Dark Souls 2

Was probably discussed earlier in the thread, but how do you guys feel about always being vulnerable to invasions unless you physically unplug your system? I'm a pretty big proponent of risk of PvP in Sandbox MMO's as long as the actual aggressor faces serious risk. The problem is, Dark Souls seems to give a lot of advantages to being the actual invader, and not too much risk (I know there is the book of the guilty, but meh). The defender seems to have huge preparation disadvantages by being forced to account for PvE AND PvP; he loses progress in his area, might have specialize gear sets on for the area that aren't great for PvP (Rings especially), might be low on resources, and has to worry about NPC agro. Meanwhile, since invaders choose when to invade, they can eliminate all those disadvantages.

I know there is some "risk" for invaders, in terms of them being hunted? But it seems within the discreet PvP itself? The invader has numerous advantages. I just went through this when I was replaying on the PC recently: One guy invaded me with obviously twinked gear for the area--I managed to parry which let me kill him pretty easily, but it was kind of a stroke of luck because I had not yet progressed into the sewers too far and so could focus on him. But then he invaded again, like 20 minutes later, but just as he invades I have 3 mobs agro me. Very frustrating (I know, I know, play hollow! But I wanted the Kirk armor and that's the point though, DS2 won't let you avoid with hollow). I get that it's random, but it's not like I can keep an eye out for him, and be aware like you can in an MMO. He just pops in at random, and so he can be prepped, while the defender could be disadvantaged.

It reminds me of Rogues in WoW vanilla --but on a larger note, this is the classic problem in MMO PvP, aggressors almost always have an advantage, because they select fights. DS, in a lot of ways, actually increases that by the way the spawn system works. I'm wondering if DS2 will then just make PvP frustrating (Though they are doing one thing right, they are greatly increasing risk for invaders--which is a way good MMO's counter balance aggressor advantage.) And I know in DS2 they allow you to join a covenant that lets you team up against PvPers and invaders. So I suppose both the risk for invading has increased (Through bounties and sin) AND the advantage is decreased (Since you can zone in and have 2v1). But overall? Do you guys think it can be balanced well? Really looking forward to this, would hate to have a it botched over PvP, because DS is like the one argument that runs counter to the accessibility tide.

The developers have said that there will be an offline mode, worry not.

The only thing that kind of worries me is the new death penalty. Some of the bosses in DS1 I died to over and over, that sounds like a giant humanity drain now.

I'm greatly looking forward to PvP being forced upon me in DS2. In DS1 I just played through the entire game hollow except right after I kindled a bonfire. Since I didn't want sunbros beating the game for me, going human was just counterproductive. That said, some of my absolute fondest moments are being invaded in those short spurts of humanity. DayZ-like levels of heartpounding.

The biggest issue they need to tackle is the overpowered invader builds, though. Being invaded by a SL11 dickwraith with +5 Ascended Pyro flames and +10 chaos weapons while you run around in starter gear fucking sucks. They have said item quality plays a role in invasions now, so I hope they get that formula right.

As for the death penalty, I'm not a big fan in theory. If you're dying repeatedly, the game is already hard enough. If you're not dying, it's too easy. There's no reason for it to become harder if you suck, and easier if you're good. I'll hold judgment until we know the availability of humanity restores.

I hate everything about Souls' online features so I will just play it offline like I did the previous two games. It's not even the invasions per se, though I do have little interest in that part of the game and generally prefer my single-player experience to not be interrupted by asshats. The ghosts annoy me, and I consider the messages to be ugly-ass graffiti filled with either spoilers or trolling that ruins the visuals in an otherwise fantastic-looking world. Demon's Souls was even worse, since the very fact of being online at all fucked up your world tendency as the online servers always pulled you towards "slightly white".

I always found DS' co-op to be really rewarding and a good way to farm souls (more variety). Sun Bro 4 life.

Invading in dark souls is a really bad mechanic. Its not really PvP since one of the party's is at a huge disadvantage. It reminds me of old school UO when shitty pks would run around and kill miners because they didn't want to engage any real threat.

The invader has all the benefits. Its an awful system. Iwhile I enjoy the online aspects of dark souls.. this will ensure I play offfline..

What's the penalty for losing as the invader anyways?

Quineloe_sl said:

What's the penalty for losing as the invader anyways?

Click to expand...

In DS you had to recover your blood stain.

Lenaldo_sl said:

Invading in dark souls is a really bad mechanic. Its not really PvP since one of the party's is at a huge disadvantage. It reminds me of old school UO when shitty pks would run around and kill miners because they didn't want to engage any real threat.

The invader has all the benefits. Its an awful system. Iwhile I enjoy the online aspects of dark souls.. this will ensure I play offfline..

Click to expand...

Yeah, never understood the reasoning behind the system as it is. It promotes ganking and griefing. You can only be attacked in a zone until you have cleared the boss, then you can no longer be attacked. My biggest issue with the two bosses (Stein and Orn something?) were not the bosses themselves (I think I got lucky) but the path there. Died 3 times to the bosses, but sooooo many times trying to get to them as the damn room just before them was always camped by someone who invaded. Two giant statues, an archer, then always an invasion. Always by someone FAR more powerful than what I was at that time.

I personally don't see the fun in that. Or the "challenge" of the players who enters my game. Reminds me more of when I played, I think it was TERA, and on a PvP server, there is a village with a bridge leading out, only path, and there newbs were permacamped too. Even if 10 people tried to rush them, one swipe killed nearly everyone. How that is fun I don't know, more like the electronic equivalent of bullying. No challenge, just the joy of being able to kill people easily so they get angry/leave/complain, then relish in the "ohhh, you casual newbs"....

Casual in my mind means someone who is on equal level as you, but don't play as much, and so you can easily kill them based on skill. In Dark Souls this is a possibility due to skill and control can really matter, not only the extra damage abilities do when higher level.

However, being 10 times more powerful and having no chance of losing when entering the fight does not make the other player casual, just makes you an ass in my opinion.

They could remedy it by having optional bosses or areas that unlock past the story. So that when you progressed past an area, then you could be attacked once you returned there. But the whole idea of only being able to be attacked when you are new to the area is a mechanic that has always boggled my mind in terms of the Demon/Dark souls games. And I play them with humanity on, because if not, you also miss out on lots of NPC invasions. I don't mind them one bit, because they are scaled to the level where you are. Me landing a backstab with my best weapon on a PC character and doing 3-4% damage though, while they oneshot me with one ability.... that isn't fun, it isn't challenging, it doesn't add anything good. And certainly doesn't make me think that the player who did it was any better than me, if anything I just shrug and think they must be a complete ass in real life as well to find enjoyment in doing it.

Most people probably aren't assholes though, as they are just utilizing the mechanic that the game offers in terms of the PvP. Enjoying PvP is something lots of people do, and can't really blame them for doing it (unless they see how overpowered they are compared to someone, then invade again and again and again). Just don't think it is a good game mechanic to only enable invasions in areas you haven't completed yet, in my mind the opposite would make more sense. Would only have to add a reason to go back to previously finished areas.

As it is, I really like these games, some of my favorite of all time, but the PvP aspect is by far the worst part of the games.

Budos_sl said:

In DS you had to recover your blood stain.

Click to expand...

so.... you basically lose the 1 humanity it took to reverse hollowing?

A major balance to that was SUPPOSED to be that invaders couldn't heal and the invaded could - meaning they had to be quick or just lose to attrition when you healed - but with how slow healing in Dark Souls was it wasn't really a realistic balance. It looks like DS2 assuming invaders have the no-healing rule still will be much better in that regard, the heals are much swifter. Just like in Demon Souls they were quite quick to activate there as well which made them useful when PVP occurred.

Derkon_sl said:

The developers have said that there will be an offline mode, worry not.

Click to expand...

Have they? Because the last three interviews they were absolute emphatic that they don't want people avoiding PvP and it's part of the game.

Lenaldo_sl said:

Invading in dark souls is a really bad mechanic. Its not really PvP since one of the party's is at a huge disadvantage. It reminds me of old school UO when shitty pks would run around and kill miners because they didn't want to engage any real threat.

The invader has all the benefits. Its an awful system. Iwhile I enjoy the online aspects of dark souls.. this will ensure I play offfline..

Click to expand...

Exactly. Again though, I enjoy PvP: I just don't like it being so ridiculously weighted toward invaders sub SL 100. If you're invaded below SL40, especially, you know most likely the guy ran through and grabbed a few big twink pieces, like the scythe, and some pyromancies and farmed up enough Titanite to make sure he's not even going to get scratched. The sad part is even against twinks, it's usually not too difficult to win because most of them don't know how to dead angle worth a shit (Which is probably why they are trying to kill some new people.). But the problem is, as I progressed and the invaders could prepare more? It became harder because they had the mob and prep advantages.

I mean, when you look at the advantages. 1.) Is always prepped for PvP in terms of gear. 2.) Does not have to worry about mobs and so has far less environmental concerns. 3,) Is always full life at start. 4.) Can have a PvP centric build (While the defender might be using a PvE one).

Those are HUGE advantages and given equal skill level? There is only a very slight chance an invader should ever lose unless he's zoning into at an SL level that's generally used for dueling. I really like PvP in DS, I just think the invasion mechanic is really poorly done (Some of the things, like gear not being weighted? They are fixing, but a lot of them are just being left.)

Add in now that you'll literally lose max health, so the risk on the defender is much higher? And yeah, I'm really leary about this being good. I mean, I can just end up unplugging the cord and playing through until I want to go hunt some sinners, so it's cool. But I'm hoping such a good series doesn't get shit on by an already bad PvP mechanic being made far, far worse by poor design decisicons. (Because DS is really the one shining light in an RPG industry that has been sliding toward the diagram of "the player always wins, even when he fails he just wins less.")

Vaclav_sl said:

A major balance to that was SUPPOSED to be that invaders couldn't heal and the invaded could - meaning they had to be quick or just lose to attrition when you healed - but with how slow healing in Dark Souls was it wasn't really a realistic balance. It looks like DS2 assuming invaders have the no-healing rule still will be much better in that regard, the heals are much swifter. Just like in Demon Souls they were quite quick to activate there as well which made them useful when PVP occurred.

Click to expand...

Yeah, I saw they swapped Estus from being your constant healing to be an emergency button and now a separate consumable restores health.

Derkon_sl said:

offline mode will still function as if playing online - National Video Games | Examiner.com

Click to expand...

Awesome, thanks for the link. That's good news. The way they were talking in the interview I read it sounded like the designer took personal offense if you didn't want to fight a Dickwraith at level 10 because he designed it so well.