Do You Have Any Unpopular Gaming Opinions?

[isiolia]

The inverse question becomes why should everything have to accommodate everyone? Why can't there be elitist games for elitist gamers? I don't think there's anything wrong with that personally. It's a niche for a niche demographic.

I think one argument for it gets occasionally mentioned, but actual accessibility. People wanting to play a video game with an actual handicap. The video I linked mentions it for Nintendo (though I would argue that non-optional motion controls are horrible in that regard).

Not every last thing can or should be changed to ensure that, but if it's something simple like letting player remap controls or whatnot, there's little reason not to.

Most games today can accommodate a wide audience, whether by having a gradual increase in difficulty, offering different modes, or doing things like player rankings. There's probably a lot more of it visible with online games where content is more perpetual. Overall, I think folks that want the challenge can (and tend to) be catered to as well.


To me, the Souls games could do a lot by simply having a mode where NPC helpers are freely summonable instead of using the humanity/effigy/ember/etc to do it. Or, at least, using that as a baseline - they might need to change up which are available where, or HP/AI in some way, etc.
As a counter, make it offline-only, and not able to move to NG+.

They could tack on a challenge mode and/or permadeath mode at the same time to cater to both ends of the spectrum.

[Exhuminator]

Are you saying that you would think less of Dark Souls as a game in the alternate universe simply because there are other difficulty levels?

I would still find it to be an interesting and appealing game. I do not believe it would harbor the same level of respect it does now however. I do not believe the Souls series would have sold as well as it has, nor be as popular as it is, if the games had easier difficulty settings. The fact that they dared to be uncompromisingly hardcore in an age of kid glove gaming is what made them legendary.

I found Dark Souls specifically to be frustrating because it seemed to me that the inherent difficulty of the game is amplified by the fact that the game doesn't seem to be very well made, like it's barely holding together with some duct tape and bailing wire.

I honestly believe the jank is part of the intended design.

I believe if you had beaten Ornstein & Smough you wouldn't feel the way you do about Dark Souls.

I also believe you are capable of beating Ornstein & Smough, and you will do so some day. You never forget your white whales.

[marurun]

YEah, I mean, Bethesda of all companies added a frikkin' iron man mode to Fallout 4 which even eliminates many kinds of saves.

Of course, this ends up being a problem for folks who want to use this mode because Bethesda software is unstable as all hell and if it crashes (hint: it will) in this iron man mode, you just lose.

[dunpeal2064]

I am also very, very happy that Dark Souls doesn't offer easier difficulty options, at least in the traditional sense. Instead, them allowing you to grind or find/upgrade better gear gives the player a means to bring down difficulty, but in a manner that requires effort, which I think makes a player more likely to stop grinding once they see victory is in reach, instead of becoming so overpowered that the design no longer matters. This means they will experience the game's design as intended, but still at a level that they can enjoy! Its quite beautiful.

Its approach of difficulty is rather brilliant, and seems completely backwards from a lot of arcade-esk action games (Bayonetta, Deathsmiles, etc) where the game is easy, but has deeper mechanics that allow for difficulty.

And I think its part of the reason why Souls succeeded as well as it did. I think a lot of gamers don't realize that they can play games that are demanding, so when its optional, they just take a pass or an easy route. But maybe, when not given that option, they will realize they actually enjoy trying. And I think developers now have to consider this, and possibly limit the way their game can be approached.

Maybe none of that is unpopular enough, so I'll add:

I think Shmups should not allow the use of continues. They should just have thorough practice modes, and an arcade mode where you insert a credit and play.

[marlowe221]

I would still find it to be an interesting and appealing game. I do not believe it would harbor the same level of respect it does now however. I do not believe the Souls series would have sold as well as it has, nor be as popular as it is, if the games had easier difficulty settings. The fact that they dared to be uncompromisingly hardcore in an age of kid glove gaming is what made them legendary.

That's fair. I'm not sure I agree about the sales though - it seems to me that increased accessibility would tend to increase sales, as a general rule. But you might be right about that too.

I honestly believe the jank is part of the intended design.

I believe if you had beaten Ornstein & Smough you wouldn't feel the way you do about Dark Souls.

I also believe you are capable of beating Ornstein & Smough, and you will do so some day. You never forget your white whales.

Personally, I have a hard time believing that jank in a video game is ever intentional. It might be the best those developers could honestly do, but intentional?

Regarding O&S.... I thought the game was pretty janky in the tutorial dungeon. That janky-ness was confirmed when I dodge-rolled off a cliff near Firelink because it turns out that you can only roll in 4 directions when you're locked onto an enemy, even though you can roll in almost any direction if you're not locked on (WTF is up with that?). And I can't tell you how many times I pressed the right trigger to do a thrust attack with my sword and literally nothing happened - I wasn't animation locked; I just stood there.

All of that was long before I even knew there was such a thing as O&S.

[dunpeal2064]

you can only roll in 4 directions when you're locked onto an enemy, even though you can roll in almost any direction if you're not locked on (WTF is up with that?). And I can't tell you how many times I pressed the right trigger to do a thrust attack with my sword and literally nothing happened - I wasn't animation locked; I just stood there.

Well the rolling is intentional. Zelda's lock on and roll works the same way from what I recall. I can see it being irritating the first time it happens, but from there you just undo lock on before rolling if you don't want the lock-on roll mechanics.

Not sure what happened with the dropped inputs, unless you were in Blighttown, which does have some shit-tier fps (at least on 360). But it was never a recurring problem for me.

I won't disagree that the game is not flawless when it comes to technical issues. It just... is good despite that. God Hand, from a reviewers standpoint, is just garbage. It does just about everything poorly... expect the thing it was trying to do, which it did better than any game had at the time. I think DS hits a similar zone there.

[marlowe221]

I am also very, very happy that Dark Souls doesn't offer easier difficulty options, at least in the traditional sense. Instead, them allowing you to grind or find/upgrade better gear gives the player a means to bring down difficulty, but in a manner that requires effort, which I think makes a player more likely to stop grinding once they see victory is in reach, instead of becoming so overpowered that the design no longer matters. This means they will experience the game's design as intended, but still at a level that they can enjoy! Its quite beautiful.

Someone always posts something interesting while I'm typing something else!

The idea of going back and grinding up new weapons or stats as a way to organically address dificulty is actuctually one I like. Doing that might be helpful in my situation in the game. But the world of Dark Souls can be pretty tedious to get around, even with all the clever short cuts.

I thought about going back to grind up some souls to level up some more for my continual battle with O&S (I'm SL 50). But just the thought of humping it back through Beige Castle Land (can't remember the name) was tiring and I decided I would rather just play a different game altogether.

I think Shmups should not allow the use of continues. They should just have thorough practice modes, and an arcade mode where you insert a credit and play.

That's my personal rule with Shmups. I give myself one credit and start over.

[Exhuminator]

Personally, I have a hard time believing that jank in a video game is ever intentional. It might be the best those developers could honestly do, but intentional?

I can't find the source now unfortunately, but I'd read Bandai (DaS publisher) bankrolled FromSoftware around 23 million for the budget of Dark Souls (double what DeS had). I have to assume with that much money, if FromSoftware didn't want the jank there, it would not have been. FromSoftware has made other 3rd person action games that did not have that jankiness. The Otogi games, most of the Armored Cores, Frame Gride, Metal Wolf Chaos, and Ninja Blade didn't have that same rough feel. And those had way smaller budgets. That's why I think the Souls' jank is intentional.

[dunpeal2064]

Ha, and you posted while I was editing!

That's my personal rule with Shmups. I give myself one credit and start over.

*fist bump*

Maybe refusing continues isn't the only way to go about it, but my biggest issue is that, when these games are just picked up and played, the player doesn't even have a way of knowing that they are intended to be played on one credit.

Imagine walking into the store having never played the genre, picking up Akai Katana, seeing a whole shit ton of bullets and dying a bunch, and then finishing the game to its ending in half an hour. I wouldn't blame them for being disappointed, or thinking there isn't much else to the game.

[marlowe221]

Well the rolling is intentional. Zelda's lock on and roll works the same way from what I recall. I can see it being irritating the first time it happens, but from there you just undo lock on before rolling if you don't want the lock-on roll mechanics.

Not sure what happened with the dropped inputs, unless you were in Blighttown, which does have some shit-tier fps (at least on 360). But it was never a recurring problem for me.

I won't disagree that the game is not flawless when it comes to technical issues. It just... is good despite that. God Hand, from a reviewers standpoint, is just garbage. It does just about everything poorly... expect the thing it was trying to do, which it did better than any game had at the time. I think DS hits a similar zone there.

The rolling thing is... intentional? Why? Why would they do that? Why make rolling work two different ways?

Yeah, I think OoT did it too. But I thought combat was pretty poor in the early 3D Zelda games in general.

As far as dropped inputs go, I don't know. My Xbox One controller works fine in every other game I use it on. I play DS on PC (with the latest DSfix). I have a FX-8320 overclocked and a GTX 970. It's not the greatest system in the world but it should be plenty for Dark Souls 1.