Dark Souls II - Page 10
Forum Index > General Games |
nihlon
Sweden5581 Posts
| ||
Fruscainte
4596 Posts
On June 18 2013 04:32 Simberto wrote: I also never summoned anyone in DS. At the beginning i read a few messages, but i quickly got used to ignoring them because they were mostly people begging for humanities. For me, the Souls franchise is a hard, but fair, single player RPG/fighter type game. Just because you tell me that multiplayer is a huge part of it does not make it that way. For me, it was always a nuisance at best that distracted from what the game is about. Luckily, in DS i could always just not be alive, except for kindling bonfires, and then suicide/die to the first invader after doing the kindling. I didn't even know that i could turn of the internet connection or something, since whenever it was not connected to g4wl it told me that i could not save the game, so i didn't proceed any further. Has it lied to me? If you can't turn of invasions in a similar way in DS2, i won't buy the game, since to me they were just and annoying thing that in really didn't like. If i want to PvP i play a game like SC2 or LoL where you get fair PvP, not a game where one of the two participants wants to progress in PvE, and the other has built and prepared to kill people, and also probably has equipment way beyond what he should have compared to the other person, so the whole point of PvP is just to give one guy the gratification of killing someone who had no chance whatsoever anyways. Well I'm very sorry you have this complete misconception of what this game is, and that's a multiplayer game. A game where sometimes completely unfair things happen and you need to learn to adapt and overcome. If you're having trouble being "endlessly ganked" (lol) maybe you should use the online functionality to, I don't know, summon another human player to help you out? I'm also very sorry you willingly restrict yourself to half the content the game has to offer because you're too afraid to experience something that might take you out of your comfort zone and that you're so afraid of dying in a game based entirely around learning through death and embracing dying as a form of sadistic fun in itself. I played DaS my first playthrough months after the game was released on Xbox. I played the entire game when I could online, which was about 75% of my run. I was invaded four times and only once was it a "twink" who completely wrecked my shit without mercy. The rest was fun as fuck, and even though I lost every one it was a great experience and when I finally killed an invader my second run through and got his souls and when I killed my second invader by having another human help me out it felt also fantastic. Like I said, no matter how much you kick, scream, and cry and it won't matter. The Souls series are multiplayer games through and through. Every covenant has multiplayer functionality to some level in DaS except like Chaos Servant. Yes, you can play the game completely offline like you have but that's reducing the game to a fraction of what it's meant to be. And reducing my argument down to "omg you'll just be endlessly ganked by overpowered twink characters " every post doesn't change that. And DaS multiplayer isn't about fair and balanced arena fighting. Look at the Gravelord, how is that fair in ANY way whatsoever? That doesn't mean it's not an awesome mechanic. Dickwraiths are dicks for a reason. It's meant to be a bleak world. I agree that there should be things to mitigate invasions, and in fact I'm willing to wager there will be a way to outright avoid them entirely but don't even try to argue that this isn't a game that is largely focused on its multiplayer aspect. This is only reinforced in DaS2 with their mirror knight boss summoning real players to help the boss out. | ||
Simberto
Germany11032 Posts
On June 18 2013 04:41 Fruscainte wrote: Well I'm very sorry you have this complete misconception of what this game is, and that's a multiplayer game. A game where sometimes completely unfair things happen and you need to learn to adapt and overcome. If you're having trouble being "endlessly ganked" (lol) maybe you should use the online functionality to, I don't know, summon another human player to help you out? I'm also very sorry you willingly restrict yourself to half the content the game has to offer because you're too afraid to experience something that might take you out of your comfort zone and that you're so afraid of dying in a game based entirely around learning through death and embracing dying as a form of sadistic fun in itself. I played DaS my first playthrough months after the game was released on Xbox. I played the entire game when I could online, which was about 75% of my run. I was invaded four times and only once was it a "twink" who completely wrecked my shit without mercy. The rest was fun as fuck, and even though I lost every one it was a great experience and when I finally killed an invader my second run through and got his souls and when I killed my second invader by having another human help me out it felt also fantastic. Like I said, no matter how much you kick, scream, and cry and it won't matter. The Souls series are multiplayer games through and through. Every covenant has multiplayer functionality to some level in DaS except like Chaos Servant. Yes, you can play the game completely offline like you have but that's reducing the game to a fraction of what it's meant to be. And reducing my argument down to "omg you'll just be endlessly ganked by overpowered twink characters " every post doesn't change that. And DaS multiplayer isn't about fair and balanced arena fighting. Look at the Gravelord, how is that fair in ANY way whatsoever? That doesn't mean it's not an awesome mechanic. Dickwraiths are dicks for a reason. It's meant to be a bleak world. I agree that there should be things to mitigate invasions, and in fact I'm willing to wager there will be a way to outright avoid them entirely but don't even try to argue that this isn't a game that is largely focused on its multiplayer aspect. This is only reinforced in DaS2 with their mirror knight boss summoning real players to help the boss out. The Gravelord fight is completely fair. The fact that you think it is not means you just did not understand it. I also strictly dislike how you act as if i am some kind of spoiled kid. I play the part of the game that i enjoy, and avoid the part that i don't enjoy, and voice concerns that the part that i don't enjoy would take over the game i enjoy in the next iteration. If that happens, i won't like it, and won't buy it, but i hope the developers are not as bullheaded as you and realize that there are people who really dislike the PvP part of the game. How that makes me of "kicking, screaming and crying" to you (i assume by using these words you want to depict me as a baby) is beyond me. I just like a different part of the game, and that makes you feel incredibly superior apparently, and depicts me a a baby in your mind. DS multiplayer is, as you yourself said, not a fair arena type combat. I really dislike that kind of multiplayer. Thus i avoid it. If it becomes unavoidable, the game won't be fun to me anymore. If you enjoy unfair gankfests, that is your choice. I don't. Thus i don't play them. | ||
Fruscainte
4596 Posts
If you enjoy unfair gankfests, that is your choice. I don't. Thus i don't play them. Called it. And reducing my argument down to "omg you'll just be endlessly ganked by overpowered twink characters " every post doesn't change that. I can see you're getting really emotionally invested in this discussion of a video game, so I'll just respect your opinion and back off. I hope you find what you're looking for in your future video game searching I know I am from what I'm seeing from DaS2. Though I do find it bizarre you find gravelording fair but darkwraithing unfair. | ||
Cynry
810 Posts
And yes, you can save game without internet on. Maybe you set yours to the cloud or something ? | ||
Simberto
Germany11032 Posts
That is how you described PvP in Dark Souls right in the post i quoted. And reducing my argument down to "omg you'll just be endlessly ganked by overpowered twink characters " every post doesn't change that. I can see you're getting really emotionally invested in this discussion of a video game, so I'll just respect your opinion and back off. I hope you find what you're looking for in your future video game searching I know I am from what I'm seeing from DaS2. Though I do find it bizarre you find gravelording fair but darkwraithing unfair.[/QUOTE] How nice of you that you are so superior to all of us mere mortals. People tend to get "emotionally invested" if you insult them by telling them that they are babies. Maybe consider actually debating in a civil matter instead of acting smug and superior if you want a reasonable debate. I actually got the feeling that you felt somehow personally assaulted when i said that i enjoy a game you apperantly also enjoy in a different way, and don't enjoy a part of the game that in my opinion does not add anything to it, but which to you is apparently crucial. And yes, i was refering to the Bossfight, not anything else. I have no idea what you need to do to invade someone since that part of the game was never interesting to me in any way. | ||
Cynry
810 Posts
This game isn't designed to be solo. The fact that you cannot, by design, have a single player experience while online should be pretty clear. There is no single player/multiplayer option in the menu. This is what the devs intended, to merge multiplayer and single player in one and unique experience. I understand why you don't like it, and I'd feel the same if, say, someone hacked into my skyrim playthrough to mess with me. If you want a solo experience, turn your internet off. That's the only way, because dark souls is a multiplayer game, wether you enjoy the consequences or not. And I'd be really mad at the devs if they tried to cater to your playstyle. Not because I find it inferior or whatnot, again, I understand and respect your opinion, but because it is unique, as in found nowhere else, and it happens that most of us enjoyed it that way. | ||
Infernal_dream
United States2359 Posts
| ||
Simberto
Germany11032 Posts
On June 18 2013 06:31 Cynry wrote: Simberto, I can tell you pretty much the same thing as he did in a civilized way, and we'll see how that goes. This game isn't designed to be solo. The fact that you cannot, by design, have a single player experience while online should be pretty clear. There is no single player/multiplayer option in the menu. This is what the devs intended, to merge multiplayer and single player in one and unique experience. I understand why you don't like it, and I'd feel the same if, say, someone hacked into my skyrim playthrough to mess with me. If you want a solo experience, turn your internet off. That's the only way, because dark souls is a multiplayer game, wether you enjoy the consequences or not. And I'd be really mad at the devs if they tried to cater to your playstyle. Not because I find it inferior or whatnot, again, I understand and respect your opinion, but because it is unique, as in found nowhere else, and it happens that most of us enjoyed it that way. My point is that at the moment, i have not really a lot of problems playing the game singleplayer. I just stay dead, die once after getting a new bonfire, and that is it. If things stayed like that, i would be totally fine with it. If, however, you couldn't remove invasions this way, like people assume might happen in Dark Souls 2, that would be absolutely annoying to the point where i wouldn't buy that game. Thus, i hope that doesn't happen. I don't need any additional catering. I would prefer the ability to not have to be alive to kindle bonfires to remove those useless deaths i get each time i kindle one, but that is a minor thing. Also, just for fun, try playing a new character, just a usual playthrough, and being alive at all times. Then count how many times you get slaughtered by twinks in Undead Burg alone. Because i tried that, and it really happened constantly. Without fault i'd be invaded every 10 minutes by a guy with max pyromancy and fire weapons. Some of them might also have been hackers because i did absolutely 0 damage onto them. If the only way to play the game would be like that, i wouldn't enjoy it. | ||
Cynry
810 Posts
And yes, if invasion were to be allowed constantly, it should come with some form of balancing. What you said in your last paragraph is a bit of a stretch, no one does that (alive all time) on a regular playthrough. Being alive in dark souls is asking to be invaded, hollows wants your humanity after all. You'd also quickly run out of humanity. But I believe you only said that to illustrate your point about DS2, and I agree with it to an extent, as said in my second line. | ||
Duka08
3391 Posts
On June 18 2013 07:08 Simberto wrote: My point is that at the moment, i have not really a lot of problems playing the game singleplayer. I just stay dead, die once after getting a new bonfire, and that is it. If things stayed like that, i would be totally fine with it. If, however, you couldn't remove invasions this way, like people assume might happen in Dark Souls 2, that would be absolutely annoying to the point where i wouldn't buy that game. Thus, i hope that doesn't happen. I don't need any additional catering. I would prefer the ability to not have to be alive to kindle bonfires to remove those useless deaths i get each time i kindle one, but that is a minor thing. Also, just for fun, try playing a new character, just a usual playthrough, and being alive at all times. Then count how many times you get slaughtered by twinks in Undead Burg alone. Because i tried that, and it really happened constantly. Without fault i'd be invaded every 10 minutes by a guy with max pyromancy and fire weapons. Some of them might also have been hackers because i did absolutely 0 damage onto them. If the only way to play the game would be like that, i wouldn't enjoy it. Just as a contribution, I'm doing a SL1 playthrough right now, and I kindled every bonfire along the way. I didn't get invaded until the room before S&O, and that was when I was standing next to Solaire's sign afk for like 10 minutes because I was cooking. Now to be fair, being SL1 in Anor Londo probably reduces your chances of getting invaded substantially. But I was human for most if not all of Upper and Lower Burg, Parish, etc. and got no invaders. | ||
LaNague
Germany9118 Posts
I can live with gankers and such, i played a lot of mmos. But this game isnt on a secure server, there will be countless of hackers. And there will be even more hackers if there is no way to avoid them. | ||
PassiveAce
United States18069 Posts
| ||
Infernal_dream
United States2359 Posts
On June 18 2013 11:23 PassiveAce wrote: I agree with LaNague here, hackers are very present in the previous games, that is something that either needs to be fixed entirely or if thats not possible then at least give players an out. There's always hackers in every game... I remember high level Halo2/3 you literally could not get a MM game that wasn't hackwars. CS:GO has it's fair share of hackers right now, diablo dupers/hackers. You can't eliminate them. | ||
PassiveAce
United States18069 Posts
but thats not really the point. If they cant deal with it, then they need to give players an out. I dont care which they choose tbh | ||
zergnewb
United States816 Posts
| ||
Fruscainte
4596 Posts
On June 18 2013 11:23 PassiveAce wrote: I agree with LaNague here, hackers are very present in the previous games, that is something that either needs to be fixed entirely or if thats not possible then at least give players an out. Yeah, definitely. At least in DaS there were ways to fight hackers, especially health hackers, depending on where you were in the game world with some well timed chain backstabs or kicks. I think though if the system uses VAC instead of GFWL (just a terrible system all around), the number of hackers would be dropping substantially. At least I hope so, VAC has been pretty -decent- in the past. On June 18 2013 11:52 zergnewb wrote: Dark Souls hackers can be really fucking nasty, such as with the HUMANTY STOLEN hack where they steal your stats without de-leveling you, so if you're going for a certain build your character then the only way you can fix it is to hack your character or to have luckily have made a separate save file of before the hacker got to you. I've actually never heard of this. That sounds horrible. And Simberto, I don't think how you play is "inferior" nor am I offended by it at all. If you prefer singleplayer, that's your choice. My point was calling DaS a singleplayer game is wrong, it's clearly a game meant to blend the worlds between SP and MP and I was just confused why you want to ignore half of what the game has to offer when you don't even know how it worked or even tried it out in depth. If that's how you want to play your game, that's your money. Go for it. Whatever gives you the most fun is the best option, honestly. I was just trying to get into your reasoning a bit breh. Like I said before, I think you just had a bad experience. I've leveled plenty of characters alive in the Burg and yes, I had a few hackers here and there but for the most part I wasn't even invaded at all. The few times I was invaded, yes, it was hacked twink characters fucking with me and I agree that FROM needs to fix that. I think online should scale with gear and the likes, not just SL. | ||
Tobberoth
Sweden6375 Posts
Fact is, the multiplayer system in DS is one of the weakest aspects of the game. It's a cool gimmick and it definitely adds a lot in some respects, but the whole PvP system is completely imbalanced and rewards people for being assholes. I'm sure they could make it work (stop scaling of SL you dumb shits), but if it's like in DS, no thank you. | ||
Duka08
3391 Posts
On June 18 2013 23:24 Tobberoth wrote: The whole argument whether or DS is or is not a multiplayer game is completely irrelevant, it's just a matter of how you define a multiplayer game. If your definition is that there's SOME FORM of interaction between players using your internet connection, it sure is. If your definition is a game which isn't fun to play offline, you're wrong. DS is an amazing singleplayer game, the multiplayer aspect adds depth (and tons of frustration), but it's far from a vital aspect of the game. Fact is, the multiplayer system in DS is one of the weakest aspects of the game. It's a cool gimmick and it definitely adds a lot in some respects, but the whole PvP system is completely imbalanced and rewards people for being assholes. I'm sure they could make it work (stop scaling of SL you dumb shits), but if it's like in DS, no thank you. This is simply the same argument though, and I couldn't disagree more with your sentiments (though I understand frustrations and do acknowledge some issues). The general audience has this biased perspective of PvP just because they wish it didn't exist at all. If you intend to PvP, the system can be extremely fun, challenging, and rewarding. Honorable duels and crazy forest clusterfucks of 4-5 phantoms are some of the most fun I've had playing DkS. I've leveled multiple characters to SL100+ with the intention of some specific PvP build. After you learn to appreciate the way the system works, and throw out hackers and abusers as random acts of bad luck (which they are to be honest), even those invaders while you're playing "single player" can be not only fun and extremely rewarding if you play it right, but give you a chance to dick over someone that's trying to dick you over! There are so many places in this game where you can use the environment to your advantage, going for kicks or surprise backstabs that can throw your opponent off a ledge or what not. For as much as I've PvPed in this game, I also have plenty of playthroughs where I don't, nor do I wish to or intend to, either based on my mood or the build I'm goofing around with. Sometimes invaders come at inopportune times of course, but there are so many ways to deal with it, you just need to change your mindset. If you have a nice stock of souls saved up and don't wish to die, you can immediately react by backtracking and getting as close to the last bonfire as possible or at least a location that's very safe. These exist in nearly all zones where you can be invaded (and the white walls go up to cordon the area off). Or, if you know there's a boss gate coming up based on where you're at, you can often keep playing, albeit a bit quicker and skipping some enemies, and just get to the boss wall to dissolve the enemy phantom. There are quite a few invasion zones that are large enough to continue playing and ignore the invader because it'll take them a few minutes just to find you and get to you. Worst comes to worst and they're closing in on you, get creative, run around a bit, be risky with your footing and force them to follow you. If you already hate PvP and you're resigned to dying anyway, make them chase you on risky footing or fight them on risky footing. There's always a chance they'll make a mistake. I'm not intending this to be a guide on how to invader PvP (at all) but just presenting the options you have at your disposal. If you restore your humanity, you did it for a reason. To kindle a bonfire, to summon someone to help you, all those little boosts... These are advantages, and with them come the disadvantages. I can agree that an "always on" PvP system would be understandably frustrating to a huge portion of the player base, and I can't even say myself that I'd be happy with the idea. But to enable one to play the game without a shred of multiplayer facets at all would be a shame. Even if you think its a single player game, and play it as such, which Dark Souls absolutely can be, the "multiplayer" that's woven into the main game is unique and spontaneous, and shouldn't be tossed out completely imo. There's plenty of tweaking and balancing to be done that could turn it from being a frustrating gankfest for some players that hate it, to fair fights and extremely rewarding for the defender, not to mention gratifying as hell. | ||
Sandster
United States4054 Posts
If persistent humanity were in Dark Souls 2 it'd be terrible. Just because YOU only got invaded x times in Dark Souls 1 doesn't mean that Dark Souls 2 won't have twinks doing nothing but invading because you can't prevent it. Griefing is in every game and people will abuse it when possible. There are 3 reasons to be human in Dark Souls 1: 1) You can't beat a boss and need help. 2) You are trying to do black phantoms or other things that require human form. 3) You welcome an invade and are prepared. You basically screw over the population that ALREADY need help just to advance with the game, while people who wanted pvp was getting it anyway. As a newer player, you don't learn from dying to a single backstab. There's no way for you to beat it, unlike the rest of the game, which lets you learn the environment/enemies and develop an appropriate strategy. | ||
| ||