brb, masturbating furiously
Shame about the streamlining, but if it's limited to a difficulty select(which all signs on the sky seem to be pointing at) then who cares? ENB? Well fuck ENB.
Printable View
brb, masturbating furiously
Shame about the streamlining, but if it's limited to a difficulty select(which all signs on the sky seem to be pointing at) then who cares? ENB? Well fuck ENB.
I want to to be excited but I have not completed Dark Souls yet and I'm not sure if I ever will.
I'm torn. On one hand: amazeballs! Praise the sun!
On the other hand: somehow the trailer didn't 'feel' like a souls-trailer to me. So far the trailers were focusing more on the world, this time I had the feeling it focuses on characters. A bit odd and if I'd be prone to wild speculation I'd say this indicates a shift in the core design philosophy. Maybe its because it launched at the VGA, the vatican-equivalent for the dorito-pope?
I'll wait with my judgement until I see some gameplay videos.
If there's so much as a speck of courage within you, you very well should.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ravelle
And in case of need, you could always try to team up with someone to go at it co-op (cowards).
I tried that but for some reason me and my bud weren't able to see each other's summoning stone on the ground and join each other.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rauten
Yeah, it's incredibly tricky. I think there some tips going around, like, place your sign somewhere with low affluence, wait at least a minute before you try to set it down again, have one of the two (usually the host) quit and restart the game, as that -might- switch him to a different server...
Not exactly the friendliest system.
Also be at the same level. (to within about 5sl iirc)Quote:
Originally Posted by Rauten
10 soul levels plus 10% of the host player's level, I think (so if the host is 20, the client must be 8-32)
games now can be artistic expressions but developers also worry about their business.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bhazor
at the end of the day, it's really all about the money.
That's reality. It's a business. After all, games have been created for money. :)
Something often overlooked/misunderstood by many people.Quote:
Originally Posted by harhis23
This seems pretty insulting towards game developers, actually.Quote:
Originally Posted by harhis23
In order to cater to a wider audience they might end up with a mediocre experience for everyone. Playing Demon's Souls the first time was something special. Playing Modern Warfare 3 clearly wasn't.Quote:
Originally Posted by ambing1
You should tell those people who make games for free.Quote:
Originally Posted by harhis23
You don't get games like Dark Souls being made by people for free. You barely get any games made by people for free, because people have needs, like eating, housing, clothing. And before you link me to the one or two games that would prove my point otherwise, look at the total percentage those games make up compared to every other game on the planet that was made with the backing of money and to make money.Quote:
Originally Posted by Makariel
They've made two unbelievably good games.
I trust them to make a third game that is awesome, more than I care what some crappy magazine preview says.
Of course not, it would be really stupid to assume this. Where did anyone claim that?Quote:
Originally Posted by Jesus_Phish
But there are plenty of games, music, pictures, wikipedia entries or operating systems that are made by people for free and in their spare time. Because some people have a job that pays for their needs and still have time to do things they consider fun. For some making a game is just fun. Will you drive to their house and force them to charge people to play?
Regarding the "make it more appealing" argument:
Only assholes want to make something that will only be appealing to a small number of people. My opinion is that Dark Souls was difficult to the point of tedium, and I walked away without progressing too far (though I still put a decent number of hours into it). Reading up on the game, the creator seemed a little disappointed that a lot of people--and he'd probably lump me into that category--didn't "get" the game, leaving it to be a sort of wiki-focused cult classic rather than a widely appreciated title.
If I understand it correctly, they want to be a little less opaque and perhaps a little less off-putting about how the mechanics work so that more people will be able to push through the early parts of the game and appreciate the title as a whole rather than just walk away. I wouldn't call that selling out, although I honestly can't see how they could do that without making the game a hell of a lot easier, and since that seems to be the entire crux of the series I doubt that they will do so. So maybe expect a more developed plot or something, as if that is really what turns people off of this game.
wutQuote:
Originally Posted by Drinking with Skeletons
Are you saying all realism-inclined simulator devs, strategy devs, etc. are assholes?
I mean that no one consciously says, "I hope that only about 1% of the gaming population will like this game." Relatively few people play strategy games because relatively few people like strategy games, not because the developers intentionally tried to exclude most players. (For the record, I love strategy games, and I know that there are more factors to their popularity than "not many people like them.")Quote:
Originally Posted by victory
If this one arrives sans GFWL, then I'm buying it yesterday.