Play Dark souls.

Dark Souls' difficulty is overrated.

And it's easier than it's predecessor, Demon Souls.

The line for Dark Souls is on there, It's called the X-axis.

dark souls isn't difficult
its cheep
it kills you for no reason just cos it wants to
once you know the pattern of everything its quite simple

First mimic you encounter.
First time you fight Bed of chaos
First time you encounter the hellkite drake and it comes from behind you.


Literally the only cheap deaths i know of in a HUGE game. If you're dying a lot then you just suck. Heck, even the cheap deaths i mentioned will only get you once each.

exactly
nothing will get you more then once
as soon as you know what happens all you have to do is follow a pattern
nothing is difficult
for somthing to be difficult is has to be hard on more then the 1st time
as for only the 3 cheep moments
there are a number but i cant remember them of the top of my head

as far as actual difficulty I gotta go with Starcraft. Every move you make affects whether you win or lose. And in dark souls if you die you just try again until you finally get it.

Read my next comment. I referred to Demon's Souls as a challenging game.

Which one is harder? Demon souls or Dark souls? I've only ever played Dark.

Demons souls. It's far more unforgiving is all. If you die in human form you lose half of your health bar until you beat a boss. There are no checkpoints and shortcuts are well hidden most of the time. And if you die in human form you shift the world towards black tendancy, making the enemies stronger.

Don't know, I have only played Demon's Souls, but I've read that they are on similar levels.

Here's a tip, play harder games.

There aren't many that actually offer a challenge like, that unless you are referring to the single player campaign. Demon's souls comes to mind, Super Marion Bros. (without warping), some of the Mega Man titles(1,3,9 for example.) Ninety percent of the games I play I start on the hardest difficulty available and am still able to crush them. When it comes to multi-player games, none are as competitive and difficult as Starcraft. What would you suggest as a more difficult game?

You want a challenge?

Play Final Fantasy 8.

WITHOUT junctioning Guardian Forces.

Play the worst Final Fantasy? No thanks, I'll pass.

**** you I love that game :(

Nethack

I actually have looked at that before. It looks difficult, but I'm now willing to put in the time it would take just to learn how to play it.

not* willing

It actually is the toughest game to get used to.

It seems that way. Once you learn it though I'd imagine that it isn't all that difficult. Single player games tend to have an element of predictability that makes them easier than multi-player games as a whole.

But the levels are randomly generated, so it would take years to figure it out.

I did't mean memorizing it really, just knowing how to play.

Well knowing how to play and actually playing it are 2 different things. Its just weird thats all.

League of Legends ranked Brazillian servers. Good luck.

>Brazillian ranked servers
>Difficult
Don't make me laugh, there isn't even enough people who own computers to make up a competitive ranked server.

Doesn't stand up to Starcraft 2 Korean servers.

LoL harder than SC2...
Ha...HAhahaah, omg thats brilliant....

Korean RTS Gamer master race here.
Shut the **** up.

I know plenty of bad Korean RTS players.

Go play SC Korean servers, noob. Have a taste of reality.
Also, you can't properly gauge whether one game is more difficult than the other because they're so very different.
Just 'cause you play SC doesn't mean you get to judge League players. And until you're Diamond League+, you can't act like you're good. Which is funny 'cause even if you ever did reach that point, you wouldn't be able to keep it long enough to brag about it -- to stay Diamond League and above takes dedication, dedication that leaves no room for scoffing at League players on FJ.
Additionally, it isn't just rumor or stereotyping that Koreans are better RTS gamers -- it's fact.

Perhaps this is a good time to mention that I am in GM

It's a different type of game =P no need to be rude.

As an SC2 player whenever I hear someone say LoL takes an equal amount or more skill than SC2 I can't help but laugh at the idiocy.

ffs, an online game where you or your opponent is going to win. Therefore no matter how simple the rule of a game is (like a pong for example), it will become increasingly complex depending on the level of competitiveness of the game. Lol have tournament for 1 000 000$ The competition is ******* huge, the tactics are becoming extremely complex, independently of the simpleness of the mechanics.

Which is all still dwarfed by the amount of strategies and map variants that can come out of SC2 at even just a semi professional level.

LoL has like 90(?) champions to go against. SC has 3 races. Everything can seem better if you compare what one game is clearly better in. One map in lol means that there are tons of strategies for that one map. You need to know the map. You need to know where you and your 4 teammates are at all times. you need to know where the opponent is. you need to know when to fight and when to fall back. you need to make better builds than the opposition.

You clearly know nothing of high level LoL play.

And you clearly know nothing of SC2 play.

I don't claim to know much about it. But i do know that LoL is just as deep as SC. SC may be more complex but complexity =/= depth.

Okay then.
Lets take the list of things you said about LoL and transfer them to what you would do in SC2, because they are the same.
Firstly, no one plays all of the champions, you'll likely know only a handful or just one type, so lets lower that number.
Secondly take away the 4 team mates.
Everything else is the same in SC2, however our maps are bigger so increase the amount of strategies required in each individual map to make up for the sheer amount of attack routes and expansion locations.
Now on top of all that a player of one race must know;
Timings up to at least 20 minutes into the game, your own and theirs (across all 3 races this is about 10-20 different timings per race in each match up).
Economy management, you must know exactly how much production you can support at anything given time, how many workers to build and how many much be at each base and even if it is safe to put money into them at the current threat level of the opponent.
You must not know only where they are on the map but everything in their base so you know exactly what units are being produced and the level of their upgrades so that you may then adjust yours so that you don't just get rolled by an army that is just a flat counter to yours.
During a fight you're not just watching you and your allies you're watching an army of about 5-100 units which needs to be controlled either with individual micro on each unit in small battles or selecting the right amount to move as a small group within that battle. You must also still be producing units during this time.

Likely I've missed a lot out but there is a lot you must do in SC2, and all this has to be done pretty much overlapping at most times.

All i'm getting from that is "You need to click on more things in starcraft so it's more complex". LoL is about making decisions. Every little thing counts. And you can't measure depth in a game. You however, are clearly completely biased and ignoring all of the pros of LoL. You are an elitist. There is no point in arguing with you.

There is no decision making?
Every tiny decision you make in SC2 counts, from the positioning of your units, which ones you make, which bases you take, which fights you take, constant decisions that an incorrect one can mean the difference between winning and losing.

I dont thinking losing a single marine to a zergling is going to lose you a game

but if you want to be super srs about it, every auto attack, every movement of the champion, every character, every teamfight, every item bought, every keybind, every mouse click, every blink of the eye.

All you do in starcraft 2 multiplayer is figure out a basic build, figure out counters, then micro a bunch of units.

Its literally ******* retarded.

Not to mention Dota 2 is at least twice as complex, if not more so, then starcraft will ever be...

Either you're stupid or retarded.
That or you're trying to troll which then makes you both of the above.

The only foolish thing is to actually think that LoL could possibly be a match for SC2 in terms of skill.
A person who is average all round at all types of games would get much further in LoL than they would in SC2

Well now that's debatable. Neither are very difficult games, if you have a good computer and good internet and the right mindset for the game. But hey, you are mad, obviously biased and probably should stop talking. Less you tarnish the amount of respect you still deserve.

I disagree, let me start by saying I play both League of Legends and Starcraft 2. I could go into great detail about how much more difficult Sc2 is to play than LoL but I'll keep it short and just say this: In both games you are facing many units with many different abilities and strategies for each and a need for knowledge of many possibilities. Both require a map awareness and an ability to adapt to different scenarios. However, in League of Legends you are only required to control one character, occasionally two if you have pets. In Starcraf 2 you are essentially a one man army, the sheer effort required just to manage your economy while micro managing your forces is enough to make it a far more complex and difficult game than League of Legends.

Complexity =/= depth. I.e. Street fighter is pretty simple. But it would take years of constant practice to get to a competitive level.

It is a different way of playing, I don't think micro makes a game more difficult, it only makes it different.

I made more points than just micro, and it's not that there is micro management, it's the amount that needs to be done, how difficult it is, and the fact that you have to macro at the same time.

So, team communication and team work aren't valid topics? What about map objectives and securing things in a strategic fashion? Or worrying about cs, ward coverage, map and champion awareness, pinging and mias, buff control, jungle timers, tower health. These are all things that have to be thought about, even in a simple normal blind pick match. Even more in a ranked match.

I also said that I could've gone into greater detail. Did you even read my comment?

Yet, your opponent is in the exact same situation, so don't you think that in the end it even out ? (if we're talking about competitive play)

Doesn't make the game any easier when you're dealing with people who have over 200 apm (actions per minute). Incidentally, apm is a good indicator of the difficulty of the game as well.

First of all, learn what mad actually means before using it, for I have not shown the slightest shred of it.
Secondly, they are both difficult games when played at a high end level. Only a low level player who has a deluded sense of their ability would claim them to be 'easy'.
Bias is irrelevant and if I wanted the respect off of people off of this site, I would of sunk to a very low place indeed.

Lol, I don't know what the term "mad" means? I am not a child, I know what the word means. You may not be angry, but you are frustrated that I don't have the same opinion about the difficulty of the game, or we wouldn't be having this discussion.
And you misinterpret my meaning of difficult. Obviously I am not a platinum player, but that doesn't mean I am not good. You said it yourself, they are difficult at high level play. But I don't play on a professional level, thus I find no difficulty in the game. Sometimes I play well, sometimes I don't, but it is no measure of difficulty.
If you play professionally then kudos to you. That would be considered tough. But like I stated. League, nor SC were difficult to pick up. Nor were they hard to get good at. And yes your bias makes you considerably in favor of SC, while I play and enjoy both games, I see arguments for both. You, evidently, do not see both arguments.

You don't have to be frustrated by something to have a discussion of two opposing opinions. It is very possible to have such discussion without a single emotive response what so ever.

What you can do regardless of what level you play at, regardless of which ones of them you play, be it one or the other or both. Is you can break them down into the actions the player must take and that of which the player must know about the game and then compare the level in which these would strain the players memory, physical ability and cognitive processing to get an accurate level of the amount skill the game would require.