I very much agree. There is definitely a place for both styles and I'm glad that D'Souls exists in that regard. However, the results are not always positive. Things still happen that would never happen. If I do a rolling dive towards a wall that is too close, I don't smack into it, thus interupting my dive. If I'm surrounded, I just dive in place, when that would never work. Or if I equip a weapon that is half a pound heavier than what I was using before it will slow my movement to a crawl. Yet I was already caring 20 weapons.....somewhere. Don't get me wrong, I liked Demons Souls enough to finish the game with multiple characters. I may even keep playing Dark Souls until I finish it. I'm just talking about what is fun for me and what's able to be overlooked. Dark Souls could definitely use more polish. My only real complaints with Demon Souls was that I just had no idea what the hell I was doing for about the first 10 hours.
That's just one of half a dozen little annoyances that popped up frequently for me in Dark Souls. Again, I never really had similar problems in Demon Souls. Also, I didn't have the massive amounts of slow down on Demon Souls either. It seemed to run pretty smooth. I'm not hacking on the game, but when it comes to "difficult", I prefer a game that challenges you, rather than challenges your mastery of a quirky control scheme. As for it being the interface, I'll agree, that's a big part of it. The targeting just felt unfinished and unpolished. I would expect a target to remain on the person you set it on unless you instructed the game to change, yet this targeting system would hop all over the place, making it very hard to attack a certain enemy until it died. That's not the kind of "hard" that I personally enjoy. Although, I will say that I enjoyed the improved group AI in Dark Souls. They're much better and flanking and using numbers against you. That's something I DO Like about a game that is hard, where the enemies use tactics. Unfortunately, the clunky targeting system kind of ruins what would otherwise be pretty awesome. The games not bad. Not at all. But it could definitely benefit from some control/interface polish. A good example is Super Meat Boy. That is a game that can be pretty difficult, but the controls never get in the way. They always behave like I would expect them to behave. When you die, it's because your timing, strategy, or tactics failed. When you die in Dark Souls, it's frequently because the enemy targeting system failed or the camera obscured something important before you could see it happening.
I'm not bashing the game and it's not a matter of adapting. The system just has problems. For example. I was walking straight forward along a narrow walkway. There was a skeleton in front of me, about 15 feet away. I tapped RS to put the focus on him for combat. There was another skeleton above me and to the left that was out of frame and I couldn't see him even if I looked because he was behind a small wall. But, technically, he was closer than the one I was looking at. So focus jumped to that skeleton, above me and to the left. Because of the contextual direction control, my pushing forward on the control stick actually swung me left, towards the skeleton that had focus. This caused me to walk off a ledge to insta-death. You don't adapt to that because it's not workable. If you can put focus on an enemy that is totally unseen and not on the one you're looking directly at, causing you to walk off a ledge that was to your left when you never hit left, that's just not a great situation. The controls need work. Can you beat the game even with suboptimal controls? Sure. Does it make it more fun? Not for me personally. I'd rather have controls that, at the very least, do what you expect. Getting surprised by a hiding skeleton is great fun, even if he kills you. Having controls act wonky and do things that are totally unexpected and kill you, is not fun for me.
Difficult controls is certainly a parameter for being a difficult game, just not the most enjoyable for me personally. I'd rather have a game that challenges simple and intuitive control, rather than a game that isn't particularly challenging unless the controls make it so. I'd go as fas as to say that focus system in Dark Souls feels downright broken when you're surrounded. Talking about it reminds me alot of Resident Evil 4. It would have been much easier if you could move and shoot. That one limitation was the basis for much of the tension and difficulty. If you're ok with that caveat, the game is fun and tense. If you simply sit there and wish the character could move around, it might be frustrating (it bothered me at first but I got used to it and ended up beating the game). Similarly, Demon (well, Dark more than Demon) Souls makes one wish the damn character would simply move like they do in almost every other third person action game, fluidly and responsively. That's my only point, that if the characters would move like they feel like they should, the enemies would be almost laughable. Now, the getting hit a very few times before dying makes it hard regardless. And the save structure and lack of pause are all legitimate parameters for making a game harder and unforgiving, something the Souls games have in spades.
I like the concept of the game and I really enjoy hard games. The thing I didn't like about this game was that it didn't feel hard because it was hard, I mean the enemies move slow, telegraph everything they do and once committed, can't stop what they're doing. No, the reason it was hard was because the controls and animations were slow and clunky. Attacking with right bumper and clicking the right stick to focus? They just don't work well. Disengaging is clunky and fighting 3 enemies at once can have the camera bouncing all over the place. I didn't have much trouble with Demon Souls (the AI was easily abused) on PS3 but had more with Dark Souls on 360. Not sure why. Also, on Dark Souls on 360, I had TONS of slow down. I wish there were more hard games out there, but not hard due to clunky controls and super slow movements. I recently played knights contract and there are some boss battles in that that will really make you pull your hair out. I died 44 times on the level 7 boss. It took me two hours of nonstop play to beat that boss. I never died that much on Demon Souls.
Don't mince words. Tell us how you REALLY feel about Capcom. ;)
I don't know which is worse, this parody or the fact that it's virtually indistinguishable to the real thing in the eyes of all but the most experienced gamers. I showed my wife the parody, then an actual trailer for the game, which was which was not obvious to her. And this is why gaming struggles for respect. In many cases, it markets itself similarly to porno. And this is coming from a guy who absolutely loves the tombraider games.
Yeah, that was an amazing run. Sony and MS lose money more years than not on their gaming divisions.
At least its not "Fyoonkeh" like the Tobias on Arrested Development.
I agree. SOmething definitely needs to be done to protect digital property. I agree that this is not it. It reminds me of when I was a lot younger and wanted to buy a motorcycle. My parent forbid me to buy one. But I was determined. And I was 18. I told them, "hey, I"m buying a motorcycle no matter what, if you want to participate and help me choose a good one, I'd welcome your input, but if you forbid it outright, then you'll have ZERO say as to what I buy"
Needless to say, they got smart and helped me pick a bike that was reasonably priced and not too fast.
We, the internet are now in the same position I put my parents in. If we don't offer some way to fix this, if we ONLY reject the attempts to protect IP holders (as we have done historically) then we'll have no say in the HOW. SOmeone, a resonsible organization needs to offer SOMETHING to address piracy or else we'll get this kind of draconian law. We need to either offer something better or get ready to get bent over.
You just shattered my understanding of the world. How dare you! Thank you.
But think about it. Someone is a pirate. That basically means, they have free access to ANY game they want. ANY game. Yet......still.....they choose to pirate Kinect Sports. WTF?
Really? You're pirating Kinect Sports: Season 2? Really? Pirates have no shame.
He's not an idiot. He's just not very smart. And his opinions are driven by ideology rather than facts or useful information.
Of course he didn't MEAN it literally. I'm talking about how these things read and how they can generate less than ideal responses from a douche bully. And Daves email reads as a personally aggressive and whiney email IMO. It is what it is. I"m not trying to absolve Paul of anything btw. Douche is a douche and got his due. (aside from his kid/wife being involved of course which is as douchey of a thing to do as what Paul did)
I'll disagree that Paul acted "like a dick" with his short response. You're reading "dick" into it. Just like Paul was reading into Daves email something that wasn't there (personal aggression).
I think he sounded whiny. You don't. Fine. We disagree. But even Kotaku is making the same point.
"Bullies never take the first swing. They look for a pretext that justifies one."
Dave gave this pretext with his wording that came off as personally aggressive (and IMO whiny). Saying "YOU HAVE MY MONEY INTEREST FREE!" is a good example. Paul hasn't personally had his money. And at the same time. of course the company has his money interest free. It's a preorder. Does ANYONE pay interest to customers who preorder because they're holding their money? Of course not. The mere mention of interest payments sounds whiney to me. Like "I should be paid interest, this is an outrage!".
Dude. It's a controller. It's late. Yes. that sucks. Yes, it's frustrating. But it is what it is.
Saying "you this" and "you that" in a personally accusatory fashion when he's really talking about the company at large is not a good way to get your frustration across. Whether or not that frustration is justified is irrelevant.
Those are my words, but your unnecessary double translation is not accurate. To say It means this other thing, which is then another way of saying yet a third thing is taking what I actually said and bending it to a new meaning. You've changed it to the point that it isn't the same thing at all. And then you've taken issue with this new meaning that I never intended. They call this a strawman. You're arguing against something I never said. And you had to translate my actual words twice just to get there. I'm not sure why people do this. Change the words to the point that they mean something different, and that new something is something you want to argue with.
Again, I don't think you really comprehend what "moral of the story" actually means. It doesn't mean some absolute undeniable truth. It means "what lesson is taught by the events of the story". And nothing in the story points one to some ultimate truth that douchery is stupid (although it certainly is). What it points to is that douchery can lead to a massive retaliation and that one needs to take that into account in advance. You never know where that retaliation might come from and ultimately it might come from someone who has alot more ability to be punitive. And to that end, does it even matter why someone is or is not a douche when it comes to a customer service rep? I personally don't care why a customer service rep is respectful to me. Do you think people who wait tables are super nice simply because they're friendly individuals or do you think they're nice because their tips depend on it? Do you still tip when a server is really nice? Or do you quiz them to make sure they're actually a nice person rather than doing it for the tips? That's a rhetorical question.
Was Paul dismissive? Sure? Did he give tragically bad customer service? Probably.
Does Dave come off as whiney (and he also kind of threatens to cancel his order which, in the context of the personal wording he uses, can be taken as an act of aggression)?
"I noticed the updated info on the webpage, and I don’t understand why there is absolutely no benefit given to those like me who have already ordered, and paid their money. You’ve had my money interest free for nearly two months, yet now ANY new order will get $10 off….meaning I should just cancel my order for 2 controllers, get my money back, then re-order. "
Notice he says " YOU'VE had my money interest free for nearly two months". The fact is that Paul, "you" most definitely has NOT had his money. This type of quasi-aggression comes off as personal even if it's not meant to be (he means the company). In any case, it comes off as whiney and aggressive. The guy pre-ordered and now he wants a better deal. Fair enough, but his response was not the best. He then goes on to threaten cancellation which is not a good way to get someone to give a positive response.
So, THEN Paul crosses the line from being a derelict employee into the realm of the douche and responds in an even more immature fashion (by a factor of 1000) and the problem is officially out of control. Paul was not forthcoming with information, Dave got whiney about something out of Pauls control and then Paul went all douchey. That's how I see it.
You may want to reread the thread if you don't see where Dave was whiney.
And I agree about the story getting out. Notice I said, the ends justify the means. That translates to "the outcome" is worth all the trouble. The outcome being that this tool got fired.
And I never said the moral of this story is don't be a douche because you might get caught. Those are YOUR words. I don't care about getting caught. That's not the point or the moral at all. I said, don't be a douche because you never know who might be in a position to hit you back. This story has nothing to do with the moral you mention "dont be a douche because being a douche is stupid". How does this story prove that? Is it true? Sure, but this story doesn't demonstrate that moral at all. A moral of a story isn't simply "whats right or true" its what the story shows through how it played out.
If you jump off a diving board doing a risky stunt and hit your head, the moral of story might be to be more careful or to avoid unnecessary risks. The moral of the story would not be that if you don't jump off a diving board you'll never get hurt jumping off a diving board. Is it true? Sure, but that doesn't make it the moral of the story. In the story we're talking about, the lesson to be learned is that you need to be aware that your words might go further than you intend, regardless of if you're being a douche. To say "don't be a douche" is a no-brainer but this story is more nuanced than that IMO.
I read the whole wall and it's patently misguided. There is no such thing as proportional response in this kind of thing. If you antagonize someone, you don't get to decide the level of their response. It's as simple as that. If I insult your mother, you might just punch me in the mouth. You also might beat the living shit out of me. It's your call, not mine. Best idea is simply not to insult your mother. It's as simple as that. Was this customer a whiney bitch? Yeah, probably. But that doesn't rate retaliation from customer service. However, Pauls response to Dave DOES rate a negative response. Whiney people shouldn't get attacked. They should get politely ignored. Paul didn't do that. In this metaphor, he insulted Daves mother. Dave chose not to simply punch Paul in the face. He chose to go find himself someone much bigger than Paul and whine to him. (again: proof dave is kind of a whiney bitch). Krahulik isn't whiney though and he responded as if HIS mother was the one insulted and he went boom.
Here's how I see it.
Here's how I see it.
1. Dave is whiney.
2. Paul is a complete douche and makes it personal attacking/insulting Dave.
3. Dave retaliates and includes Krahulik.
4. Krahulik goes thermo nuclear.
Is anyone "right" in this? Probably not. But the end kind of justified the means IMO.
Moral of the story: Don't be a douche because you don't know who you might be getting schooled by.
Oh, and Pauls wife and kids SHOULD NEVER enter into the equation. Anyone involving them is a pitiful asshat.
Agreed. To be honest, I played GodoWarIII and turned it off after about an hour. Was not impressed at all.
