From Software The Dark Souls Discussion Thread

[Morgoth]

So when do you people estimate this will arrive?

August.

 

[deuxhero]

Thursday.

 

[Average Manatee]

Pretty sure they do respawn...

They do? I don't recall that, but then I wouldn't know because I didn't die much.

 

[Hobo Elf]

I'll wait for FROM to announce anything before habeebing it.

 

[Stabwound]

It's irritating seeing 12 years olds whine about it coming to PC because they spent all their allowance on their X-Bawks, but I guess they'll have to deal with it.

 

[Demnogonis Saastuttaja]

What I have heard about it is just that whenever you die, chances are you go back and have to wade through the same enemies again, and if I want that sort of gameplay I play older purebred action games.

Then again if it's coming to the PC, I can try it out for free.

 

[Emily]

What I have heard about it is just that whenever you die, chances are you go back and have to wade through the same enemies again, and if I want that sort of gameplay I play older purebred action games.

Then again if it's coming to the PC, I can try it out for free.

Dark Souls is much better, and you are totaly off on the gameplay, i advise you to play it and then make judgment.

 

[LordDenton]

Isn't this one of those games where you die and then grind between half to a full hour just to get where you were, because that's... fun? Pass.

Hey, console gamers consider repeating the same section over and over and over like a braindead ADD retard a "fun challenge". Checkpoint saving systems were created because shit consoles were too pathetically underpowered to handle save anywhere. Now even though the current generation of consoles can handle save anywhere, they continue to design console games around checkpoint systems as it was a feature.



If I can't save whenever I want, I too will, of course, pass (I don't even torrent games that use checkpoint saving). I mean, the simple fact that Dark Souls doesn't have save anywhere, is hard proof that it's a shit game.

 

[praetor]

As for the "new bosses", would love to see some FromSoft cameos (Guyra is actually a fairly reasonable prediction though Katia/Tara, God of Destruction and God of Harmony would be cool and Metal Wolf could be worth it for the sheer "what"ness.)

i actually hope they either re-do the bosses they originally wanted to do differently (bed of chaos, gwyn...) or add those boss designs and replace some other lame or re-used bosses (like firesage or stray demon)

What I have heard about it is just that whenever you die, chances are you go back and have to wade through the same enemies again, and if I want that sort of gameplay I play older purebred action games.

so after you make up one reason why you will not like the game and are instantly debunked, you make up another? are you a skyway alt?
bolded part: sounds exactly the same like pretty much every game with a save/load system, whether it's "save anywhere" or checkpoint-based you'll have to re-fight the same enemies from the last checkpoint/save point to the point you died and tried (not to mention games where you restart the whole level, like this game's predecessor), except here you can open up shortcuts that you can use after you die and if you die you can pick up your "currency" (and humanity, but that's a different story) so in a way, unless you're an idiot, it's even easier than traditional checkpoints. so why is it a problem here? why is punishing the player for being especially dumb (as in, dying twice at the same place or before) suddenly bad or somehow worse than "older purebred action games"? not to mention there are plenty ways of "circumventing" the problem of losing souls. that is, if you're not stupid of course. or just being edgy... caelummodo docet, i guess.

If I can't save whenever I want, I too will, of course, pass (I don't even torrent games that use checkpoint saving). I mean, the simple fact that Dark Souls doesn't have save anywhere, is hard proof that it's a shit game.

ah, the uneducated, braindead, misinformed fools... bethesda/bioware what have you done?
technically, DkS autosaves everywhere constantly whenever you open up your inventory or gain some souls or every X seconds (i'm not sure about the last one, but 101% confirmed on the first 2).

 

[Emily]

guys cmon these guys are just trolling, or just plain ignorant. Like who cares srsly there have been a lot of comments and explaning the game mechanincs. Just stop it is pointless.
If someone wants to dismis a game for no reason-fine. FROM never did make the game for ALL people. And they alyways had their niche market, which just turns out it isnt niche anymore in such a way.

 

[LordDenton]

ah, the uneducated, braindead, misinformed fools... bethesda/bioware what have you done?
technically, DkS autosaves everywhere constantly whenever you open up your inventory or gain some souls or every X seconds (i'm not sure about the last one, but 101% confirmed on the first 2).

So if I want to stop playing for any reason and I want to save right away, can I do that? And after I reload, can I resume exactly where I left off?

 

[Deitti]

day 1 purchase for me, finally i can play this game without having to borrow someone else's PS3.

and i agree, people really need to stop listening to shitty rumours about this game and just try it themselves, works better that way.

 

[bminorkey]

ah, the uneducated, braindead, misinformed fools... bethesda/bioware what have you done?
technically, DkS autosaves everywhere constantly whenever you open up your inventory or gain some souls or every X seconds (i'm not sure about the last one, but 101% confirmed on the first 2).

So if I want to stop playing for any reason and I want to save right away, can I do that? And after I reload, can I resume exactly where I left off?

Yes, you will always resume your game exactly from when you left off upon quitting the game (it autosaves every couple seconds and when you rest at a bonfire/quit). However, you can't decide when /not/ to save - if, for example, you die, then you can't reload a save from before you died. In a sense you have exactly one savefile per character and that savefile is automatically up to date with the immediate point you are in the game (kind of like the way a MMORPG works). (So if you have to repeat an area, it won't be because you quit before you reached a check point, but because your character died).

 

[Kylearan]

Yes, you will always resume your game exactly from when you left off upon quitting the game (it autosaves every couple seconds and when you rest at a bonfire/quit). However, you can't decide when /not/ to save - if, for example, you die, then you can't reload a save from before you died. In a sense you have exactly one savefile per character and that savefile is automatically up to date with the immediate point you are in the game (kind of like the way a MMORPG works). (So if you have to repeat an area, it won't be because you quit before you reached a check point, but because your character died).

So by all of the moron-logic floating around in this thread, does this not, in fact, make Dark Souls the BEST GAME EVER?

 

[Demnogonis Saastuttaja]

Fanboys ahoy! It's just like those people who claim there are more than 5 games for the PS3. Hoh.

What I have heard about it is just that whenever you die, chances are you go back and have to wade through the same enemies again, and if I want that sort of gameplay I play older purebred action games.

so after you make up one reason why you will not like the game and are instantly debunked, you make up another? are you a skyway alt?

I have made up nothing, these are the critiques I have heard in reviews of the game. That it's a game that makes you go back and waste your time. Sure doesn't sound like quicksave / quickload to me. I have heard the checkpoints, or bonfires, are few and far between. So you go back, and have to grind through the same enemies. Unless, of course, all the reviewers lie.

bolded part: sounds exactly the same like pretty much every game with a save/load system, whether it's "save anywhere" or checkpoint-based you'll have to re-fight the same enemies from the last checkpoint/save point to the point you died and tried (not to mention games where you restart the whole level, like this game's predecessor)

Uh. You really don't see a difference between standard save system and a checkpoint system? Not every game throws you back to waste your time. Not every game should. Games with very short levels, such as Mega Man, can have a checkpoint system. Others shouldn't. And BTW the game's predecessor really sounds like shit just because of that. Why would I want to play the same stage again? I have seen it already, what's the point?

, except here you can open up shortcuts that you can use after you die and if you die you can pick up your "currency" (and humanity, but that's a different story) so in a way, unless you're an idiot, it's even easier than traditional checkpoints. so why is it a problem here? why is punishing the player for being especially dumb (as in, dying twice at the same place or before) suddenly bad or somehow worse than "older purebred action games"? not to mention there are plenty ways of "circumventing" the problem of losing souls. that is, if you're not stupid of course. or just being edgy... caelummodo docet, i guess.

It's still not a proper PC save/load system. And what sort of an action game is one where you always can prevent dying to something after you've seen it just once? From what I gather, this is not one of them. But yeah, I get it, hardcore gamers dig doing the same shit over and over again just because it's not actually harder but takes more time. What's the point again?

If I can't save whenever I want, I too will, of course, pass (I don't even torrent games that use checkpoint saving). I mean, the simple fact that Dark Souls doesn't have save anywhere, is hard proof that it's a shit game.

ah, the uneducated, braindead, misinformed fools... bethesda/bioware what have you done?
technically, DkS autosaves everywhere constantly whenever you open up your inventory or gain some souls or every X seconds (i'm not sure about the last one, but 101% confirmed on the first 2).

Chill man, no need to get so defensive, it's just a random PS3 game.

 

[Cowboy Moment]

All roguelikes are shit games, because you can't save. Bullet hell schmups too, what were those designers thinking, not putting in a quicksave function?

 

[Emily]

HOW DARE THEY WASTE MY TIME!! HOW DARE THEY MAKE ME LOSE! HOW DARE THEY MAKE IT SO THAT I CAN ACTUALY HAVE CONSIQUENCES FOR MY DYING !!!
fucking devs fuck em

 

[Demnogonis Saastuttaja]

Oh I'm sorry, I didn't know this was a roguelike or a shmup. Is it sort of like Street Fighter, too?

 

[BLOBERT]

LOLOLLOL AT BRIANLESS PCTARDS HAHHAHAHAA CANT CHEESE AND SAVE ONLY WHEN THEY WANT

THATS THE REASON OLDER CONSOLES ARE OK BECAUSE THEY HAVE EMULATORS AND SAVESTATES FOR PEOPLE WHO HAVE TO RELOAD EVERY OTHER MINUTE

BROS LOLLOLOL THERE IS MORE SYSTEM WARS WHINNING ON THIS BOARD THEN GAMESPOT AND GAMEFAGS PUT TOGETHER

 

[Cowboy Moment]

It's actually surprisingly close to a roguelike, in that 90+% of deaths can be avoided by being cautious, perceptive, and generally not a fucking retard - which is probably why professional gaming journalists found it so hard.

Honestly though, bro, do you also rage because not only does everything respawn in Diablo 2 after you exit the game, but there's also an XP penalty for death? What about the concept of a game being balanced around save points is so hard to grasp?

 

[Demnogonis Saastuttaja]

From the reviews I gathered it isn't very well balanced in that but is rather a enormous, slow-paced and repetitive timesink which is not the style of game I enjoy. I would better like talking from experience but... eh, it's the PS3, even if there was a demo I wouldn't connect the fucker to the internet. Look, checkpoint systems don't work for all styles of games, I can think of a lot of examples where they are terrible and this game sounds like one that could either be a really shitty example or a good one. I haven't made a judgement yet, but I don't like doing the same shit again for no good reason and thus the talk about the game hasn't made me even consider purchasing it.

I'll try it out for free, see if the reviewers were right or not, but I don't see the need to get so defensive about it.

 

[praetor]

see if the reviewers were right

are they ever? they've been playing railroaded "press A for AWESUM" cinematic experiences with emotional engagements for over a decade now, so of course most of them find the occasional real game very difficult and hardcore.

and the "checkpoints" work really well (although it'd be more correct to call them "respawn points" since the game technically saves automatically all the time). if anything, there are too many of them so more often than not (considering each encounter is usually quite carefully designed so enemy placement is static) you'll be set back by a minute of straight running to get from the closest bonfire to the boss. i'd honestly rather have a system like this, than the usual save scumming of a quicksave/load system because you either live with the consequences of your choices or restart the game. very , which is something this prestigious magazine stands for

 

[Average Manatee]

I imagine Demnogonis also bought DA2 expecting a 10/10 game that improved upon DA:O in every way and set the new standard for RPG excellence?

 

[Demnogonis Saastuttaja]

Yeah, because there are only three sources of game reviews in the internet.

 

[Clockwork Knight]

It's still not a proper PC save/load system. And what sort of an action game is one where you always can prevent dying to something after you've seen it just once? From what I gather, this is not one of them. But yeah, I get it, hardcore gamers dig doing the same shit over and over again just because it's not actually harder but takes more time. What's the point again?

"It's not hard, I just keep dying over and over because it lacks a proper saving system."