DARK SOULS 2 - All info so far Thread - Interviews, Trailers, etc. - Release Date: March 2014

Multiple areas would be boss! With the possibility of vehicles, that makes me really wonder, actually.

great...I'm worried based on that interview/artwork. This looks like God of War mixed with something else....

I always thought the convenant system was pretty easy to understand I also find some that interview pretty worrying, Miyazaki has to have a large input or can't see it having the same depth, hope I wrong tho

The covenant is not simples to understand, it's not polished either and most players just ignore it on their first playthrough, but is it bad? for me it was a lot of fun trying to discover how it works, it added a ton of replay to the game.

To answer that question, carl; yes. When a system of the game is a complete mess, and people still debate what it does a year later, that's bad. Not gamebreaking, but there is no reason it shouldn't be fixed.

ak1287 wrote:To answer that question, carl; yes. When a system of the game is a complete mess, and people still debate what it does a year later, that's bad. Not gamebreaking, but there is no reason it shouldn't be fixed.

Which covenant's functionality it's being debated?

ChizFreak wrote:

ak1287 wrote:To answer that question, carl; yes. When a system of the game is a complete mess, and people still debate what it does a year later, that's bad. Not gamebreaking, but there is no reason it shouldn't be fixed.

Which covenant's functionality it's being debated?

Way of White. There's a general consensus, but most people are even wary of saying it does THAT one function.

ak1287 wrote:

ChizFreak wrote:

ak1287 wrote:To answer that question, carl; yes. When a system of the game is a complete mess, and people still debate what it does a year later, that's bad. Not gamebreaking, but there is no reason it shouldn't be fixed.

Which covenant's functionality it's being debated?

Way of White. There's a general consensus, but most people are even wary of saying it does THAT one function.

No debate buddy. It's a starter covenant, which groups players from the same covenant, so it's easier to see other people's signs. Everyone is sure about it, anyone saying otherwise are either lying or just didn't tested it correctly.

It may sound as an useless covenant, but it's supposed to be for newcomers, new people often talk to Petrus right off the bat and join this covenant, thus acquiring that perk.

ChizFreak wrote:

ak1287 wrote:

ChizFreak wrote:

ak1287 wrote:To answer that question, carl; yes. When a system of the game is a complete mess, and people still debate what it does a year later, that's bad. Not gamebreaking, but there is no reason it shouldn't be fixed.

Which covenant's functionality it's being debated?

Way of White. There's a general consensus, but most people are even wary of saying it does THAT one function.

No debate buddy. It's a starter covenant, which groups players from the same covenant, so it's easier to see other people's signs. Everyone is sure about it, anyone saying otherwise are either lying or just didn't tested it correctly.

It may sound as an useless covenant, but it's supposed to be for newcomers, new people often talk to Petrus right off the bat and join this covenant, thus acquiring that perk.

Well, that wasn't really the part of that covenant I was talking about; it's supposed to increase your likelihood of not getting invaded, too. Or it doesn't. I've never heard a definite answer, although I've heard about 40 different answers.

ak1287 wrote:

ChizFreak wrote:

ak1287 wrote:

ChizFreak wrote:

ak1287 wrote:To answer that question, carl; yes. When a system of the game is a complete mess, and people still debate what it does a year later, that's bad. Not gamebreaking, but there is no reason it shouldn't be fixed.

Which covenant's functionality it's being debated?

Way of White. There's a general consensus, but most people are even wary of saying it does THAT one function.

No debate buddy. It's a starter covenant, which groups players from the same covenant, so it's easier to see other people's signs. Everyone is sure about it, anyone saying otherwise are either lying or just didn't tested it correctly.

It may sound as an useless covenant, but it's supposed to be for newcomers, new people often talk to Petrus right off the bat and join this covenant, thus acquiring that perk.

Well, that wasn't really the part of that covenant I was talking about; it's supposed to increase your likelihood of not getting invaded, too. Or it doesn't. I've never heard a definite answer, although I've heard about 40 different answers.

It's supposedly reduces the amount of invasions as long as you don't have phantom with you. In that case the chance are the standard ones. That's what tests pointed out. And no way to get 40 different answers, or they are all trolls or liars. That's the truth. From my personal experience I seem to get less invasions while being on the Way of White and not summoning anyone.

Read the wiki.

There are lots of newbies out there throwing theories of things that have been already figured out, that's why you always have to resort to trusted places for knowledge. Sadly globalization has lowered the general quality of knowledge, while at the same time making it easier to acquire.

You have to resort to trusted places for info, like wikis. Still, there are lots of wikis out there, but most of them are checked by faithful users who won't post untested or lies in there.

It's not that it reduces the chance, it's just that other covenants/ and people with phantoms have higher priorty.

there's no real way to test it though, if your not getting invaded you could simply be on a bad server at the moment or you could be having good/bad luck depending on what you want.

So, would it somehow harm the game if these things were stated somewhere?

I mean, I HAVE read the wiki, otherwise I wouldn't BE here; but I shouldn't BE FORCED to read a wiki for every little thing I want or need, especially not written by a bunch of dudes on the internet I don't know; you all might be swell, intelligent people, but that doesn't mean I'm going to trust everything you say.

I believe the covenant system is brilliant, i want other companies to copy it. but it was clearly rushed, some covenants have full progression with cool bonuses, others like princess guard and way of the white are useless, Gravelord was spoiled by the poor netcode of the game, it will probably improve a lot with server games.

When the new director says he wants to add more action, what he really means is quick time cinematic combat sequences.

The only change I want to see with the covenants is to actually have them work. I've been gravelorded a number of times, and once I even invaded the guy and we fought, but yet I've never seen a BP in my world :|

ComaPrison wrote:When the new director says he wants to add more action, what he really means is quick time cinematic combat sequences.

No. no no no no no..... no.

ComaPrison wrote:When the new director says he wants to add more action, what he really means is quick time cinematic combat sequences.

1.Quicktime events, when done right are usually not that bad. The problem is that they are rarely done well, and tend to imitate God of War's QTEs.
2. Perhaps you spoke with the director personally? If so, when did he give you this secret information? Inquirers are dying to know.
3. Have you ever played the Monster Hunter games? Well, that's where he came from. He says that he wants to bring some of that experience/knowledge into the evolution of the action in Dark Souls. How many QTEs did you actually see in those games?

MasterofShadows wrote:

ComaPrison wrote:When the new director says he wants to add more action, what he really means is quick time cinematic combat sequences.

1.Quicktime events, when done right are usually not that bad. The problem is that they are rarely done well, and tend to imitate God of War's QTEs.
2. Perhaps you spoke with the director personally? If so, when did he give you this secret information? Inquirers are dying to know.
3. Have you ever played the Monster Hunter games? Well, that's where he came from. He says that he wants to bring some of that experience/knowledge into the evolution of the action in Dark Souls. How many QTEs did you actually see in those games?

1. I don't like them, they are just to look spectacular, and they don't fit into Dark Souls.
2. He is speculating, as we all do, don't be so rude.
3. He is not the same guy, read the main post with all the info before saying things you don't know. Tomohiro Shibuya and Yui Tanimura are From Software employee who worked only on the mech-action series called Another Century.

ChizFreak wrote:

MasterofShadows wrote:

ComaPrison wrote:When the new director says he wants to add more action, what he really means is quick time cinematic combat sequences.

1.Quicktime events, when done right are usually not that bad. The problem is that they are rarely done well, and tend to imitate God of War's QTEs.
2. Perhaps you spoke with the director personally? If so, when did he give you this secret information? Inquirers are dying to know.
3. Have you ever played the Monster Hunter games? Well, that's where he came from. He says that he wants to bring some of that experience/knowledge into the evolution of the action in Dark Souls. How many QTEs did you actually see in those games?

1. I don't like them, they are just to look spectacular, and they don't fit into Dark Souls.
2. He is speculating, as we all do, don't be so rude.
3. He is not the same guy, read the main post with all the info before saying things you don't know. Tomohiro Shibuya and Yui Tanimura are From Software employee who worked only on the mech-action series called Another Century.

I stand corrected about the director thing. And no, QTE's are not always meant to just "look spectacular." They are sometimes used to include more complex actions that are too difficult to replicate with the game's standard input system. Like I said, its rarely done well, but the mechanic in and of itself is not bad.

Secondly, nobody is being rude, so relax. I'm just pointing out that he is doing much more than mere speculation. He is drawing conclusions with no basis whatsoever. Perhaps you should reread the post to see how he worded it?

Im not loving all of this info

Lasts I checked Backstabs and Ripostes were QTE... :roll:

Everyone seems fine with them, though we could probably all agree that the window for them could be smaller.

MasterofShadows wrote:

ChizFreak wrote:

MasterofShadows wrote:

ComaPrison wrote:When the new director says he wants to add more action, what he really means is quick time cinematic combat sequences.

1.Quicktime events, when done right are usually not that bad. The problem is that they are rarely done well, and tend to imitate God of War's QTEs.
2. Perhaps you spoke with the director personally? If so, when did he give you this secret information? Inquirers are dying to know.
3. Have you ever played the Monster Hunter games? Well, that's where he came from. He says that he wants to bring some of that experience/knowledge into the evolution of the action in Dark Souls. How many QTEs did you actually see in those games?

1. I don't like them, they are just to look spectacular, and they don't fit into Dark Souls.
2. He is speculating, as we all do, don't be so rude.
3. He is not the same guy, read the main post with all the info before saying things you don't know. Tomohiro Shibuya and Yui Tanimura are From Software employee who worked only on the mech-action series called Another Century.

I stand corrected about the director thing. And no, QTE's are not always meant to just "look spectacular." They are sometimes used to include more complex actions that are too difficult to replicate with the game's standard input system. Like I said, its rarely done well, but the mechanic in and of itself is not bad.

Secondly, nobody is being rude, so relax. I'm just pointing out that he is doing much more than mere speculation. He is drawing conclusions with no basis whatsoever. Perhaps you should reread the post to see how he worded it?

The speculation is just getting to fanatical levels at this point, we know absolutely nothing other than what's been (vaguely) stated, some concept art and a CGI trailer. Doesn't help when a certain famous community member over analyses a 2 minute CGI trailer and the interview. Time to hibernate away from this 'community' lunacy me thinks.
But I digress the game isn't due out next year so this will die down when cold hard fact hits people in the face in the form of gameplay footage.
Also Chiz your rudeness remark was beautifully ironic.

Sloth9230 wrote:Lasts I checked Backstabs and parries were QTE... :roll:

Everyone seems fine with them, though we could probably all agree that the window for them could be smaller.

More like a grab attack from a fighting game. QTE are over extended flashy finishers, or are use to split boss segments up.

Press R1 as soon as you parry/are behind opponent, aside from the fact that it doesn't appear onscreen, it sounds like a QTE to me.

And some of those Hornet Ring backstabs can get pretty flashy.

I meant Riposte earlier, not parries lol

Sloth9230 wrote:Press R1 as soon as you parry/are behind opponent, aside from the fact that it doesn't appear onscreen, it sounds like a QTE to me.

And some of those Hornet Ring backstabs can get pretty flashy.

Exactly, backstabs and parry animations are essentially quick-time events.