Quote from: Luciana on December 07, 2015, 01:57:22 AM

I praise it because it rejects the easy way out and goes against the grain.

I praise it because video games cost so much money to make, and when you see games like Call of Duty and how much money they make, it makes the temptation that much more to take the easy way out, lest you lose that money.

I praise it because the entire point of the industry is to push the current boundaries and trends, and to express your creative ingenuity in the form of pixels, music, and voices. Not to grow complacent and offer the same thing with a slightly different light.

i still don't personally find that very impressive or praiseworthy, because it's nothing new

That's a pretty piss poor argument considering pretty much EVERYTHING is just a copy paste of things before

Quote from: NiggerBot 9000 on December 07, 2015, 02:01:30 AM

Nowhere close to what I said. If you bothered to advance in the game, you'd know what I'm talking about. It's literally a choice to allow invasion or not. The only times I chanced being invaded is when I sought an ally in a boss fight, and never outside of that. You can play through the game solo just fine without others attacking you.

But I guess if you choose to remain ignorant or outright stupid of this fact, that's nobody's fault but your own.

Or people could just not be dickheads and never invade people. It's their fault.

Blaming others for your ineptitude? That's quite the skirt for accepting responsibility. You can literally make the choice to NEVER allow anybody to invade you. If you fail to make that choice and STILL blame others, you're fucking stupid.

Quote from: NiggerBot 9000 on December 07, 2015, 02:11:55 AM

Blaming others for your ineptitude? That's quite the skirt for accepting responsibility. You can literally make the choice to NEVER allow anybody to invade you. If you fail to make that choice and STILL blame others, you're fucking stupid.

I shouldn't have to play offline. People should just not be cunts.

"People shouldn't break laws LOL"

You don't have to play offline. I played through more than half the game online and was only invaded twice - both times because I willfully made the choice to chance an invasion (I've never invaded anybody, either). You have no excuses whatsoever.

Quote from: NiggerBot 9000 on December 07, 2015, 02:17:15 AM

"People shouldn't break laws LOL"

They shouldn't. And if they do, it's their fault.

Just like if you invade someone, it's your fault.

Quote

You don't have to play offline. I played through more than half the game online and was only invaded twice - both times because I willfully made the choice to chance an invasion. You have no excuses whatsoever.

I'm sorry you were invaded twice. That shouldn't have happened to you. It wasn't your fault.

It was, though, because I completely lowered the barriers against invasion. The first time I died to the invader, and the second time I won. Both invasions were due to a personal choice of completely allowing people to invade my world - had I not, there was 100% no chance of invasion. Nobody was to blame but myself for invasion, because I opened my only barriers to hostiles 100%.

It was, though, because I completely lowered the barriers against invasion. The first time I died to the invader, and the second time I won. Both invasions were due to a personal choice of completely allowing people to invade my world - had I not, there was 100% no chance of invasion. Nobody was to blame but myself for invasion, because I opened my only barriers to hostiles 100%.

That doesn't give people the right to be dickheads and invade you. You should be able play online with other people without fear of getting invaded, but you can't. It wasn't your fault.

Quote from: unyun on December 06, 2015, 07:37:56 PM

I remember having the same opinion as Verb in my first hour, but now it remains as one of my favourite games of all time.

Spoiler

Though Bloodborne was more fluid and had arguably better lore, bosses and matchmaking.

Bloodbornes PvP was absolutely shit. It is not as engaging as Dark Souls 2, because all you do is jump all over the place and spam your blood vials. You don't even get punished for that.

It's bad. PvE vs monsters is good, but not PvP or fighting other hunters in PvE.

Besides, everyone forgot about that game after the first 3 months.


Edit: Actually, it doesn't help every single Souls game ever has servers developed by monkeys. The latency of BB is what helps kill it. You'll get blood/hit sound effects in it and the player will jump away just fine. It's annoying.

I explicitly said matchmaking. The glyph system actually allowed you to play with friends. They have also since fixed their servers and improved connectivity issues.
Co-op works great, better than it ever did in DaS.

I don't think anyone necessarily "forgot" about it either, it was unappreciated due to its exclusivity. It's the best game since Dark Souls.

gg luci

I love how, according to Kupo, tany game with a canon explanation for character deaths and respawns is obviously copying souls

ggnore

Quote from: NiggerBot 9000 on December 07, 2015, 01:57:16 AM

You can literally avoid it entirely. It's up to the player whether or not they want to allow the chance if they want to be invaded or not - and if you choose to allow that chance, it's ENTIRELY your fault. You have zero excuses.

"Rape is your fault. Never go out in public."

kk

There's an anarchy joke in here somewhere.

To be fair, this is a really shitty argument as it's literally a central point of the game. Any invasions are entirely and perfectly avoidable if that's what you wish.

Yeah, by doing something you really shouldn't have to do to begin with.

That's not good design.

What you're doing is really no different from playing Call of Duty online and then complain when people kill you because they're being cunts when you just want to run around the map and explore stuff.

Which isn't the same at all because I'm actually consenting to having a match with them. Invasions are intrinsically non-consensual. "You're consenting as soon as you play the game--" No you're not. There is no contract, there is no warning. It's a fucking game flaw.

If there was a disclaimer at the beginning of the game that said,
"Warning: This is a game made for cunts, by cunts. If you'd rather not have to deal with cunts, please play offline."

Then I wouldn't have a problem. But guess what? There isn't such a disclaimer.

You have to set yourself up to be invaded. Simply being online is not enough. The game offers you a very straightforward and deliberate choice. You can remain hollow and play through the game without ever seeing another player, if that's what you want. But, it also gives you an alternative. You can consume humanities to become human. This gives you more damage resistance, more damage output in some cases and other benefits, including the possibility of summoning a random friendly player to help you with a particular boss fight or area. However, by doing so and choosing these extra benefits, you also run the risk of having someone trying to fight you. It's a very reasonable trade-off.

No, it isn't. It's not good enough.

If you're so bothered by potentially having to fight another player, don't choose to be human.

Shouldn't have to make that choice.

Complaining about this is really no different than people deciding to play Halo Reach online to get the extra credits you can earn there (while it's still entirely possible to earn them in singleplayer just the same) and then complain that you might get killed by someone even though you deliberately chose to put yourself in that situation.

Fucking hell, did you seriously repeat the same shitty point AGAIN? I'm not refuting it twice.

Dark Souls multiplayer is hands down one of the most innovative, clever and insanely fun online experiences I've had in any of the hundreds of games I've played.

You can disagree with that all you want (even though I find that incredibly close minded as you never even played it yourself), but don't go around pretending that it's poor and innocent players being prevented from playing the game because they're being invaded by big bad bullies against their will.

How is it close-minded to say that I hate having non-consensual shit imposed on me?

I know what it's like, so why in the FUCK would I need to experience it again in this game?

And when did I ever say that they're being prevented from playing the game? I said they're being prevented from playing the game without the burden of being invaded and playing online at the same time. Which should be possible.

"You want to play through the entire full game by yourself without ever having to worry about others invading you while still seeing phantoms and hints? You can do that with ease, as it's actually even the default option.

Not if you have it so it automatically signs you in every time you turn your system on.

Something a lot of people do. So "default" is kind of a dumb word to use.

Your precious game is flawed as fuck online. Sorry to say.

Geez, you two really know how to take a nice vibe of a thread and really degrade it with this useless arguing that's happened before about 4 times on this same exact topic.

I'm done talking about this stupid thing. Verb I'll engage you in actual Dark Souls thoughts whenever you actually get to playing it, rather than your pre-made judgement of it (no that's not an insult or a jab). I only told you about the offline thing for your consideration since it offers players an option in case they don't want to play online like the vast majority of their audience wants to.

Well, I'm sort of conflicted, because on one hand, I would love to just play offline the entire playthrough. Fuck those cunts.

But at the same time, I'm sort of deliberately avoiding part of what makes the game so fun for a lot of people, so maybe I should enable the multiplayer at least once, or something. I don't know.

I'll figure it out when I make it there, I guess.

You haven't refuted a single thing. People make the deliberate choice to play a more challenging mode of the game where they consume certain items that results in a higher risk, higher reward experience. They can get through the game faster, more efficiently and have the opportunity to obtain a large amount of souls, items and humanities by fighting invaders. The trade-off for this bonus is that they consent to some enemies in the area actually being human players.

The trade-off shouldn't exist, is my argument, because it's a shitty trade-off. I should be able to play the game online with friends if I choose and never run the risk of getting invaded by some fucking shithead.

The fact that that isn't possible is terrible design in my eyes.

You're not refuting anything and a lot of your posts show that you really don't understand how the game and its multiplayer works. You played the first 10 minutes, failed at the tutorial and never played it again.

I didn't fail at the tutorial--I turned the game off at the tutorial the first time I saw a misleading message, because I said to myself, "I can't deal with a game that allows you to do this to people."

It might be a good idea to actually play the game more or at least read up on it before you do this. By making the willing and entirely free choice to play the game in human mode, you consent to potentially running in to real enemy players that might try to fight just as much as you consent to other shooters trying to kill you when you play Call of Duty online. There is not a single difference.

Except for the whole consent thing.

Start game. Choose not to go out of your way to find relatively rare items that you can only consume at certain places in the game which reverts your hollowing and changes your gamemode by opening you up to the multiplayer after giving you a warning and asking you if you are sure if you want to do this. Play game.

Terrible trade-off. I want the entire game, offline.

If you had actually played the game, you'd know that you start off hollowed. You need to find very specific items and use them at very specific locations after a message asking you if you are sure if you want to do this shows up to even enable the multiplayer portion of the game. I played through the game 3 times before I even chose to do this. Three full online playthroughs where I did not fight a single other player and was not invaded once. As I already said, the game's default setting is to be hollow. You need to go through certain steps (which are all reverted back to the original, default and non-invasion setting upon any death you incur) to allow hostile players in your world. How in the world is this "having non-consensual shit imposed on me"?

Because when you're invaded?

You're, uh.

Not asking for it.

Not complicated.

As I already tried to point out: it is possible. Even more so, it is the default setting. And even more more so, you can't just change it to "allow players to invade" in the settings or enter a specific playlist. It takes single-use consumable and rare items to even initiate the possibility of an invasion.

I want co-op without the possibility of invasion.
I want to be able to use those items without running the risk.

That is all I'm willing to accept.

No trade-offs.

A lot of what verb says is just blatantly wrong because he hasn't even played the game past the tutorial.

There is no way, no how to justify non-consensual invasions. I don't care how they work.

Quote from: Verbatim on December 07, 2015, 09:18:35 AM

Quote from: Tyger on December 07, 2015, 09:17:19 AM

A lot of what verb says is just blatantly wrong because he hasn't even played the game past the tutorial.

There is no way, no how to justify non-consensual invasions. I don't care how they work.

good thing their aren't any non-consensual invasions then huh

"Rape is consensual."

ok solonoid

Quote from: Tyger on December 07, 2015, 09:19:41 AM

Quote from: Verbatim on December 07, 2015, 09:18:35 AM

Quote from: Tyger on December 07, 2015, 09:17:19 AM

A lot of what verb says is just blatantly wrong because he hasn't even played the game past the tutorial.

There is no way, no how to justify non-consensual invasions. I don't care how they work.

good thing their aren't any non-consensual invasions then huh

"Rape is consensual."

ok solonoid

you choose to be open to invasions, like you've been told 100 times already in this thread.