View Single Post

Default 

December 26th, 2012, 11:51
Again: How easy or hard you find a challenge is completely individual. It's impossible to taylor the individual experience unless you let individuals taylor it themselves.

I spent well over 100 hours playing Dark Souls and got as far as the Duke's Archives Prison Tower before I quit. That is how hard it was for me. And to me, difficulty is a matter of how much time I wish to spend with a game. If the lore and atmosphere are good, I can take a higher difficulty. Personally, I think 30 hours would have been reasonable in this case. I would have been perfectly happy with the difficulty if I had gotten as far in 30 hours. Then I would probably have continued to complete the rest of the game.

Again: An easy mode would not "destroy" or even alter the game for anybody who wants a challenge. It would not prevent you from playing the hard mode. (No, really, it wouldn't.) It would let players decide how much time they wish to spend completing the game.

And it would not require extra resources. For Dark Souls, reducing the damage taken by half for "easy" and by half again for "way too easy" would probably suffice.

Originally Posted by killias2 View Post
It'd be like making an Easy mode for an Adventure game and just, I don't know, offering the answers for each puzzle if they aren't solved quickly enough. The game is designed encounter by encounter.
I suppose that's an attempt at irony, but it's not such a bad idea, really. The way the lore of the world is presented through scattered clues in Dark Souls reminds med of Myst and Riven. Those games were pretty hard too, though in an entirely different way. Why no let the game notice when the player is stumped and offer additional clues or hints? Of course, you should be able to reject that help if you insist on figuring everything out for yourself.
Mr Smiley is offline

Mr Smiley

Mr Smiley's Avatar
Watchdog

#46

Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 158