, more budget was in place, and so on. But in short, development costs increased, especially just the fact that it needed to be developed for multiple systems. The average cost of game development in 2010 was 20 million and above, whether they had close to that, lower or above isn't really able to be answered. But in 2012, costs have risen to 25-28 million so you can infer what it was for 2011 and before. Outsourcing, licencing fee's, manufacturing, taxing, distributing, engines as said, rights to music and audio, artists, equipment, then above all else, publisher profits, and ect... More goes into production that people think, its not just a simple units to cash conversion, but you already know this. So it's real easy to see how more than 65% to over 90% can be shaved off the top of profits for the team's company. It probably needs to be noted for those that do not know that profits are more than just a developer making profits. It's more about the developer making the publisher profits and increasing publisher faith that your development team can do the same. So no, FromSoftware is most likely in no position to try and sponsor its own game and pay for all it's costs by themselves. They rely of the publisher, to which they MUST show a return for them, so if that means "selling out" as some are afraid of, I understand why. It's better than falling back into the pits of "I hope this game works out." and "I hope a publisher will sponsor this project." Another note, I still don't quite understand why people are afraid of an easy mode that will be made separately as explained. It just seems to me like it encourages what games are made to do, be enjoyed. But if the game is not niche, then what are people trying to protect the game from? Themselves?
  • Manguy17 - December 16, 2012 11:13 a.m.

    " a crowd that was never interested in the series to begin with" Ive been interested in the series for a long time, but I don't have the time to learn the ins and outs, whats wrong with a separate difficulty that just changes damage, health and consumables to be more forgiving? Its not as if an easy mode would effect the other difficulties at all unless the game was re-built to be easier from the ground up, but just tweaking a few settings for players who want it changes nothing.
  • SDHoneymonster - December 15, 2012 3:48 a.m.

    Any form of easy mode is a no-no, unless it comes on its own online servers. Experienced players could blitz the game, get all the best equipment with no risk, and leap into PvP with much better equipment than people playing through the game on its right & proper setting at a similar level, unbalancing it hugely. As someone has already said to, if you want to make the game easier, go online, summon some help, and read the wiki to learn how to upgrade your equipment & armour. Otherwise, the technical issues are the biggest for me. My biggest peeve is clipping - weapons clipping through walls as you run for example, and being able to hit enemies through walls, and have enemies hit you, is something they desperately need to get rid off. Leads to both exploitable situations and frustrating deaths. Sort it out FromSoft, and keep the challenge in place, and my money is all yours.
  • ParagonT - December 16, 2012 8:10 p.m.

    The article explains that if the easy mode was separate from the rest of the game, it would not affect those things.
  • zodairk5454 - December 15, 2012 12:50 a.m.

    EASY MODE. NOT COOL. I was enjoying the article up until this point. Do you understand why people enjoy these games? The extreme frustration that eventually leads to a sense of great accomplishment is a major part of this series, if you want an easy game play something else.
  • ParagonT - December 16, 2012 8:09 p.m.

    That's a very bold statement. Thats like saying, if you don't like playing FPS's on 'Veteran' or above, go play something else. Which although your entitled to your opinion that games must be difficult to be enjoyable, I doubt the developers wish to see their IP's only approachable to just those that like that sort of thing.
  • shaquille-brown - December 14, 2012 9:49 p.m.

    For a Souls game adding an easy mode it a terrible idea, not because choice is bad but because an easy mode would lead to imbalance. Demon souls and Dark souls were tight gameplay experiences based on a set of carefully constructed variables and restrictions. This gave the games a sense of organic difficulty simply making wide sweeping reductions and increases in that stats and damage would break the game. Imagine casual players being able to beat the game in two hours because they can hold right and mash the left bumper. Rather than infuriate first or casuals player and pose a challenge the game becomes the complete opposite, boring. Rather than an Easy mode, the developers need to teach players the system through a carefully constructed tutorial phase. Be it added to the beginning or done in a similar manner to Megaman one where they make it more apparent, without being orvertly so, that a specific game gameplay mechanic would make sections more managable.
  • Janoosen - December 14, 2012 6:56 p.m.

    Right...I'll go at this with the parts I disagree with. So the things I don't mention I either don't have any complaints about or don't disagree with. "Praise the sun!" "But we also think some fresh blood on the development side might take the Souls series from capital 'A' awesome to unprecedented levels of incredible." <- That's what they always say and then a game turns into s*it. Simple as that. ---- "Give us more nuggets of story, but keep them subtle" They are already subtle with the story. It can all be pieced together so there's no need to give us more "nuggets" of story. The lore in Dark Souls is about piecing things together. Some things make sense, some things don't. Some parts of the lore is pure speculation but that's what's so interesting about it. It presents the opportunity for endless debates and discussions among fans, something which I'm rather fond of. ---- "Add customization options" I *really* don't see the point in this. Does anyone else play this game to "stand out"? Because I sure as hell don't. I want to play Dark Souls, not a generic RPG/MMO where you can change the appearance/color of your armor to get internet attention. ---- "Make a Wii U version" A Wii U version of the game would be the worst move ever. For starters, while that would give more players access to the series, if it performs horribly on the platform (which it would, I'm calling it now if they do make a Wii U version) it will turn people AWAY from the series. Which in turn would make the company lose more money than they invested in making a Wii U version. It's a waste of time and money. ---- "Include an easy mode..." Include an easy mode? Fine by me, so long as I can choose my non-casual mode I don't care. ---- "So the world might be mended" It's easy to say all that but time and time again I've seen game developers ruin game series due to poor decisions and I'd hate to see the Souls series become one of those series. So I sure hope these two new guys are up to the task. ---- Whew...well, that's what I think. Bring on the hate.
  • shawksta - December 14, 2012 9:32 p.m.

    Just so you know, Tekken Tag Tournament 2, Mass Effect 3, Batman Arkham City all did just as great on the Wii U as it did on PS3/360, and while Ninja Gaiden 3 is too horrible to fix, Razors edge is the Superior Master Race version. It depends if their willing to make it work or simply paste it.
  • ParagonT - December 15, 2012 7:15 a.m.

    I think that information is incorrect. Global Mass Effect 3 Sales--- Wii-U- 0.03m Xbox- 2.6m PS3- 1m PC- 0.7m Tekken Tag---- PS2- 4.05m Xbox- 0.16m PS3- 0.37m Wii U- 0.03m Batman Arkham City--- Wii-U- 0.07m Xbox- 3.45m PS3- 3.99m PC- 0.41m These are some figures I found on VGchartz. Although the Wii U has not been out for awhile, its only real hope is Christmas for these figures. I'm not trying to rag on the Wii-U, I want it to succeed, but I'm being honest with myself that it can't compete with already established consoles. Perhaps in the future when Sony or Microsoft pushes out their next console, then it will be more established and do better. But for right now, I'm going to state that Wii-U will most likely not even come close to moving the same units as the already dominant consoles. Although I could be wrong, but if I were a betting man... Of course I think that this will change in the future when the next consoles drop and Christmas rolls by, since Wii-U will have a plethora of more titles to choose from, but for now... I personally doubt it. I'm very 50/50 about Souls coming to Wii-U for many reasons, but a few being the demographic and the consoles units already out. On the side, the re-releases were pretty much destined to not do as well. People who were adamant about getting the games most likely already purchased them on their previous console. Gaming has become a larger industry than before that's contracting (and shrinking). There is not that many people who are "just now getting into gaming" anymore. I believe were slowing down near the industry's peak, so I personally don't think that reasoning is valid for some who think that.
  • shawksta - December 15, 2012 5:40 p.m.

    Good point, but that doesnt mean the Wii U doesnt deserve games, it needs the support
  • ParagonT - December 15, 2012 7:30 p.m.

    Although it may need the support, that's more so of Nintendo's problem of giving developers more of an incentive to develop for their consoles, which is why its mainly Nintendo's fault. I can't really find fault with developers that question the profit margins of developing/producing units for a system that may yield less than expected results or returns. Nintendo is the one that has to sell the console not only to customers, but to developers as well, which in a weird way is to do the first.
  • shawksta - December 15, 2012 9:53 p.m.

    Of course, but as you know, its the consoles first weeks, you cant except Massive sales on something so new, EVERYTHING has this problem. Plus, The Wii U is much better to appealing to the devs which is what Wii has failed in, given most of success and successfull games being from Nintendo themselves. Time will tell the tale.
  • ParagonT - December 15, 2012 6:42 a.m.

    I'm actually 50/50 with you on the Wii U version. Souls is a brutal/punishing game, so it really depends on what demographic the Wii U is trying to aim for to determine if it would be successful.

Showing 21-40 of 57 comments

Join the Discussion
Add a comment (HTML tags are not allowed.)
Characters remaining: 5000

OR…

Connect with Facebook

Log in using Facebook to share comments, games, status update and other activity easily with your Facebook feed.