-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
Difficulty by Design - What’s the Difference between Sekiro and Crusader Kings?
- Thread starter marrec
- Start date
Developers game....Their vision. The end.
If they wanted to appeal to everyone, they could. If they wanted to put an easy mode in their, they could. They didn't? Why? Because that is not what they wanted out of their game.
Either you are with that or against that.
If they wanted to appeal to everyone, they could. If they wanted to put an easy mode in their, they could. They didn't? Why? Because that is not what they wanted out of their game.
Either you are with that or against that.
Not necessarily, Souls games found success in part due to their reputation of being challenging to the point where that was even used as a selling point. Just like how an easy game can bring players, it can also turn off others and I don't think From games would have reached where they are without those design decisions. They found their audience there and I so no issue in playing to that audience instead of trying to chase after everyone, if anything, this is something we need to see more of in the industry.
This is an estimate of all disabled gamers, not disabled ones that are asking for an easy mode in Sekiro, maybe stop using it as such.
Last edited:
Definitely. It got all that buzz because of the challenging and unforgiving nature of the game world.
Meanwhile, Kingdoms of Amalur, a big-budget open-world RPG with actually interesting combat mechanics and skill trees, was brain-dead easy even on hard (which means you never got to really properly use its combat system to the fullest), and also, a commercial failure.
Obviously they are anecdotes, but it does show that the "it limits the market" argument doesn't hold much water.
I've played it for 300+ hours. It doesn't change anything in that post.
If games are art, creators should be allowed to challenge their audience. No one would tell Coltrane that giant steps should be made more approachable so that more people should enjoy it.
If games are a product, do not support a product if you feel that that product doesn't cater to you. There are other competing products out there that might be better for you, and you can support them instead.
Accessibility is important. We should give players more options to engage with games. But that's not the same thing as difficulty. People can beat Souls games with DDR pads, guitar hero guitars, and even more dumb controllers. Aka a much less accessible method.
If you don't want to invest the time into a game that looks appealing to you in order to get better at it, that's fine. But don't use disabled people as a shield. That's gross. Not every game is for everyone, just get over your FOMO and move on.
If games are a product, do not support a product if you feel that that product doesn't cater to you. There are other competing products out there that might be better for you, and you can support them instead.
Accessibility is important. We should give players more options to engage with games. But that's not the same thing as difficulty. People can beat Souls games with DDR pads, guitar hero guitars, and even more dumb controllers. Aka a much less accessible method.
If you don't want to invest the time into a game that looks appealing to you in order to get better at it, that's fine. But don't use disabled people as a shield. That's gross. Not every game is for everyone, just get over your FOMO and move on.
Absolutely, and depending on what DLC you have (at least CK2), I want to say there are 20-30 options, including turning off demense thresholds or turning off the Black Plague etc.
We've had plenty of people throughout human history who have no problem pointing to someone else, in a manner of ostracizing them, and saying:
"This thing/job/family/life/etc. that many people can have, these things are not for everyone."
Knowing this, why in the world would you ever want to be one of these people who would talk to someone else in this manner, and especially about games?
And how come people have no problem telling others about some games "dude, don't play this game on normal, play it on hard - it's too easy on normal" - but bristle at the notion of putting an easy mode on a game that currently doesn't have it? That other game surely had an easy mode (or normal IS easy or whatever), but you wouldn't pay that mode any mind - you would just play the mode you are most sure to enjoy.
I think some people are being too protective of their own cherished experience with "difficult-to-master" games. Yet, none of the people who want more accessibility options are coming to take away anyone's experience playing the game.
"This thing/job/family/life/etc. that many people can have, these things are not for everyone."
Knowing this, why in the world would you ever want to be one of these people who would talk to someone else in this manner, and especially about games?
And how come people have no problem telling others about some games "dude, don't play this game on normal, play it on hard - it's too easy on normal" - but bristle at the notion of putting an easy mode on a game that currently doesn't have it? That other game surely had an easy mode (or normal IS easy or whatever), but you wouldn't pay that mode any mind - you would just play the mode you are most sure to enjoy.
I think some people are being too protective of their own cherished experience with "difficult-to-master" games. Yet, none of the people who want more accessibility options are coming to take away anyone's experience playing the game.
What's the acceptable number of Sekiro players with disabilities before you take them into consideration?
Also games is art debate has long went out the window thanks to publishers. Games are a service now. At best products.
Maybe just an example of someone actually asking for an easy mode due to their disability is enough.
Well you got one then. I've been avoiding Sekiro because of the difficulty and I'm disabled with my eyesight.
There's a difference between complex and mechanically difficult. A game can be hard to parse and hard to get into, but action games should provide accessibility options for players and not expect a certain level of response time out of everyone who wants to even try to play them.
college volleyball coach had a great quote "fun is the residue of skill"
mashing is fun up to a point
but knowing your characters moveset and the moves of your opponents
countering their attacks and baiting openings
it is a time investment but extremely rewarding when it clicks
mashing is fun up to a point
but knowing your characters moveset and the moves of your opponents
countering their attacks and baiting openings
it is a time investment but extremely rewarding when it clicks
If an artist wishes to create a game experience by having the player face difficulty and overcome challenges, then I believe that should be respected. The personal accomplishment or narrative implications that would result from overcoming those barriers wouldn't be the same if the players knew they could have taken the easy way out at any time, as you'd be playing what's essentially a different game on Easy Mode.
Video games should 100% focus on getting people with physical disabilities through the door. It's been brought up before but colour blind modes should be a must at this point. However the reason someone may not be able to make it through Sekiro or Ninja Gaiden or whatnot is NOT necessarily a physical disability. It's also hard to pinpoint if the physical aspect of the game is what is keeping someone from succeeding.
And yet, it's not the decision of a single person to whom you might be addressing with all of this. The game is as it is. If it's othering you it's not others doing it to you or ostracizing you, it's you yourself othering that game from your preferences then lashing out at people for pointing out that your choice is to either accept the product or move on.
For those whose sight and physical capabilities are different, there are already narrative implications agnostic of what any "artist" does or doesn't do.
But for me, since I'm able-bodied and can distinguish most colors, the personal accomplishment and narrative remain unchanged and unaffected by the existence of easy difficulty or visual settings. And knowing that these settings exist in part to allow other players to engage with the game, they don't constitute "taking the easy way out" to me.
And I might also choose to play a game on easy mode, either to re-live or further appreciate the narrative of the game, or examine the animation or artwork further while having a lighter gameplay burden. I'd say that difficulty options allow me to better appreciate what an artist has conceived and constructed, even more than just one specific difficulty setting might.
I've watched videos of the game and the problem I have with it is it's not forgiving on parrying. There are other things but that was the big thing I noticed. With my eyesight I either need better more visible cues for mechanics like that, a more forgiving window for parrying or more play options. It's why I loathe QTEs in games now. I don't think adding options for those things would ruin anyone else's experience.
The primary discussion doesn't focus on changes which are only affecting accessibility such as color blindness or hearing impairment. The conversations have surrounded the concept of difficulty as a function of successfully and accurately reacting to what's going on in the game with the correct mechanical inputs or strategy.
If the developer prizes that form of challenge over you wanting to easily replay a certain part of the game then yes, you either have to deal with that or self select your way out. There is still no one in the greater audience othering you.
To generalize it that way doesn't make much sense. Michael Bay making movies doesn't negate that Ingmar Bergman was making art
Do I have to pay extra in the movie theater to get Soundwave in the Transformers movie? Do I have to be online and in a group of others to watch Dumbo? Do I have to pay extra to skip the boring grindy parts of a movie?
As another poster said, this is a huge reason I play games on PC. In recent years, life had gotten more and more in the way of playing games.
When the souls (and BloodBourne) games released, I had a much easier time beating each of them as I could dedicate myself to getting better. Yes, it was a great feeling. However with Sekiro, I just know I wouldn't enjoy it because I don't have the time, but what I did do is "cheat." I changed my attack power to a much, much higher number. This allowed me to play the game how I wanted. I tweaked it a good amount to find a sweet spot for my personal play style. One where the challenge was still there (for me), but it wasn't as unforgiving. Bosses took me a multiple tries instead of 25+.
Giving me the ability to do that in the game would have been wonderful. Otherwise I never would have enjoyed this great game. People enjoy games differently. I would have enjoyed Sekiro even if I was invincible the entire time. Some people will scoff at that I'm sure, but my personally enjoyment is going to be vastly different than anyone else's. Giving me the options to enjoy the game how I want would be great. Especially in a single player, completely offline, game. I love how Celeste did it. I ended up not using any of those options because I enjoyed the hell out of it without it, but knowing they were there was comforting. I knew I would finish the game.
When the souls (and BloodBourne) games released, I had a much easier time beating each of them as I could dedicate myself to getting better. Yes, it was a great feeling. However with Sekiro, I just know I wouldn't enjoy it because I don't have the time, but what I did do is "cheat." I changed my attack power to a much, much higher number. This allowed me to play the game how I wanted. I tweaked it a good amount to find a sweet spot for my personal play style. One where the challenge was still there (for me), but it wasn't as unforgiving. Bosses took me a multiple tries instead of 25+.
Giving me the ability to do that in the game would have been wonderful. Otherwise I never would have enjoyed this great game. People enjoy games differently. I would have enjoyed Sekiro even if I was invincible the entire time. Some people will scoff at that I'm sure, but my personally enjoyment is going to be vastly different than anyone else's. Giving me the options to enjoy the game how I want would be great. Especially in a single player, completely offline, game. I love how Celeste did it. I ended up not using any of those options because I enjoyed the hell out of it without it, but knowing they were there was comforting. I knew I would finish the game.
I wouldn't know because apparently having an Easy option in the menu gives "gamers" the vapors so I'm not able to play it.
It's not that they get ignored (I've atleast responded to them), but there's also women disagreeing if something is misogynistic or black people disagreeing what is racist. There are minorities debating about affirmative action etc. But the discussion doesn't stop there, if I post an opinion from South Korean who isn't offended by the ad to the Hornbach thread. Does that mean the advertisement isn't racist? So when people with disabilities say, hey I'd need assistance with this. It's not negated by someone else with disabilities telling that they personally don't. They don't need or want that assistance, that's fine. But what it has to do with those who need and want it?
Last edited:
See, I don't see why one of these opinions is worth more than the other. Because you share it? It's not about negations, it's about listening to these people, and I see way more people on here bringing up disabled people to back up their argument for easy difficulties as some form of accessability than from people that argue for the opposite.
It has to do something with the view of an easy mode being neccesary "because disabled people" and when some disabled people say "no, I'm disabled and don't think we need one for every game" they get ignored by most people taking the former stance.
But let's not get into this again at this hour lol.
So you don't even know if you were able to play it as is because you never tried it, you just assume you wouldn't be and demand them to alter their entire design philosphy out of principle...cool.
User Warned: Hostility towards other members
I've played them all, and adding an easy mode would not "alter their entire design philosophy" in the fucking slightest.
Not wanting an easy mode in these games is pure gatekeeping elitism, full stop, period, end of discussion. I have seen absolutely no valid, convincing, or worthwhile arguments against the idea. People against it should probably just embrace being an asshole about this particular subject and stop trying to fool anyone, especially themselves.
It absolutely would change it. From leveldesign over atmosphere to item and currency ecenomy, these things are linked to the difficulty. Miyazaki has been designing his games like this for a decade now and you want to say it's not part of how he makes games. Cool story. Maybe you should look harder then.
If you haven't noticed, you're on a discussion forum, so telling others when the discussion is over while labeling them in all sorts of terms is bullshit of the highest order, maybe look into that while you're at it.
It's because of the view, that society disables physically impaired people. Disability is something imposed on top of the impairment by the way people are unnecessarily isolated and excluded from full participation. This has been very important point for disability movements. It can be said, that games are luxury products and not a necessity. But why wouldn't disabled people have the same rights to entertainment (or art) as others, cinemas etc should accomodate people with disabilities too. Whenever possible, an effort should be made to give people the same chances and best possible experience.
I'll argue in favor of accessibility options against anyone, I'm not ignoring them. But I wouldn't even imply, that everyone needs those options. I understand that there are many different people and many different disabilities. And the possible assist and extra accessibility they need varies too. Captions and color blind mode really don't cut it to everyone, not even specialized controller is nearly always enough.
Last edited:
This is huge. My disability is hearing related and subtitles boxes at a movie theater becoming a thing has been massive. There is enough that I deal with to manage my issue that giving me a small peace of normalcy back is really empowering.
Thanks again Budi. Your english is fine btw.
Edit: Just for background info, I suffer from Tinnitus, a mild form of hyperacusis and cogential hearing loss (moderate, at around 50DB) in the frequencies of human speech. Yes, I can listen to heavy metal, but only in the car as white noise/road noise helps lessen the impact of tinnitus and only at speaking volume. I know I used to rock the heavy metal avatar and post in the OT, so now everyone knows how I can do it, low volume (speaking volume), white noise/road noise background, no headphones ever and limited listening in a quiet environment. I have good days and bad days as well. How this effects gaming is I sometimes cannot hear audio cues at a comfortable volume, many sound effects are uncomfortable at any volume (pain/increase in tinnitus), I usually cannot understand voice chat, I miss many words without subtitles. Usually this results in it being more comfortable for me to play games at no volume and usually I play games silently with something like tv show on in the background to lessen the tinnitus. Just an idea of the kind of life adjustments, ear plugs during showers due to sound of running water, earplugs on public transportation, only use certain power tools, many public places like bars, theaters, stadiums, clubs, concert venues, festivals are no go zones without some accommodation, hell, even a poorly maintained HVAC systems have had me losing it in a quiet place. Its probably worst with other people, as once people talk over each other it gets too loud in a close space.
My quality of life is good and earplugs are a god send, so I'm fine. But just some background.
I read the http://gameaccessibilityguidelines.com/ , it really covers things I run into.
Last edited:
Books without translations that many people will never be able to read sounds ideal, that's what we should strive for, as well as singular difficulty levels.
I mentioned this in the Giant Bomb thread, but the overwhelming majority of talk around Sekiro is the difficulty. People talking about their struggles with the game, overcoming those struggles. If people didn't talk about their difficulty with Sekiro... would they even talk about the game at all?
Is Sekiro the Bennett Foddy of 2019? Really not much else to offer.
I told you earlier that don't mention it, but I actually appreciate it. Thanks to you for the encouragement.
Last edited:
Recommended reading for everyone asking these kinds of questions
http://gameaccessibilityguidelines.com/
Worth noting, difficulty levels belong into the basic category of accessibility options. Let's leave the argument to rest that it's not tied to accessibility.
People have argued that difficulty settings aren't an accessibility option. And your link says otherwise, it's even in the basic category that it's easy to implement rather than some herculean task.
OP
OP
We're leaving this argument because of an arbitrary definition on a website huh?
Oh right, yes indeed.
That website is maintained by Ian Hamillton, he's a great guy though I've only spoken with him briefly.
The page does come with the caveat that difficulty settings are a rather blunt way of addressing accessibility. But nonetheless, they are relatively easy to implement (especially compared to some of the other accessibility options, like providing audio transcription for the entire game, for instance) and crucially I think what people are missing here is that it's about proving players with options.
Gamers with disabilities come in all shapes and sizes, some with mild cognitive impairments, some with visual difficulties, some with a mix of disabilities, it's difficult to accomodate all of the variation with any one individual feature. Difficulty settings are a good way of providing a little extra help for those who a game still feels inaccessible to.
As an example, if you're blind or partially blind, there's only so much a game can to help you understand what's happening in the game world. Difficulty settings, ideally alongside other accessibility features, can nudge the experience back into being something that's realistically accomplishable. It doesn't make the game a cakewalk, it actually helps these players experience the game in a way that's closer to the way the developers intended.
Well personally I respect the assessment by group of professionals more than random people on forums. If people who research and work towards accessibility on games say that difficulty is an accessibility option, then I'm going to believe that yes. And is there any reason for me to refute that? I also don't see any logic in arguing against it, nothing at all. You can of course challenge their assessment, I'd actually be rather curious to see that. Why don't difficulty settings make the game more accessible? I respect your opinion, but you're out of the league compared to the contributors of that site. They definitely have more information and insight on this than you. Or do you work on game accessibility? It's bit like I don't usually argue against my doctor. Only when they tell me to stop smoking. You can still argue that Sekiro shouldn't have difficulty setting as an accessibility option, but you were claiming it shouldn't be treated as such.
Yeah I checked the core contributors. I've been sharing a Twitter thread by Hamilton few times already. And I've been calling difficulty options as all-encompassing myself, of course that's not nearly enough to have. More is needed, for specialized needs. Colorblind mode isn't all-encompassing, but still important etc.
I personally have people in family and friends with color blindness, dwarfism, movement impairment, epilepsy, intellectual disabilities and also someone who has been badly damaged by fire and his hands aren't quite what they used to be. So that causes some problems for him on occasion.
Last edited:
people want to play Sekiro; as it is the current big game.
Crusader Kings is not.
If in some weird alternate world it became this big hit; you'd see a lot more articles.
Demon's Souls was a novelty niche game that got poor scores and became a cult hit. These articles and calls for easy modes didn't exist back then because DS wasn't the zeitgeist game of the moment.
It happens whenever anything that was once niche and jank gets a boost in popularity, and new people want in but find that getting in requires more dexterity than they are used to.
Then it becomes a delicate balance of having your cake and eating it too for the devs in making it most accessible but w/o losing its identity and thus losing their core fanbase. Capcom struggled hard w/ this last gen for example. Their best game was the jankfest that was Dragon's Dogma...a game that could be stupid punishing and had a lot of design choices that discarded some basic ass QOL stuff..that IMO is what makes it special to me. If a DD2 happens; its going to be interesting to see if Capcom keeps some of those weird choices or make it into a co-op games as service hellhole like I fear.
Its tough really. damned if you do, damned if you don't. The key is finding which option maintains success...and thats hard
Crusader Kings is not.
If in some weird alternate world it became this big hit; you'd see a lot more articles.
Demon's Souls was a novelty niche game that got poor scores and became a cult hit. These articles and calls for easy modes didn't exist back then because DS wasn't the zeitgeist game of the moment.
It happens whenever anything that was once niche and jank gets a boost in popularity, and new people want in but find that getting in requires more dexterity than they are used to.
Then it becomes a delicate balance of having your cake and eating it too for the devs in making it most accessible but w/o losing its identity and thus losing their core fanbase. Capcom struggled hard w/ this last gen for example. Their best game was the jankfest that was Dragon's Dogma...a game that could be stupid punishing and had a lot of design choices that discarded some basic ass QOL stuff..that IMO is what makes it special to me. If a DD2 happens; its going to be interesting to see if Capcom keeps some of those weird choices or make it into a co-op games as service hellhole like I fear.
Its tough really. damned if you do, damned if you don't. The key is finding which option maintains success...and thats hard
It's still fucking wild that people can't understand that difficulty settings are accessibility. This honestly shouldn't be a discussion. I promise you, an easy mode won't bruise your precious ego
They deliberated what can developers do to accomodate more people with physical and cognitive impairments.
I don't really know how you wouldn't see that it's helpful. It seems like a no-brainer. It just feels that you don't want it to be an accessibility option, rather than you wouldn't actually understand it's usefulness and value. Person's disability can hinder someone's perfomance in a game on many different areas, difficulty options help to even the playing field.
Edit: For fine tuning of difficulty instead of just a blunt easy mode option there's this reasoning.
Last edited: