From Software The Dark Souls Discussion Thread

[bminorkey]

It's like you excavate my post for that one inconsequential detail you could nitpick about.

Most new players would know of the Drake Sword because they heard about it from their friends or on the net. It's one of the most shared exploits in the game, not some obscure secret passed down from one Master Ḥashshāshīn to the next over the generations.

Hrm, okay. If I think something you say is wrong, how many times must you say it before it's alright for me to argue against it? Should we discuss it before hand in PMs? Anything else I can do to alleviate your pain?

Here's how I'm going to demonstrate why your post irked me:

Stupid argument aside, the only way you'd know of the Drake Sword is if you were looking at hints for the game. I don't know if that's "most players" or not and personally it didn't apply to my first playthrough. It continues to stand that the game doesn't require a new player to grind in the early stages just so they can get through them, since the Drake Sword is by no means a requirement to do anything and any of the really useful items sold (BB, repair boxes, and so on) are cheap as shit.

Yeah, that makes sense. Especially because a smart, very lucky player obviously couldn't predict shooting the Drake's tail would be worthwhile. Oh wait

 

[SerratedBiz]

Yeah, that makes sense. Especially because a smart, very lucky player obviously couldn't predict shooting the Drake's tail would be worthwhile. Oh wait

... The fuck? This is a goddamn video game, logic only goes as far as the designer wants it to go - so no, there's no level of intelligence which would allow you to predict shooting its tail would give you a weapon, no more than shooting its horn might net you another. Is this a joke?

There's no mechanic in DkS (up to that point) or in DeS that could hint towards tail-cutting as a means of getting a new weapon. The first boss you can actually handle that has a tail weakness is the Bell Gargoyle and to get there means you've already made progress well and beyond the Burg and are ready to take on the Lower one. There is NO reason whatsoever for anyone to say "hey, maybe if I shoot the tail, something will come up!". You're pulling this argument straight out of your ass, so stop it.

 

[Jasede]

If you want to split hairs about it, if new players play the game the way I do they could easily figure out the tail thing:

A) The Gargoyle
B) A love for restarting the game with different characters (I did this a LOT, though in the end I did finish it with my Great Club/Great Hammer heavy)
C) Noticing how very tempting that tail wiggles about crossing under the bridge

But it's moot; it doesn't really matter.

 

[SerratedBiz]

But it's moot; it doesn't really matter.

Yeah, pretty much.

 

[bminorkey]

Yeah, that makes sense. Especially because a smart, very lucky player obviously couldn't predict shooting the Drake's tail would be worthwhile. Oh wait

... The fuck? This is a goddamn video game, logic only goes as far as the designer wants it to go - so no, there's no level of intelligence which would allow you to predict shooting its tail would give you a weapon, no more than shooting its horn might net you another. Is this a joke?

There's no mechanic in DkS (up to that point) or in DeS that could hint towards tail-cutting as a means of getting a new weapon. The first boss you can actually handle that has a tail weakness is the Bell Gargoyle and to get there means you've already made progress well and beyond the Burg and are ready to take on the Lower one. There is NO reason whatsoever for anyone to say "hey, maybe if I shoot the tail, something will come up!". You're pulling this argument straight out of your ass, so stop it.

You explicitly said the only way a player could find out about it is through looking at hints for the game. This is patently false. It is theoretically possible to predict tail cutting would give you something, or maybe you could hack into From Software's computers and steal their source code, or hear about it from a friend. But the point is, that like you yourself agreed:

But it's moot; it doesn't really matter.

It has no relevance to the argument. It has nothing to do with anything you said. It deliberately disregards the entire point of your post to nitpick a small, inconsequential falsehood.

The analogy here is when we go back to your post. And I quote:

Makes sense, especially since being new to the game you'd have no idea you could get the Drake Sword.

Okay, so you think one of my examples for things players might farm for is for some reason wrong. You probably know it isn't entirely wrong, for example, because some new players could've heard about the Drake Sword in any number of ways (in fact, it isn't wrong at all - a considerable amount of new players do know about the Drake Sword). But... why bring it up? It has nothing whatsoever to do with my post. It's just an example for something players might farm for. I even gave another one: farming in the Burg.

The overall message of the post was exactly the message of your post following it. Whether a new player might farm for one specific piece of equipment or not has absolutely no relevance to the point, which is: grinding can help in the early stages, but it's optional.

And yet, out of everything I wrote in that paragraph, the one thing you go out of your way to respond to is that perceived inconsequential falsehood which has nothing at all to do with anything. That's nitpicking, and it's irking.

 

[SerratedBiz]

Irking to you, worth posting to me. I don't even see why this is a problem, other than you seeming to be so hung up about the issue. It's not like I'm raging behind my screen, punching my balls while wondering why someone spoke of the Drake Sword so freely. I disagreed and posted it, that's it.

I'd still contest your claim that it's "theoretically possible to predict tail cutting" since it's about as reasonable as, again, it being theoretically possible to predict horn cutting, or fang removing, or eyeball gouging, as a possible weapon acquisition mechanic. It only makes sense because it's already there, not because it's possible (those examples are all possible, but not implemented, because tail-cutting is as much a design decision as any other - it's there because someone put it there, not just because it makes sense). I don't see why you're so aspie about this one issue.

We did indeed agree on the rest of the post, yes. Maybe you need to stop raging a little, take a deep breath and reevaluate the value of this much wasted effort.

 

[bminorkey]

Do you make it a point to be as odious as possible by finishing every paragraph with the equivalent of "I don't see why you rage :trollface:"? We're having an argument here. You did something which irks me - I am explaining to you, since you actually asked the question, what it is. One might find something annoying or distasteful without sitting behind the computer screen, cheeks flushed red fists shaking.

Likewise one might take an honest criticism seriously. You did something which annoyed me - deliberately excavating my post for that one point you could potentially nitpick about, presenting it as the Rosetta stone to unlocking the mystery of my paragraph. I told you it annoys me. Take my complaint as you will (although I am hoping you will take it into consideration!) - this is all that's essentially going on here.

 

[joeydohn]

I like the idea of a hitting a predefined part of an enemy to get items, especially if it's an easter egg or scarcely used and unexplained mechanic. On your first playthrough there's an element of luck and experimentation in combat will pleasantly reward you, in later playthroughs you won't have to rely on the RNGod and grind for it, but (correct me if I'm wrong) there's still an element of skill required to get it.

 

[funkadelik]

I like the idea of a hitting a predefined part of an enemy to get items, especially if it's an easter egg or scarcely used and unexplained mechanic. On your first playthrough there's an element of luck and experimentation in combat will pleasantly reward you, in later playthroughs you won't have to rely on the RNGod and grind for it, but (correct me if I'm wrong) there's still an element of skill required to get it.

That's one of the reasons I love Monster Hunter. The battle system is perfect and you have to figure out how to hit flints off of a boss or what not to make certain armor and weaponry. Super sweet.

 

[Black]

LoW FPS FEAtuRE
To prevent latency issues and frequent disconnections, there is a
low FPS feature implemented where if your FPS drops below 15
for 30 seconds, your game will automatically be disconnected
from the online session and will return to the title screen. To avoid
this, please refer to the minimum/recommended specifications
to have a better configuration.

http://cdn.steampowered.com/Manuals/211420/DARKSOULS_PC_MANUAL_ANZ.pdf?t=1344010093
Page 14
Seems like a good feature on a game that devs couldn't even properly optimize for consoles

 

[Raghar]

If you want to play on line, you should have computer that allows that. Offline mode should be unaffected.

 

[Black]

If you want to play on line, you should have computer that allows that.

Yes, it's called internet connection.

 

[Grunker]

oh dear fucking lord

Games for Windows Live? Really? You must be kidding me. How many bad decisions are they going to make. The decision to play this based on the review of some of the best Codex bros is hanging in a thinner and thinner thread.

 

[Metro]

Well the good news is they're selling it for a reasonable $40 base so it should hit $10 sooner rather than later.

 

[Jasede]

New trailer from Gamescom



I fucking hate trailers and commercials and sneak peaks, no matter what medium.

 

[Ulminati]

Well, Dark Souls was supposed to be the next console game I finished after Dragon's Dogma after getting recommended in my previous xbox game reccomendation thread. But enh... I can play it for about an hour, then my attention drifts elsewhere. The graphics are ok. The combat isn't awful, although lots of games do it better. I absolutely loathe having combat functions on the triggers. Dunno why, I guess I'm too used to Ninja Gaiden. It's not nearly as difficult as the interwebz made it out to be. The story is decentish so far and the whole you-play-as-an-undead thing was a nice touch.

But at the end of the day, after sitting down and thinking "this is the time I'll hit a groove where the game clicks with me", I last for about an hour and then I find myself thinking "what else am I yet to complete".

The first time I got past the asylum with a single death to the demon because I missed the "run away!" sign and thought I had to lure it into smashing all ten pillars for ceiling-crumbling action. Then took about half its hitpoints off with the sword hilt after that failed. Spoke with the guy after you land walked around a bit. Then jumped back to dashboard, disengaged brain and got through 4 chapters of gears of war 3. The next day I figured I'd give Dark Souls another shot. Abut after 30 minutes I grabbed a beer of finished gears of war 3. Today I figured I could finally make some progress in Dark Souls and instead I find myself getting as far as the Ettenmoors in War in the North.

I think I'm ready to give up on Dark Souls. Something in it just doesn't click with me. The only legitimite complaints I have is the button mapping sucks balls and the game utterly fails to entertain me despite the story being decent, the graphics and sound being passable and the atmostphere being quite good. Oh well. Off to finish War in the North, then Arkham City is up next.

 

[Damned Registrations]

So you tried it for like... an hour? And half of that in the tutorial area?

Oh well. I did the same thing with PST so who am I to judge.

 

[Ulminati]

I tried it for an hour, got bored, played something else. Gave it another hour, got bored, played something else. Gave it another 30 minutes, got bored, played something else. And now I really can't justify giving it another hour. If you're not entertained in the slightest after sinking 2½ hours into it - especially when there's no huge learning curve to justify an ultra-slow start - I can't really see a compelling argument to sink more time into an unentertaining entertainment product.

 

[Crooked Bee]

So Ulminati has no taste? Updated my journal.

 

[aris]

So Ulminati has no taste? Updated my journal.

Now that's a huge surprise! I'd wager he enjoyed his beer of finished gears of wars 3 though, seemingly so much that he finished all three iterations(?)

 

[commie]

Someone slags off Derp Souls! In before Crooked B....oh too late....

 

[Crooked Bee]

Ah commie, a fan of shitty games. Hello there.

 

[commie]

Ah commie, a fan of shitty games. Hello there.

I'd point out the hypocrisy and irony of that statement but I'll refrain from it. I'll just say that The Witcher 1 and 2 won 3 Codex RPG GOTY awards so you and your ilk with a lack of monocled taste are in the minority....

 

[Black]

Ah commie, a fan of shitty games. Hello there.

I'd point out the hypocrisy and irony of that statement but I'll refrain from it. I'll just say that The Witcher 1 and 2 won 3 Codex RPG GOTY awards so you and your ilk with a lack of monocled taste are in the minority....

:declining:

 

[Crooked Bee]

Ah yes, as voted by all the butthurt poles who cling to just about anything to be proud of but alas have nothing.

Sorry commie, my taste is impeccable.