Reasons like this make me NOT want to play Dark Souls II...

learn how to play the game and fight back lol.. not that hard of a concept

Umm yeah, relax there junior. Way to misinterpet my post. I'm saying that those who suggest others to play offline so people won't invade them are offering a flawed solution because it prevents some of the other online benefits the games have had such as reading/writing messages and viewing bloodstains.

@Lulu_Lulu: Then play it.

yea.. sorry for sounding like a dick, that post was a bit immature of me and i apologize, it just seems these days like everything to do with gaming has gone "or is forced" towards online multiplayer, whether its deathmatch, co-op, or capture the flag its the ONLY flavor of the day, so much that most seem to forget that there are still a select few of us old timers who would rather just sit back and play a game the old fashion way, before all this COD online crap came about, is that so wrong? and it seems we're shunned to the back of the bus if we so much as admit we prefer playing offline, it just doesn't seem right and i try to defend what little is left of offline gaming whenever i can, thats all.. but yea i may have went a bit too far with that post, sorry m8.

I can't wait for this game. This new change means it'll be easier to PvP. I have multiplayer in general, but the way they handled it in Dark Souls was always interesting to me.

-Byshop

That's cool and understandable. Thanks for the apology, it's a rarity on the internet.

Love your one-lines Lulu :D

Anyways of course one can disconnect but why should they be forced to do it because some 2nd rate developer thinks it makes it more "hardcore" and appealing to "hardcore" players that its ok to allow some sick twisted kid access to your single player game. at least for me it wont be a purchase and if i were a jerk i would also hope that anyone else would just pirate the shit out of the game so they at least learn a lesson. But im not so i hope the best for the developer even though their style isent for me.

Also Ubisoft are doing the same thing with Watch Dogs, but at least they put in a off switch so people who still actually care about playing single player can if they want.

Forced PVP is a mistake, in my opinion. I will be playing offline, and unfortunately not taking advantage of the other cool online features. Dark Souls is a near-perfect game- this is not a good change.

It doesn't bother me, I say if people want that extra challenge have it. There are other games similar to Dark Souls out there with less frustration. I prefer less frustration hence why I avoided Demon Souls and Dark Souls, I'll be avoid Dark Souls 2. I rage enough as it is from "fun" games lol

I like this, it takes out the static nature out of the game, and throw some random occurrences for the player.

With all due respect, you're wrong. I know what the games are supposed to be and I do "get" them. They are supposed to be one of the most challenging games in videogame existence. You die a lot, you learn from your mistakes, and you soldier on and take on these huge battles that make you feel like you've emerged victorious from a long fight. Some videogames have given me that feeling. In any case, if a game like Dark Souls doesn't allow me to have fun when it often gets frustrating for the player, why bother playing it? That's why I tried to go and play more Dark Souls recently, to see if I can get back into it and the truth is, I can't. It's now not for me after repeated attempts of playing it.

Some games are meant for others and some are not. I just wish that there was a videogame like this, but with difficulty level settings. Then and only then would I not mind. I would LOVE to play this game and explore the lore and history behind the land and why it is made to appear the way it is, but I can't due to its harsh difficulty. Videogames are meant to be fun...NOT frustrating.

@ Metamania

I'd say Fair not frustrating

XMB, Settings > Network Settings > Internet Connection - Enable/Disable.

Problem solved.

Your opinion. Not mine.

This happened to me recently in Ascend. I was beating the shit out of everybody, taking over lands. I go to take another land when I lose ten times to some idiot before giving up. I honestly think he was using a turbo controller. I haven't played since because I hate games that force you into PVP.

No, if you did "get" them you would realize that difficulty and the online component of the Souls series is an integral mechanic. The entirety of the core gameplay revolves around them: summoning players, watching blood stains, reading messages, leaving messages, invading players, getting invaded. Remove that, and you have a shell of a game.

And I think you, and many others in this thread, are putting way too much weight on invasions. Like I posted earlier, invasions are honestly the least of your worries when it comes to the difficulty and frustration in the Souls games. For example, I started a new character about a month ago and have been playing it off and on with a total of about 25 hours. Within those 25 hours of gameplay I've been invaded around 9 times and each of those time I had 2 Blue Phantoms (summoned players) with me. There are checks in place so you don't just get invaded whenever. Thing's like humanity, Soul level, number of Blue Phantoms summoned, Covenant affiliation, and others determine whether you get invaded. I'm sure the same will thing will happen with Dark Souls II, being Hollow will most likely be on the bottom of totem pole when it comes to being invaded.

12 year olds? This is not COD.

Good post. I see people who play Dark Souls or Demons Souls offline by unplugging their consoles because they don't like the multiplayer, but to me it's a core part of the unique experience (and -I'm- someone who hates multiplayer). While the ability to invade hollows seems harsh on paper, these games have always been tough but fair and I'd be surprised if this weren't balanced out in some way.

-Byshop

Sounds like a good idea, but has many pitfalls. If they can prevent twink-gankers, then maybe it could work.

More PvP is always a good thing in my opinion. Some people are complete wimps and cry at the thought of having to fight other players - but I view it as a fun challenge. I'm not sure why people are so dead-set on having a lonely, static game experience...

I suppose some people don't like the sight of competition. Not sure why. This sort of thing makes the game far more interesting for people who actually likes dynamic game experiences and challenges. At least lonely people who want no challenge aren't going to ruin the game for the rest of us.

One of the most challenging games in videogame existence? Please. These games are NO WHERE NEAR that level of difficulty. If you think these games are trying to be challenging in an effort to be some of the hardest games around - pyratrum is right, you really don't "get" the game. They aren't that challenging - absolutely no where near being the most challenging games in videogame existence, nor are they even supposed to be.

This game is simply made for people who enjoy challenge in their gameplay. If you can't have fun while being presented with a challenge, that's entirely your problem - you aren't the game's intended audience.

If invasions are an integral mechanic, why do the first two games let you avoid them entirely? I guess the devs of DS2 "get it" it more than the devs of Demon's Souls and Dark's Souls?

Or maybe they don't get a fundamental tenet of online games - give your PvP and PvE communities their own sand boxes. Maybe they, like many other devs today, see multiplayer as the key to sales and they're trying to bolster that multiplayer community by forcibly increasing the number of combatants.

In any case, if you loved the first two games like I did and remember how PvP was entirely optional in those games, then how would allowing for the choice to PvP be a problem? It's not going to make the game worse for PvPers and it's going to make the game better for others. So why try to defend a company when they are denying players the choice to play a game in the way they wish, the way they played the last two?

Stop bringing up how painless it might be. This isn't your job or raising kids or going to school...it's entertainment on your dime. You should be able to make the choice to play it how you want. If this was the first game in a franchise, that'd be different...but this is the third game that is suddenly deciding to decrease the choices available to its fanbase in a very unnecessary and pointless way. It's just not defensible.

You've always been missing out on the game experience by going out of your way to avoid invasions. It's because they've been integral to the game. If you go out of your way to avoid them, it means you also went out of your way to avoid a lot of things in the DS games. Being Human is a huge part of Dark Souls, for example. It's the state you pretty much want to ideally play in - your item discovery chances are much higher, curse resistance heightens, you can Kindle bonfires, summon human and NPC helpers to assist with bosses, etc.

And that's my choice. The relevant discussion is how does my choice to play the game in this way negatively affect you? Because if it doesn't, what is the objection to DS2 continuing to offer the choice for people like me to avoid PvP while enjoying the other online aspects the game offers? All i'm saying is what's wrong with handling PvP the way the last two games did? How is that going to ruin your day?

@ Metamania

Damnit ! That didn't come out right. I wasn't saying Dark Souls isn't frustrating, I was offering a replacement for the word "fun" in your last sentence.

It's not required, but this game has a lot of elements that are unique to this series and every element of how it approaches multiplayer is a big part of that. Without it, you still have a solid dungeon crawler but it's the funky-ass multiplayer that kept me coming back for over 200 hours (and again, I hate multiplayer generally).

If they don't give you -any- option to avoid invasions at all, and the play mechanics allow you to just constantly get invaded and hampering your progress then yes, that's punishing and probably won't be fun. However, that's a lot of "ifs". I have no idea how it's going to turn out, but I liked Dark Souls a lot more than Demons Souls because I thought many of the changes made the game a bit more accessible. I'm hopeful that they will not be taking massive steps backwards with the sequel, but that's always a risk. This news, however, doesn't make me concerned. I like invasions so it makes me even more interested in the game.

" You should be able to make the choice to play it how you want."

You can always unplug your network cable like people did in the old game, but this statement is one that I disagree with. I think that freedom of choice is important in games depending on what type of game it is, but I think there is an element that's -more- important than freedom to play a game however you like, and that's the freedom to -buy- whatever game you like.

Let me explain: I've been gaming a long time, and one of the things that annoys me about current gen games is how safe they all play their design. Additions to existing IP rarely make significant changes or take risks with their gameplay formula and even most new IP usually looks a lot like all the previous games of their genre that come out. If a new FPS game comes out, without even looking at it you can make the educated guess that it'll be a linear to semi-linear progression through a series of maps that are basically "get from point A to point B by one or more paths" with little narrative choice and the game will likely have regenerating health. If you make those guesses about any new FPS, you'll be right most of the time.

I like it when games try something new, regardless of whether I like the game or not, because I think that taking risks is FAR more important to the industry than the idea that I personally will derive at least an average amount of enjoyment from every game that gets released. The Souls series has numerous, significant ways in which it's different from any other game out there. This choice, while I have no idea if it'll pan out from a game perspective, is bold from an industry perspective. Maybe the game will flop because of it, but at least they tried something new rather than releasing Darksiders 3.

-Byshop

I see no downside to this.

Well, one. Hopefully it'll be clear and teach new players how to indict invaders so us Darkmoon (or whatever the equivalent will be in 2) players will have more invaders to hunt down. Seriously, invasions didn't happen enough in Dark Souls.

Not a big fan of this change. I loved Dark Souls but didn't care for the invasions at all, and I would hate to have to go offline and miss out on the community aspect altogether because of this.

You have the choice to play offline.

You do but imagine you buying a car and you can only drive 20mph because if you drive faster a gnome comes out and keeps punching you in the face.

i think like most you would think WTF and either not buy it or complain on a forum about it.

Exactly. I played and beat both previous games, (including a new game plus play through) skill is not involved at any point. It's about extreme patience, and trial and error. That's it. From Software is a mediocre at best developer, always has been, always will be. They just happen to have a cult following. I'm happy to see them making moves to make that cult yet smaller. They fooled a lot of people with Dark Souls, DS2 will suffer a dip in sales compared to that game because people are wising up to what an incredibly narrowly focused niche product the series actually is.

The emperor has no clothes.

@ Randolph

Weird, couldve sworn I mentioned that before.

@Byshop: You can always unplug your network cable like people did in the old game

why do people keep saying this? I don't want to miss out on the messages...I enjoyed helping others and also getting deceived by others. The ghosts were a nice touch, too, as they could indirectly give players an idea of what to expect a few steps ahead of them. It's not like people connect only for the PvP.

As to the rest, mixing your PvP and PvE communities isn't bold, it's just dumb. Like double booking your ballroom to the KKK and the Nation of Islam - these groups do not get along. Devs of online games are pretty sensitive to this...like if there are pvp flag exploits where pvp'ers can force someone who doesn't have their flag up into a pvp state...yeah, that shit gets patched in a hurry. Because the thing about grieving - it only needs to happen once to lose a player, meanwhile they will put up with the same buggy instance for years.

Somebody brought up Ascend...the game where players troll-spam totems into other player's games right on top of mini-boss locations. It's what people do. Have a cousin who would literally sign into Ultima Online just to grieve people...nothing else...just ruin someone's day and sign out. My reservations on this come from years of putting up with other people's shit, and with that has come the knowledge that there needs to be some kind of barrier in place when you're dealing with non-dedicated pvp environments.

I've always noticed this about Dark Souls more "hardcore" fan base. They are CONVINCED beyond any reason that other people playing the same game a different way will "ruin" the game for them. If you guys are so convinced that From Software is something special, and not a talentless group of try hards, then why do you argue that they cannot do the rough video game development equivalent of walking and chewing gum at the same time? Why do their detractors seem to have more faith in them than their so called "fans"?

I don't like the sight of competition because absolutely every time, without exception, that I have played a game with online competitive modes of any kind, it always brings out the absolute worst human beings in the world, and shoves them into my game. Playing games with bad human beings always results in a soured and completely unfun experience for me, even when I win they simply render the act of playing video games at all completely undesirable.

Well said Randolph

Dark Souls is not that hard i have played games much harder and much more challenging.

40 days before release i cant wait for DS2

Wow. Reading the posts made by PvP players in this topic is a fantastic reminder of why I avoid online multiplayer in general. It does look like they're salivating at the prospect of having a bunch of single-players unwillingly at their mercy. It's kind of understandable, though, when you put hundreds of hours in a repetitive task (and don't tell me there's any game out there that doesn't get repetitive after that time) your only fun must be beating the s*** out of people. Me, in the same time I'll usually have played 4-8 different games as having a more varied experience is more my cup of tea.

So you want the benefit of the other online features but not invasions so that YOU can enjoy the game despite invasions being a core design philosophy of the game? Maybe you can email From Software and have them send over one of their employees to come rub your feet while you play DS as well.

It's not that we care how you play, it's that guys like you are complaining about a core game mechanic that is ingrained into the game. Invasions are there from the outset, if you don't like it then don't play it. That's like me complaining about projectile attacks in a Street Fighter game; it's been there from the beginning and a core aspect of the gameplay but "I just don't like it! Wah!"

It honestly seems like you're just completely jaded with multiplayer. You had a bad experience(s) with some online games and now you think they are all bad. I mean, you constantly bitch and complain about multiplayer on these forums and then you go pick up a game (Dark Souls) that is designed with a unique multiplayer aspect and then you bitch and complain about the multiplayer. lolwat?

I don't advocate unplugging the network cable for all the reasons you said, but a lot of people use this as an option.

Here's the thing: In principle I don't disagree with any of your points. Flooding a PVE group with PVP griefers wouldn't be a good thing. Nothing would make the game more frustrating than someone who wants to play a single player game, but can't because of invaders who constantly murder him. By the way, I LOLed at your "double booking" analogy. I read it for my wife and she chuckled, too.

My position came from two specific areas: A) I really like invasions. I was nervous about the idea at first but once I got used to the idea it was the invasions that kept me coming back for 200+ hours of total gameplay, so expanding this feature sounds interesting.

The other point is B) I'm not convinced that this step will automatically ruin the game. Invasions were well balanced in the previous games, so I'm hopeful that the game will be balanced in other ways even though on paper this one change could be for the negative.

But you're totally right about UO. I was on the beta for that game (yeah, I'm old) and screwing with people was pretty much the whole point of playing at all. It was like a very early, 2D DayZ.

-Byshop

What kept me going back was the game world itself. So when some stupid jackass comes bowling in and disrupts things, it pisses me off. Few things can match the awe and fear of traversing the Tomb of the Giants in suffocating darkness, hearing the rattle and clink of your armor and gear, trying desperately to see with what little light you have, seeing eyes floating just outside of your light in the darkness, piercing you with sheer malevolence and bad intentions. The game has a fantastic world and incredible fantasy atmosphere.

It wounds me that it continues to fail to reach it's potential as a game. It could be so much more than a niche product for a niche crowd.

unplug your internet connection

I hate that freakin' tomb (in that good sort of Dark Souls kinda hate). So many deaths down there.

Yes, the SP content is amazing and I'm not trying to discount it. I had at least 50 hours into the game before I even tried to actively pursue multiplayer, but when I passed the 200 hour mark, that's because of the combination of both. 200 hours is more time than I've even put into Skyrim. This is a truly unique game, but some of makes it awesome is what keeps it niche (i.e. difficulty and conbsequence).

-Byshop

I've been thinking, if this is so damn Important and an intergral Part of "Teh Dark Souls Experience" then why don't they just stop screwing around and just make the online mandatory since the Die Hard fans believe you're doing it wrong if you just wan't messages and bloodstains without the griefing.

That sounds good actually. The invasion aspect of the Souls games is probably one of the most interesting ones, so all the power to them if they expand on it.

Also if it's so bad just disconnect your internet connection lol

I really don't like how confrontational (and downright incendiary) some of the posts in this thread have become. Everyone's welcome to disagree, but at least be civil about it, for christ's sake. Feels like I'm talking to a brick wall with how often I have to state that obvious fact.