To me the Souls games have always been about difficulty, isolation, and subtlety. So long as it's more of that, I couldn't be happier. The worst thing they could do though is try to add some sort of in-your-face linear storyline -- or an easy mode. I think the thing I'd like to see most out of this new game though is the ability manipulate difficulty variables in NG+ and beyond. Could be some fun tweaks there like enemies only taking damage from parries or being unable to repair a broken weapons.

No more backstabs. Lagstabbing and backstab fishing completely ruin PvP. Parry and riposte only, please

To the people who are very against an "easy mode" in the game, why? If it's presented as an option, you can very easily ignore it. And if it only affects someone else's single player world, why does it matter to you? Would you not prefer the series to be more accessible to more people, thus encouraging more Souls games?

@MildMolasses said:

To the people who are very against an "easy mode" in the game, why? If it's presented as an option, you can very easily ignore it. And if it only affects someone else's single player world, why does it matter to you? Would you not prefer the series to be more accessible to more people, thus encouraging more Souls games?

I'm not one of the people staunchly against it, but I understand why people are. It'd be like taking the strategy out of a strategy game. If you make it so you only lose a centimeter of health or if you only lose half your souls when you die, the sense of tension and need to play carefully are eliminated. Being able to die with one wrong and careless move is what makes the combat exciting. Exploring unknown dungeons with the possibility of a life threatening trap is exhilarating. The difficulty is what fuels and enhances almost every element of the game. It's a scary thought, but take that one aspect away and Dark Souls could very well just end up a generic power fantasy where you plow through every enemy and clear each dungeon without dying.

I think newcomers would miss the appeal of a Souls game if they played it without the difficulty looming over them. They'd experience something else, not necessarily something representative of the series.

I expect more whining from people who hated Dark Souls, I also expect more loot!

@MildMolasses said:

To the people who are very against an "easy mode" in the game, why? If it's presented as an option, you can very easily ignore it. And if it only affects someone else's single player world, why does it matter to you? Would you not prefer the series to be more accessible to more people, thus encouraging more Souls games?

To me, it would be as foreign as adding in a hands-only option in a FIFA game, or sticking guns in Skyrim. Yeah it's just an option and you don't have to use it, but it still goes against everything the game experience tries to offer. The tension, the danger, and the difficulty are all key in what makes Souls gameplay so satisfying. At least that's my opinion on the matter.

@MiniPato said:

Being able to die with one wrong and careless move is what makes the combat exciting. Exploring unknown dungeons with the possibility of a life threatening trap is exhilarating. The difficulty is what fuels and enhances almost every element of the game. It's a scary thought, but take that one aspect away and Dark Souls could very well just end up a generic power fantasy where you plow through every enemy and clear each dungeon without dying.

Except, if you know what you're doing in these games (which all the people fighting against an easy mode does) none of this is true. And I'm not talking about knowing the enemies or levels. With proper character development and playstyle there are just a very few actually life threatening situations, and most of them are just about falling. If your entire basis for enjoying Souls games is the challenge, then the series would've been a one-trick pony as already with Dark Souls you went into the game knowing exactly how to make it far less challenging.

@MildMolasses said:

To the people who are very against an "easy mode" in the game, why? If it's presented as an option, you can very easily ignore it. And if it only affects someone else's single player world, why does it matter to you? Would you not prefer the series to be more accessible to more people, thus encouraging more Souls games?

So that they can say "I've beaten Dark Souls"? No way. I love Dark Souls because I feel like I'm doing something others couldn't. When an avarage Joe can beat this game, it's just... it looses some of its magic.

No easy mode gosh darn it. The whole point of Dark Souls is that it's hard to learn. But after you learn, you don't die as frequently anymore. It's awesome that the game has only one mode. It's like saying Super Meat Boy should be easier. No, someone that 100% SMB should feel like a bad-ass. This easy stuff is crap. I just want more Dark Souls please.

@Ares42 said:

@MiniPato said:

Being able to die with one wrong and careless move is what makes the combat exciting. Exploring unknown dungeons with the possibility of a life threatening trap is exhilarating. The difficulty is what fuels and enhances almost every element of the game. It's a scary thought, but take that one aspect away and Dark Souls could very well just end up a generic power fantasy where you plow through every enemy and clear each dungeon without dying.

Except, if you know what you're doing in these games (which all the people fighting against an easy mode does) none of this is true. And I'm not talking about knowing the enemies or levels. With proper character development and playstyle there are just a very few actually life threatening situations, and most of them are just about falling. If your entire basis for enjoying Souls games is the challenge, then the series would've been a one-trick pony as already with Dark Souls you went into the game knowing exactly how to make it far less challenging.

I can see where you're coming from, but I think you're omitting the fact that a lot of learning and patience had to accompany that level of prowess. The vast majority of people did not toss in Dark Souls and power though with mechanically memorized attack patterns and killer character builds. It took some time. I think the other thing you might be overlooking is the idea that despite whatever knowledge one may or may not have, a single mistake can often prove fatal. At that level it becomes not a challenge between player and game, but of the player and his or her self. It becomes less a question of recognizing patterns, and more of execution and consistency. This is especially true on the higher NG+ levels. I still can't beat Kalameet on my NG+++ file despite knowing exactly what to do. But again, that's part of the charm I, and I think many other players, take from the series as a whole.

But then all this is just like my opinion, man.

@Ataribomb: I think you might've played too much NG(+....) to remember how easy these games are on the first playthrough :P

Still though, the game doesn't need easymode. If they just do a better job at presenting game mechanics (like they might've hinted) the game has just the right challenge level for both new and old players to enjoy it. And it's only fair to let new players at least close some of the gap of knowledge they have to returning players.

@Ataribomb said:

@MildMolasses said:

To the people who are very against an "easy mode" in the game, why? If it's presented as an option, you can very easily ignore it. And if it only affects someone else's single player world, why does it matter to you? Would you not prefer the series to be more accessible to more people, thus encouraging more Souls games?

To me, it would be as foreign as adding in a hands-only option in a FIFA game, or sticking guns in Skyrim. Yeah it's just an option and you don't have to use it, but it still goes against everything the game experience tries to offer. The tension, the danger, and the difficulty are all key in what makes Souls gameplay so satisfying. At least that's my opinion on the matter.

I guess what I'm getting from a lot of this (and I don't mean you in particular) is that atmosphere, character and level design are completely discounted. I own Dark Souls but have never played it. What drew me to it was the bleak, miserable world that the game exists in, and wanting to see what it has to offer. However, I'm also someone who gets easily frustrated and would probably be turned off very quickly by its punishing style. I am well aware that challenge is a huge part of this game, and that there is an audience for that. But there is also an audience of people like me who come to games for an entirely different reason, where high levels of challenge is a hindrance to my enjoyment, rather than a boost, and I don't see why its wrong for a game to want to appease both groups. After all, Ninja Gaiden is praised for its crazy difficulty, but it still exists with easier difficulty settings.

@TwoLines said:

No easy mode gosh darn it. The whole point of Dark Souls is that it's hard to learn. But after you learn, you don't die as frequently anymore. It's awesome that the game has only one mode. You feel great that you are beating it. And with an easy mode it's... well, it's just not as cool if any avarage joe can breeze through it. It's like saying Super Meat Boy should be easier. No, someone that 100% SMB should feel like a bad-ass. This easy stuff is crap. I just want more Dark Souls please.

What if average joe has bought the game do they not have a right to see all of its content. I think if someone isn't skilled enough to beat it on the regular difficulty, a compromised mode would still give them a challenge and wouldnt make it any less of a game. reduction in diffculty can come in any form it doesn't have to be Normal, easy modes, how about higher chance to stagger oponents, slower attack patterns, a larger counter window, making the dodge cover further ground. There is a compromise to be had and the choice is down to the developers, it doesn't have to be a traditional normal, easy option. Just somthing that allows less skilled players to progress like we all did. They have that right too

@MildMolasses: I like to think of Dark Souls like classic Megaman. The game seems hard and impossible to beat at first. But the more you try the more you start noticing patterns and enemy tells, and start paying attention to your surroundings. It's not a game about difficulty, but how much knowledge the player has on what they're going against.

@eclipsesis said:

@TwoLines said:

No easy mode gosh darn it. The whole point of Dark Souls is that it's hard to learn. But after you learn, you don't die as frequently anymore. It's awesome that the game has only one mode. You feel great that you are beating it. And with an easy mode it's... well, it's just not as cool if any avarage joe can breeze through it. It's like saying Super Meat Boy should be easier. No, someone that 100% SMB should feel like a bad-ass. This easy stuff is crap. I just want more Dark Souls please.

What if average joe has bought the game do they not have a right to see all of its content. I think if someone isn't skilled enough to beat it on the regular difficulty, a compromised mode would still give them a challenge and wouldnt make it any less of a game. reduction in diffculty can come in any form it doesn't have to be Normal, easy modes, how about higher chance to stagger oponents, slower attack patterns, a larger counter window, making the dodge cover further ground. There is a compromise to be had and the choice is down to the developers, it doesn't have to be a traditional normal, easy option. Just somthing that allows less skilled players to progress like we all did. They have that right too

They need to lower the skill ceiling of Starcraft II dramatically because I have the right to play Starcraft II tournaments with the best players!

@TwoLines said:

@MildMolasses said:

To the people who are very against an "easy mode" in the game, why? If it's presented as an option, you can very easily ignore it. And if it only affects someone else's single player world, why does it matter to you? Would you not prefer the series to be more accessible to more people, thus encouraging more Souls games?

So that they can say "I've beaten Dark Souls"? No way. I love Dark Souls because I feel like I'm doing something others couldn't. When an avarage Joe can beat this game, it's just... it looses some of its magic.

No easy mode gosh darn it. The whole point of Dark Souls is that it's hard to learn. But after you learn, you don't die as frequently anymore. It's awesome that the game has only one mode. It's like saying Super Meat Boy should be easier. No, someone that 100% SMB should feel like a bad-ass. This easy stuff is crap. I just want more Dark Souls please.

Also, and ill go ahead and say this; stop being uptight just because somone can't complete a game the same way you did doesn't mean that your entitled to the experience and they are not. If you are so self concious that you have to justify your dark souls experience buy its level of difficulty rather than the jorney of the game then i feel for the way you play. I completed Dark souls even did a naked run as a little bet, and it would bother me none to see my little brother do the same on a easier mode.

@Gargantuan: Sarcasm?? Your entitled to your opinion, but i think you would be able to distinguish a massively competitive online multiplayer game, to a single player story. To which some of the player base just dont want others to enjoy, and want them to suffer the same way. Like someone already mentioned what if that is not the way another person likes to plays games

@eclipsesis said:

@TwoLines said:

@MildMolasses said:

To the people who are very against an "easy mode" in the game, why? If it's presented as an option, you can very easily ignore it. And if it only affects someone else's single player world, why does it matter to you? Would you not prefer the series to be more accessible to more people, thus encouraging more Souls games?

So that they can say "I've beaten Dark Souls"? No way. I love Dark Souls because I feel like I'm doing something others couldn't. When an avarage Joe can beat this game, it's just... it looses some of its magic.

No easy mode gosh darn it. The whole point of Dark Souls is that it's hard to learn. But after you learn, you don't die as frequently anymore. It's awesome that the game has only one mode. It's like saying Super Meat Boy should be easier. No, someone that 100% SMB should feel like a bad-ass. This easy stuff is crap. I just want more Dark Souls please.

Also, and ill go ahead and say this; stop being uptight just because somone can't complete a game the same way you did doesn't mean that your entitled to the experience and they are not. If you are so self concious that you have to justify your dark souls experience buy its level of difficulty rather than the jorney of the game then i feel for the way you play. I completed Dark souls even did a naked run as a little bet, and it would bother me none to see my little brother do the same on a easier mode.

I would be bothered though. Just tellin' you how I feel, it's more rewarding. I like this game to be a little snobby, no other game does that anymore. Just wish this one would.

@Ares42 said:

@Ataribomb: I think you might've played too much NG(+....) to remember how easy these games are on the first playthrough :P

That is probably very extremely true, haha. Was actually considering just firing up a fresh run of it once finals clear up.

@MildMolasses said:

@Ataribomb said:

@MildMolasses said:

To the people who are very against an "easy mode" in the game, why? If it's presented as an option, you can very easily ignore it. And if it only affects someone else's single player world, why does it matter to you? Would you not prefer the series to be more accessible to more people, thus encouraging more Souls games?

To me, it would be as foreign as adding in a hands-only option in a FIFA game, or sticking guns in Skyrim. Yeah it's just an option and you don't have to use it, but it still goes against everything the game experience tries to offer. The tension, the danger, and the difficulty are all key in what makes Souls gameplay so satisfying. At least that's my opinion on the matter.

I guess what I'm getting from a lot of this (and I don't mean you in particular) is that atmosphere, character and level design are completely discounted. I own Dark Souls but have never played it. What drew me to it was the bleak, miserable world that the game exists in, and wanting to see what it has to offer. However, I'm also someone who gets easily frustrated and would probably be turned off very quickly by its punishing style. I am well aware that challenge is a huge part of this game, and that there is an audience for that. But there is also an audience of people like me who come to games for an entirely different reason, where high levels of challenge is a hindrance to my enjoyment, rather than a boost, and I don't see why its wrong for a game to want to appease both groups. After all, Ninja Gaiden is praised for its crazy difficulty, but it still exists with easier difficulty settings.

I think that's an incredibly valid point, that many (myself included) tend to overlook. I think maybe, and I'm speaking for myself here, there's a tendency to get so wrapped up in our own individual experiences with a game that we try to apply it to others. Taking a step back, I can definitely see how just the premise of exploring the world that the Souls games offer (especially Dark Souls) would be inviting to many, and how the challenge could be a turn-off. I think the conflict here stems from some fan's inability to recognize that their own personal tastes might not be representative of the greater whole. Different strokes for different folks.

In that way, I suppose an easy mode might not be the end of the world. It would still feel weird though, haha.

@Ataribomb said:

@Ares42 said:

@Ataribomb: I think you might've played too much NG(+....) to remember how easy these games are on the first playthrough :P

That is probably very extremely true, haha. Was actually considering just firing up a fresh run of it once finals clear up.

@MildMolasses said:

@Ataribomb said:

@MildMolasses said:

To the people who are very against an "easy mode" in the game, why? If it's presented as an option, you can very easily ignore it. And if it only affects someone else's single player world, why does it matter to you? Would you not prefer the series to be more accessible to more people, thus encouraging more Souls games?

To me, it would be as foreign as adding in a hands-only option in a FIFA game, or sticking guns in Skyrim. Yeah it's just an option and you don't have to use it, but it still goes against everything the game experience tries to offer. The tension, the danger, and the difficulty are all key in what makes Souls gameplay so satisfying. At least that's my opinion on the matter.

I guess what I'm getting from a lot of this (and I don't mean you in particular) is that atmosphere, character and level design are completely discounted. I own Dark Souls but have never played it. What drew me to it was the bleak, miserable world that the game exists in, and wanting to see what it has to offer. However, I'm also someone who gets easily frustrated and would probably be turned off very quickly by its punishing style. I am well aware that challenge is a huge part of this game, and that there is an audience for that. But there is also an audience of people like me who come to games for an entirely different reason, where high levels of challenge is a hindrance to my enjoyment, rather than a boost, and I don't see why its wrong for a game to want to appease both groups. After all, Ninja Gaiden is praised for its crazy difficulty, but it still exists with easier difficulty settings.

I think that's an incredibly valid point, that many (myself included) tend to overlook. I think maybe, and I'm speaking for myself here, there's a tendency to get so wrapped up in our own individual experiences with a game that we try to apply it to others. Taking a step back, I can definitely see how just the premise of exploring the world that the Souls games offer (especially Dark Souls) would be inviting to many, and how the challenge could be a turn-off. I think the conflict here stems from some fan's inability to recognize that their own personal tastes might not be representative of the greater whole. Different strokes for different folks.

In that way, I suppose an easy mode might not be the end of the world. It would still feel weird though, haha.

Mm. You may be right. I just feel that the difficulty is a core aspect of the game. But I guess it could be appreciated to a certain extent for its art direction and whatnot. I just like being in the elite that finished something hard. That makes it more rewarding, you kinda know there's no other option. Sigh. If there will be an easy mode, I just hope that there's a kick-ass achievement for finishing the game in hardcore mode. That would make me feel better.

My biggest hope for Dark Souls 2 is to fix the attack lag bug and the frame-rate issues.

Really I just want more Dark Souls with a good PC port.

@TwoLines:

In my opinion, though I know this could never happen, I always thought the Souls games only ever needed one Achievement/Trophy, and that's for beating the game. Everything else like achievements for lighting bonfires and getting Estus flasks just seemed intrusive to me. To me those games are all about the feeling of isolated immersion, and then randomly you have a little ding telling you that you rang a bell properly. Just seems unnecessary in my eyes.

I'm in the "just want more Dark Souls" camp.

And to touch a bit on the "easy mode" controversy... I don't think they should add something like that. At all. Sure, if they had some kind of easy mode more people would probably take a stab at it. Or, more than the first stab at the first miniboss at least. But would they get as much out of the game? I feel much of the magic Dark Souls offer when it comes to story and atmosphere comes partly from the fact that it is difficult. Because it is difficult you have to go slowly ahead when you get to new locations. You cannot just run in and swing your sword around. Slow, methodical and cool wins the day. You are also more likely to check out any new items you get extra carefully, because maybe it's something that can help you survive. Oh, what's this? I learn something interesting about the world because I checked this item out extra carefully? How neat!

So yeah, I think more people would try Dark Souls if it was easier, but some of the magic would be gone. Which would be a shame.

I agree 100%. I want it to be harder, "cheaper", more confusing, story more obtuse. I really thrive on it, and the thought of making it easier, or an easy mode, makes me very sad. There are already dozens of good, wholesome, fun, "safe" action RPGs out there. Give us the terror and uncertainty!

@rebgav said:

@eclipsesis said:

There is a compromise to be had and the choice is down to the developers, it doesn't have to be a traditional normal, easy option. Just somthing that allows less skilled players to progress like we all did. They have that right too

Anyone willing to put in a little bit of time can complete Dark Souls. It isn't a test of "skill," the only obstacles to progression are your own patience and knowledge. Remove those obstacles, those challenges, and Dark Souls is just another action RPG. Remove the obfuscation and the consequence and you lose the essential flavor of the game.

I find it difficult to understand why people want to see an already successful series with its own unique philosophy homogenized for a broader audience. It seems to me that we should be asking for exactly the opposite of that in every instance.

Yeah i completely understand you, and your first paragraph is absolutely correct but you have to be certain type of player to even get to that i feel.

and the last thing any of us want is it becoming generalised, i dont think it will get to that point tbh. Also i dont think the developers are going to compromised the game in any way which i feel kind of makes the talk of a easy mode mute, just i dont agree with the elitism that the talk of easy mode has brought up i feel its outright stupid as your first paragraph suggest its all about learning and when that is done the difficulty goes away almost. I just want to share the experience with friends thats all

I almost hate to say this but as much fun as the obtuseness was in the original, I'd kind of like to see them add a little clarity to items.

I LOVED and beat Demons' Souls, I really enjoyed Dark Souls but I haven't beaten yet and every time I pop it back in I end up getting scared off. Not by the difficulty, not by the world but by the bag full of items that I have no idea what they are for or where/when I picked them up.

I know a lot of people would say this vagueness is integral to the Souls experience but I would argue that the world and gameplay is so outstanding that the experience would be just as good without it.

Nothing really, Dark Souls to me was perfection, oh maybe some better netcode. In the end i have 100% trust in them, they know how to make this game so just let 'em get on with it, they're not gonna mess this up.

I almost hate to say this but as much fun as the obtuseness was in the original, I'd kind of like to see them add a little clarity to items.

I LOVED and beat Demons' Souls, I really enjoyed Dark Souls but I haven't beaten yet and every time I pop it back in I end up getting scared off. Not by the difficulty, not by the world but by the bag full of items that I have no idea what they are for or where/when I picked them up.

I know a lot of people would say this vagueness is integral to the Souls experience but I would argue that the world and gameplay is so outstanding that the experience would be just as good without it.

FUCK YES! FUCK FUCK FUCK FUCK YES!

I'll be honest when I first saw it, I thought it was new Skyrim DLC. I'm glad its not though, as the Souls game are some of my favorite games this gen.

Details from the new Edge say they are trying to make it more accessible. Which fans of the series will probably shit their pants over but I'm excited for. I love the combat, world, story, enemies, and everything but hate the death system and all of that. Never could bring myself to get to far.

@ArtisanBreads said:

Details from the new Edge say they are trying to make it more accessible. Which fans of the series will probably shit their pants over but I'm excited for. I love the combat, world, story, enemies, and everything but hate the death system and all of that. Never could bring myself to get to far.

It's really not that bad. Besides, that's what summoning is for.

Anyway, of course it has to be more accessible! It's 2012, ya'll. Heaven forbid a game is what it is. If certain people don't enjoy unforgiving games, they don't have to play them. A game shouldn't have to appeal to everyone. They claim it's going to be more straightforward and accessible, I wonder if they're going to axe the "open-world" vibe from Dark Souls? I hope not, but that would seem like a good place to start.

That's according to the latest issue of Edge - on sale December 20 - which reveals the just-announced sequelwill be the first in the Souls series not to be helmed by creator from Hidetaka Miyazaki. Instead newcomers Tomohiro Shibuya and Yui Tanimura will take the reins, with Miyazaki supervising.

I just a lot of interest. I really hope this isn't their attempt at a mainstream cash-in. We'll see.

I'm currently playing through it for the first time right now, and the only thing I would change/add would be

1. Better descriptions/UI for items/equipping. Well maybe not better, but simpler. Half the items leave me wondering what they still do.

2. A better sense of direction. I just rang the top bell, and had no idea where to go from there. I love the fact that you can go to multiple areas, not asking to change that, maybe just some sort of heads up on what the next best "zone" would be for me.

I agree with the masses here on if they simplify the combat/difficulty, it will ruin the game completely.

My very short experience with this series felt like I was building a castle out of playing cards, and every two minutes an angry asian man would burst in thrashing around the room like a wild animal and knock it down, screaming with froth spilling from his mouth "NOT GOOD ENOUGH! YOU NEED TO BE BETTER! DO IT AGAIN!" I guess some people call that fun, but I'm not taking another look at this series until they add an easy mode.

Here is my 2cents:

1. Improve the multiplayer connection in the game, as it is now - PvP is a hit and miss (mostly miss) with horrendous lag.
2. I hope covenants are more involved with one another, like having small skirmishes between dark moon blade and dark wraiths.
3. More NPC invasions would be awesome.
4. Remove backstabbing or at least make it much harder to do in PvP - its cheap and too easy execute.
5. Better ranged weapons - I hope they increase the targeting range, because aiming down sight is impractical in a fight.
6. No more shitty bosses i.e. Dragon God and Bed of Chaos.
7. I hope they do more with the various armor and damage types and remove the shitty embers that were useless i.e. Magic and Occult.
8. I really love the combat in the souls series, so having some sort of Arena would be great.
9. I would like the game to be more difficult without forcing the player to raise it artificially with the Calamity Ring or playing the game with base Soul Level. They could introduce more optional bosses or areas or something.
10. PC release first day!

For everything else - its perfect.

I hope they keep everything intact and just improve on DS. Clearly this game is a direct sequel to Dark souls, I'm really interested in the story now - would it be in a new country? Would the events of Lordran mean anything? It really piques my interest and I'm really excited for this game. I hope it turns out great!

@Ares42 said:

@MiniPato said:

Being able to die with one wrong and careless move is what makes the combat exciting. Exploring unknown dungeons with the possibility of a life threatening trap is exhilarating. The difficulty is what fuels and enhances almost every element of the game. It's a scary thought, but take that one aspect away and Dark Souls could very well just end up a generic power fantasy where you plow through every enemy and clear each dungeon without dying.

Except, if you know what you're doing in these games (which all the people fighting against an easy mode does) none of this is true. And I'm not talking about knowing the enemies or levels. With proper character development and playstyle there are just a very few actually life threatening situations, and most of them are just about falling. If your entire basis for enjoying Souls games is the challenge, then the series would've been a one-trick pony as already with Dark Souls you went into the game knowing exactly how to make it far less challenging.

That mindset was completely crushed with the Artorias of the Abyss DLC. I had already played the game for over 300 hours and I went in with a new character at SL40 with around 60 humanity and 2 million souls all of which was gained fighting in the forest for about a week. I felt the fear and tension of losing what I had all throughout the DLC and normal enemies and bosses were killing me. That's what Dark Souls is about. It's about fearing the unknown and knowing that your vast experience isn't enough to save you.

@golguin: You were afraid because you had something to lose. Anyone that's playing through the game normally will never have that much to lose. If you just make sure to always spend your souls after defeating a boss instead of trying to push on (which is pretty simple) there's never really any reason to carry many souls at all. I've just gotten into a routine with these games where every time before I go into a new area I just spend as many souls as possible, and then completely ignore whatever souls I get while exploring. Even if you die, going back to the same spot will net you the same amount of souls so you're not really losing anything.

Also, I went into the DLC on my first ever clear of the game before any guides were out and I could count my number of deaths on one hand. Not to say that I'm awesome at the game (which I definitely am not), but just using the same playstyle I had learned and the character build I had figured out there wasn't really anything that posed any immense threat. That's not to say I didn't enjoy exploring the new content though, but the whole fear angle is overplayed. I get that some people find enjoyment in the games from that (and seek it out with their choices), but there's much more to these games that you can enjoy even if you don't really find it that punishing.

@Ares42 said:

@golguin: You were afraid because you had something to lose. Anyone that's playing through the game normally will never have that much to lose. If you just make sure to always spend your souls after defeating a boss instead of trying to push on (which is pretty simple) there's never really any reason to carry many souls at all. I've just gotten into a routine with these games where every time before I go into a new area I just spend as many souls as possible, and then completely ignore whatever souls I get while exploring. Even if you die, going back to the same spot will net you the same amount of souls so you're not really losing anything.

Also, I went into the DLC on my first ever clear of the game before any guides were out and I could count my number of deaths on one hand. Not to say that I'm awesome at the game (which I definitely am not), but just using the same playstyle I had learned and the character build I had figured out there wasn't really anything that posed any immense threat. That's not to say I didn't enjoy exploring the new content though, but the whole fear angle is overplayed. I get that some people find enjoyment in the games from that (and seek it out with their choices), but there's much more to these games that you can enjoy even if you don't really find it that punishing.

Everyone always has stuff to lose when playing Dark Souls. The only time you have nothing to lose is after you just lost it on a failed corpse run. I always had stuff to lose because I was good enough to keep what I earned. My other character had had 99 humanity for multiple playthroughs (replenished when giving them to covs) and is currently sitting on 45 million souls and she also went through the DCL on NG++ at SL 111.

What was your SL in the DLC? I'm sure you had a stack of humanity you didn't want to lose unless you glitched your stuff. I never used any glitch in the game.

@golguin said:

What was your SL in the DLC? I'm sure you had a stack of humanity you didn't want to lose unless you glitched your stuff. I never used any glitch in the game.

I don't remember my SL, but think I had cleared everything but Gwyn and a few optional bosses and never did any specific farming so take from that what you will. As far as humanity I never cared about it, probably never had more than 4-5 banked which would only be incidental (if anything, if I noticed I had humanity I would probably just kindle a fire to get rid of it). I probably went into the portal with like 2-5k souls I couldn't care less about and some number of humanity, so ye.. nothing to lose really.

@Ares42 said:

@golguin said:

What was your SL in the DLC? I'm sure you had a stack of humanity you didn't want to lose unless you glitched your stuff. I never used any glitch in the game.

I don't remember my SL, but think I had cleared everything but Gwyn and a few optional bosses and never did any specific farming so take from that what you will. As far as humanity I never cared about it, probably never had more than 4-5 banked which would only be incidental (if anything, if I noticed I had humanity I would probably just kindle a fire to get rid of it). I probably went into the portal with like 2-5k souls I couldn't care less about and some number of humanity, so ye.. nothing to lose really.

If you were at Gwyn and used your souls as soon as you got them and used even a minority of them to level yourself up you would have easily been at SL 60-80 and I'm guessing more towards the high 70s range because you get a LOT of souls from bosses. You were pretty over powered for the DLC so that's why you didn't really die. Bosses could one shot me at SL 40. The dark magic casters could nearly one shot me with their dark blasts. I purposely went in with my SL 40 (was going for under SL 50 arena) because my SL 111 was too powerful and too prepared to feel the true Dark Souls.

@golguin: Again, all you're really saying is that the game was scary because that's the experience you seek out. The game doesn't force that on you unless you seek it out.

So I don't really care for Dark Souls, so what I really want is for them to control better, or at least more to my preferences. When I play Dark Souls I felt like my character was unable to respond to the challenge he faced. I want it to control as good as any action game, but still be hard as hell.

@Ares42 said:

@golguin: Again, all you're really saying is that the game was scary because that's the experience you seek out. The game doesn't force that on you unless you seek it out.

Then that is a good argument against the people calling for an easy mode. Increasing your SL would allow you to have more vitality to survive more hits from mistakes and higher endurance to equip heavier armor to take more hits. Add that on top of the phantom summoning and there is no need to cater to people wishing for an easy mode.

It's like asking for easy mode in Super Meat Boy or Trials because you feel that putting down the money give you a right to the content in the game. I might even go so far as comparing that to college and claiming that paying for your classes means you should pass. You have to put the work in. I know its not the argument you are making, but I just thought of that now.

Multiplayer that isn't completely fucked by technical and balance issues would be nice.

Oh, and environments that aren't barren as fuck. Anor Londo looked like something out of 2005.

@golguin said:

@Ares42 said:

@golguin: Again, all you're really saying is that the game was scary because that's the experience you seek out. The game doesn't force that on you unless you seek it out.

Then that is a good argument against the people calling for an easy mode. Increasing your SL would allow you to have more vitality to survive more hits from mistakes and higher endurance to equip heavier armor to take more hits. Add that on top of the phantom summoning and there is no need to cater to people wishing for an easy mode.

Oh ye, most definitely, and I've already said that earlier in the thread =) I've never argued for an easy mode but this whole "Souls games can't be good unless they're punishing" attitude is just false and doesn't help address the actual issues with the games that would make them better, and I find that it's short-selling the game as a gimmick when it has many other strong strings to play on.

@Commisar123 said:

So I don't really care for Dark Souls, so what I really want is for them to control better, or at least more to my preferences. When I play Dark Souls I felt like my character was unable to respond to the challenge he faced. I want it to control as good as any action game, but still be hard as hell.

Are you basically asking for something more akin to DMC 3, but with rpg progression?

@Commisar123: I think that is solely your experience, because the momentum of the character is - to me - much more enjoyable and difficult. I like my character feeling like he weighs a shitload, but I can definitely see how that would throw you off. It would be incredibly hard to balance the stamina system, the encounters, and weapons if everything was more lithe. Hell, most devs would say, "pump them HP's!" instead of actually balancing.

It's the reason why I loved Dark Mode in The Witcher 2 - I felt like, because I learned when to throw my weight around, the game had a nearly perfect system for a glass cannon. It did have the HP pump problem, however.

@Turambar More or less yeah, especially because I really like DmC, but they should make their own video game. Obviously people like it and there is nothing quite like Dark Souls on the market, so they probably shouldn't listen to me XD. That being said, as it stand Dark Souls is not what I want to play.

@oulzac said:

Ugh, what was that. That trailer was not a Souls game, it looked like Dragons Dogma II. If not for it saying Dark Souls II, I would have gone on assuming it was Dragons Dogam II.

Dammit From, don't change the formula to appeal to more people. You will ruin it, and we wont want it anymore.

Uh they already changed the formula to appeal to more people. See: King's Field. Hell I bet you that dragon you see in the trailer is from other From Software games too.... hint hint. I will forever be irritated by people who think From Software didn't exist before Demon's Souls, they have been a developer since early PS1 days. They have also made their fair share of crappy games.

It looks like a Soul's game to me. You are a dude by yourself getting beat down by dudes either dying in the process or coming close enough you may as well have.

I would like to see more open world design. Every level coming down to be a corridor crawl with a very few exceptions got irritating. Better balance in the weapons and enchantments. Better balance period. Get rid of the BS cheap tactics for multiplayer. Better bug testing (never going to happen, it is From Software half this crap is left in on purpose). Toss the class system, just let everyone start at level 1. More direct narrative, keep it vague and open to interpretation but return to the King's Field style where you at least had a clear understanding what was going on and what each area was about. King's Field also had more NPC's, even if half of them died horrible deaths.

@Commisar123 said:

@Turambar More or less yeah, especially because I really like DmC, but they should make their own video game. Obviously people like it and there is nothing quite like Dark Souls on the market, so they probably shouldn't listen to me XD. That being said, as it stand Dark Souls is not what I want to play.

If you really liked DMC3 then you should play its successor Bayonetta. Here is a fun fact for you. I gave Bayonetta my personal GOTY in 2010 and I gave Dark Souls the GOTY in 2011. I feel both games are at the pinnacle of their specific types types of gameplay and I got 1000/1000 achievements in both of them. I would never want one game to be more like the other though. They should each go further down their path in their sequels.

On a sidenote I will be giving TWD the GOTY this year so it's not like I'm all about fighting mechanics.