I guess I just wanna understand why this seemingly convoluted "land drift theory" is so prevalent in the community? Lemme know what I'm missing. In Zelda, every Hyrule is Hyrule, and the landscape is just a design consideration brought about by the needs of the developers and their limitations. DS1 was built on a budget, and it was never as sprawling as this game is. I just think that -occaming my razor here- just having a kingdom built on top of another old ass kingdom is just easier to both buy into as a player and to conceive as a developer. I saw the quote from the opening scene in 3 about "converging lands." But converging just means "meet" or "intersect" and doesn't necessarily carry any implication for movement. And if we're to take it as deep as possible, with relativity and all, then time and space are inseparable. Now I get that from the start, Solaire says that time is convoluted. That Firelink isn't in the same place is really not that big a deal because Firelink doesn't literally have to be the same Firelink. Then you proceed to systematically visit the locations which are apparently totally overgrown, dilapidated or just simply built over/around. Why would this not be the case in Dark Souls? Time passes and shit changes.Īs soon as you start out, you get a whole lot of direct references to DS1 talking about those events as legends, which is very similar to the way we talk about Jesus and the old Greek pantheons. However, in Europe at least, cities are built on top of cities all the time.
(where I'm sure many people here are from), because the oldest American architecture is maybe ~200 years old. I know this isn't as prevalent in the U.S. Why is this theory so much easier to buy into for people than simply that Lothric was built on top of Lordran? The way we build cities on top of old cities. Not like the continental drift that takes place over millions of years, but a spontaneous one that basically seems to have happened on a whim. But with time, when we add equipment, everyone will be able to beat these levels quite easily.The case seems to be, in almost every lore thread, is that someone mentions some variation of geographical drift. Right now, levels above 20 or 25 will probably be too tricky for most. In the current alpha version, we made only the first 50 levels available because there's still no stuff to drop to handle properly the second half.
With higher levels come more enemies, enemies with more hit points, more damages, more and more suicide bullets and special behaviours for opponents. From now on, every stage of Drifting Lands can be played with one out of a 100 levels of difficulty. We need a far bigger scale for players to climb. It was clear from the start that we wouldn't only have to create 2 or 3 difficulty levels. On top of that, we want to offer an experience spanning over dozens of hours of gameplay like any typical hack'n'slash. We sure want to offer really good players an interesting challenge, but we also want to create a fair challenge for people defining themselves as "not very good at this kind of game". We don't want to make a shoot'em'up for an elite of superplayers.
0 kommentar(er)
