From Software Dark Souls PVP can suck my balls

[DramaticPopcorn]

oh god i love DS so much

 

[Servo]

EDIT: Odd. DU must have changed the auto-correct.

Maybe it has to be pluralized then. Let's try it: liberals.

oh god i love DS so much

Yes, it is an incredible game. I just needed to rage a lil there.

 

[DragoFireheart]

Liberals

Edit: nope, it's just you.

 

[Clockwork Knight]

i remember invading in dukes after i sinned in anor londo. i was wrecking their shit like 10 straight invasions easily won and than some faggot snitched on me to dorkmoon wankers and i got my ass handed to me by somy fucker with darkmoon blade spell. how is that not fun?

Maybe if you're 13 years old

Why?

 

[chubs]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hEA0OFugIdw

"git gud" Fuck you.

 

[Servo]

Liberals

Edit: nope, it's just you.

Lower-case then?

 

[DragoFireheart]

liberal

edit: nope.

 

[mediocrepoet]

It's lower case and plural: liberals

 

[Micmu]

fuck liberals in ass

 

[Servo]

Glad we cleared that up. This thread has been productive.

 

[meanwhileInPoland]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hEA0OFugIdw

"git gud" Fuck you.

first 30 seconds. really that hard faggot?

and than you have ring of fogg, hidden body, silver pendant, tower shields. dark bead and pursuers are OP but they are not game breaking shit.

 

[chubs]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hEA0OFugIdw

"git gud" Fuck you.

first 30 seconds. really that hard faggot?

and than you have ring of fogg, hidden body, silver pendant, tower shields. dark bead and pursuers are OP but they are not game breaking shit.

When did I say that pursuers are game breaking? The video I posted was to demonstrate why the pvp in this game is not worth the trouble and that you're better off not even bothering. The video you posted here makes the argument for me as to why the pvp is shit. Nothing but ninja flipping, magic abusing, lag stabbing faggotry.

 

[Gozma]

I don't really understand the context for this stuff since I never played the games, but I don't get the reasoning for adding this kind of thing to mostly 1-player or coop games. There are all kinds of direct adversarial games to play that aren't weighed down by RPG bullshit like grinding gear or inventories full of healing potions or twinking, where one guy wins and one guy loses. And in those (e.g. a fighting game) the entire scope of game design is about the adversarial payoff. In this you have this sideline competition designed in a ramshackle way where you aren't supposed to care about it or put in a lot of effort... What's the attraction?

 

[AngryEddy]

I think I'll play offline from now on. The game is hard enough as is.

Stay in zombie mode like a faggot.

 

[subotaiy]

Jesus, why is it with all these angry kids nowadays, your mom forgot to give you your allowance?

 

[Chaotic_Heretic]

I don't really understand the context for this stuff since I never played the games, but I don't get the reasoning for adding this kind of thing to mostly 1-player or coop games. There are all kinds of direct adversarial games to play that aren't weighed down by RPG bullshit like grinding gear or inventories full of healing potions or twinking, where one guy wins and one guy loses. And in those (e.g. a fighting game) the entire scope of game design is about the adversarial payoff. In this you have this sideline competition designed in a ramshackle way where you aren't supposed to care about it or put in a lot of effort... What's the attraction?

sweet sweet when you beat a chaos weapon twink who invades you in UndeadBurg with starter equips at SL6.

 

[Edward_R_Murrow]

What's the attraction?

Drunkpoasting time. Here goes:

-It's an extension of the skills learned in the PvE aspect of the game. This is the "big one". I'd probably have put Dark Souls down if it weren't for the PvP element because the PvE element becomes boring fast. Maybe this is my fault for being an enormous akshunfaggot playing a title that is clearly not designed around my level of spergery, but the Souls series doesn't really hold up well beyond a second playthrough. The addition of PvP adds morte incentive to further leaen the systems as the Ai enemie can be easily dispatched with bog-standard i-frames->jab game...to say nothing of cheesing with spells/Poise/backstabs. Fighting against players adds longevity to the game and makes certain things that were mostly frivolous useful; learning to manually aim or cancel spells matters little in PvE, but is a fundamental tactic in PvP. I get a lot of kills with basic Great Fireball cancel mindgames or by dropping them unlocked at my character's feet on people who swallow the bait and go for a backstab counter. This shit is useless in PvE, but I get a lot more mileage out of the game in PvP as it forces one to really plumb the depths of the system to gain an advantage. Typically games don't do one or the other well. Fighting games have worthless, unfun single-player and technical action titles have no multiplayer or tacked-on shit (see: Hayashi Gaiden). The Souls Series is unique in that you can take mastery of the game mechanics in a robust single-player experience into something greater.

-It has a type of variety you rarely see in other player versus player games. While fighting games certainly have different playstyles within a given character (for example, I play Dictator Bison in SF2/SF4 with more air game than I should) there's still a strong boundary on what a character can effectively do. And most fighting games have a strict character limit, so things will eventually become routine. Dark Souls has many possible builds/loadouts so variety is more pronounced at any given competitiveness level. Certainly, "tryhard/pro" tiers willconsist mostly of the optimal builds given the meta, but much of "organic" PvP can consist of matches against a wide variety of playstyles. Or it used to...as the game has aged much of the "variety-seeking" pyschographic has abandoned the game in favor of...well, seeking variety in other titles, stagnating the meta at any given level.

-It has elements not often found in other "competitive" titles that (slight) bear similarities. Most fighting games, or other multiplayer action titles, have no concept of map control and have little support for matches beyond 1v1 affairs. Dark Souls, intentionally or not, give both a rather hefty weight. Battles that are 2v2 make me wish more fighting games were trying to break the mold rather than building a better combo/crossup/etc. and the aspect of stage control can make radically alter the balance between any given build. I'll admit that this rationale is highly subjective and comes from a fighting game heretic that enjoys Smash Brothers, but stuff like this doesn't really exist in many compelling, single-controlled-character, multiplayer titles.

Yeah, there's definitely a lot of flaws in Souls series PvP, like poor matchmaking, the lack of admin "refereeing", the meh netcode, and the loltastic imbalance between certain builds (good luck beating a halfway competent Dex-build as a Str-bro)...but it definitely has a unique appeal.

 

[sea]

Maybe you shouldn't play in human form if you don't want to be invaded? On consoles you can also just play offline. I mean, seriously, you have options on how to regulate this sort of thing, why are you QQing about not using them?

And strictly speaking, losing 12,000 souls and 3 humanity is absolutely nothing. Yeah it sucks early on, but try losing 150,000+ souls instead. At a certain point in the game you don't even really need souls anymore.

 

[Gozma]

What's the attraction?

Drunkpoasting time. Here goes:

You make it sound like taking it seriously is rewarding because it has a lot of depth, but is it like, it would be even better if they made a spinoff game that was entirely about the PvP that drops the dumb parts like not being able to switch builds at will? What are you getting out of it being a synthesis of a single-player action RPG and an adversarial game? Just that the PvE is a tutorial?

 

[AngryEddy]

What's the attraction?

Drunkpoasting time. Here goes:

What are you getting out of it being a synthesis of a single-player action RPG and an adversarial game?

The thrill of a challenge, and the excitement of playing against human players. Ninja Gaiden Black and above tried to simulate fighting against human players [Think Dopplegangers on Master Ninja difficulty] for the same reasons I listed.

 

[Karellen]

The multiplayer elements in Dark Souls really work best when you look at them as an extra ingredient for the single-player game, rather than a game in and of itself. As a competitive game, it's... well, flawed but sort of adequate, and you can play it like that, but when you look at all the Covenants and modes and the way the whole thing is set up, it becomes plain that none of it was intended to be even remotely balanced. On the contrary, it has a ton of imbalance built-in. At the start of the game, having invaders should be a terrifying experience - not something you can resolve with a simple duel, but rather something that you might survive if you have allies and come up with a clever trap or if you run through to the boss before the invader gets to you. It is often flawed in this respect, but still, the idea is that the multiplayer elements heighten your engagement with the single-player, rather than being the primary feature.

The attraction for me is that since the multiplayer doesn't work well as a strictly competitive system, a lot of people don't look it like that - as a result, much like a box of chocolates, you never know what you're going to get. In the Darkroot Garden, for instance, on a regular basis I would run into people who just want a straight-up fight, people who just want to troll you with crazy spells, people who are testing different weapons and builds, people who team gank for tears and giggles, people who wait for you to fall into their trap, people who just want to get through to fight the boss, people who want to duel honorably, people who want to trade, people who play hide-and-seek with Sorcery spells, people who want to box to train backstabs and ripostes or just because they're that cool, people who dress up in sackcloth and make funny gestures, newbies who just wanted to play the single-player game and are scared to death of you and beg you to let them go. The fun part for me is the moment just when you invade or are invaded and you start to divine the other person's intentions. It's a strangely communicative experience you rarely get from other online games, and it probably wouldn't be that way if it was clearly delineated and functional as a competitive game.

 

[Fart Master]

PvP in this game was extremely thrilling (when it actually worked). I spent hours upon hours fighting at the Cathedral where you fight the boss with the 2 giant dudes. After killing the boss downstairs the whole area becomes dark and starts spawning stronger enemies. I think having strict 'duels' in a set place is boring as shit though and barely requires any skill. The thought of invading some poor suckers world and stalking him is a lot more appealing. Too bad you can just go undead and no one can ever invade you.

I want to see a game like this where you select online or offline when creating a character and you can be invaded whenever you play (with some restrictions like camp sites and maybe so you can only be invaded once every x minutes).

I kinda wanna play now since they rebalanced the weapons (last time I played was when electric weapons trumped EVERYTHING and the gravekeepers faction didn't work at all-) but fuck paying for xbawks gold.

 

[Servo]

the idea is that the multiplayer elements heighten your engagement with the single-player, rather than being the primary feature.

This might be best demonstrated by the boss at the end of Tower of Latria. That's possibly the coolest use of multiplayer in any game ever.

People here make a lot of good points for why PVP in DS is not suckballs but my point was simply that it pisses me off when I'm trying to get through a level and get instakilled by some backstabbing faggot.

 

[DragoFireheart]

liberals

 

[Servo]

You did it. Great job!