By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Nintendo Discussion - Dark Souls Producer says Wii U audience doesn't care about Dark Souls.

curl-6 on 21 December 2013
Fusioncode said:
curl-6 said:
Kane1389 said:

Any game can become repetitive when you suck at it :)

Dark Souls has more variety and depth in its combat system than any action RPG there

And more cheapness. Another hallmark of poor game design.

The thing I love most about the Souls game is that they're not cheap. There's a big difference between difficult and cheap. If you die it's YOUR fault. You need to learn how to block, evade, parry, counter, it takes a while but it's a very rewarding experience once it all comes together for you. This isn't Zelda or God of War, you have to actually use your brain if you want to succeed. The only thing that might feel cheap is the fact that you can't pause the game, but even that helps build the atmosphere of never being safe unless you're at a bonfire. 

LIke I sad, the cheapness is how much progress you can lose.



Around the Network
curl-6 on 21 December 2013
Kane1389 said:
curl-6 said:
Kane1389 said:
curl-6 said:

One mistake costing hours of progress is obsolete 80s-era game philosophy that hinders fun.


It must be one pretty huge mistake on your part if those are the consequnces

I'm talking about the potential for it to happen.

In my view, one of the absolute cardinal sins a game can commit is to be frustrating, because  frustration is the antithesis of fun, and fun is the core value of a video game.

Like I said, any game can become frustrating when you suck at it. 

Sometimes, people look beyond the mindless ''fun'' in videogames. Maybe the want immersion and challenge. If mindless fun is all they want, Tetris would be all we need

But fun is the holy grail in my view. Challenge is simply a means of achieving it. Games are, after all, entertainment.

I have no problem with hard games. The game would be fine if it was just as hard to stay alive but didn't (potentially) take away quite so much progress on death.



the_dengle on 21 December 2013
curl-6 said:

LIke I sad, the cheapness is how much progress you can lose.

I died plenty of times and never felt like I had "lost progress." You don't lose items or anything, only souls (currency). And here's the thing: if you die and drop your souls, as long as you can make it back to that point again, you'll get your souls back. The game only punishes you if you make less progress in subsequent attempts -- in other words, if you learned nothing from your first trip through an area.

You might as well say Mario games are cheap because when you die you lose the power-up you were using.

I don't know what game you were playing, but at no point in my entire playthrough did a death result in my losing "hours of progress." I don't recall ever feeling that I had been set back more than 10 minutes.



AZWification on 21 December 2013

 Well............ He is right....... Let's not deny it.



                
       ---Member of the official Squeezol Fanclub---

mtu9356 on 21 December 2013

It can be punishing for sure (and very rewarding). But if you can't learn from your mistakes the game is not for you. Being aware of your surroundings and finding shortcuts/bonfires reduces the progress you can lose when u die. We should appreciate Dark Souls because of its old school difficulty and lack of hand holding (which is far to prevalent in modern day gaming).



Around the Network
curl-6 on 21 December 2013
the_dengle said:
curl-6 said:

LIke I sad, the cheapness is how much progress you can lose.

I died plenty of times and never felt like I had "lost progress." You don't lose items or anything, only souls (currency). And here's the thing: if you die and drop your souls, as long as you can make it back to that point again, you'll get your souls back. The game only punishes you if you make less progress in subsequent attempts -- in other words, if you learned nothing from your first trip through an area.

You might as well say Mario games are cheap because when you die you lose the power-up you were using.

I don't know what game you were playing, but at no point in my entire playthrough did a death result in my losing "hours of progress." I don't recall ever feeling that I had been set back more than 10 minutes.

I didn't lose hours of progress, I've only played roughly 2.5 hours of Demon's Souls. But I see the potential for it to happen.



the_dengle on 21 December 2013
curl-6 said:

I didn't lose hours of progress, I've only played roughly 2.5 hours of Demon's Souls. But I see the potential for it to happen.

Demon's Souls. There's the problem. Dark Souls is much more... fair.



NintendoPie on 21 December 2013
Drakrami said:
Your title twists his quotes. It is not exactly what he said.

Enough said.

The title doesn't have to be exactly what the article says. Unless there are quote marks.

OT: And he's pretty near spot on.



arcelonious on 21 December 2013
Mnementh said:

Let's not forget, Monster Hunter Tri was on Wii, with a strong online component. Many people seem to think Wii had no online.


Having played and enjoyed Monster Hunter Tri myself, I'll concede that I forgot about it, although I do remember experiencing lag occasionally, depending on who was hosting an area (something that I rarely experienced with Dark Souls).  I also think Monster Hunter Tri was a bit of an exception in regards to online capabilities for the Wii, although I also think Tatsunoko vs. Capcom was decent.  Given Dark Souls much more pervasive online system (constant ghosts, messages, etc.), I'm still not convinced that it would have been an easy port.



Michael-5 on 22 December 2013
oniyide said:
Michael-5 said:
oniyide said:
Michael-5 said:

You know, I'd rather buy this game for a WiiU over a PS3/360. Lets face it Dark Souls is a hard game, I don't want to get a half ass list of trophy's/achievements, nor beat the game multiple times and get all the collectables to get a platinum/1,000.

If these guys released Dark Souls on WiiU, I'd consider it. However on PS3/360, there is just too much already.

that logic makes no sense at all considering trophies and achievements are 100% optional

Yea, but if I played the game on PS3/360 and didn'thorde then I'll end up with somthing like 20-60% of the trophy's/achievements. Just makes me feel like I half assed the game, but on WiiU I don't have to care at all.

Plus if I did care about troophy's, I won't have to open some collectables guide, which can spoil part of the game for me. I'd much rather play JRPG's on WiiU then PS3/360.

well then its not really the devs issue if you cant control yourself. Is it that important that it says whatever percent? not to me at least.

I'm just saying that as a JRPG fan, I'd give it a second chance if it were available on WiiU. If I like a game, I like to get as many trophy's/achievements as possible, and with JRPG's it's annoying. I won't go for a platinum/1,000 in many games, but I will pull out a collectable guide, and a trophy guide too.. Makes the game less enjoyable, but I can't control myself.



What is with all the hate? Don't read GamrReview Articles. Contact me to ADD games to the Database
Vote for the March Most Wanted / February Results