Kotaku: An easy mode has never ruined a game

[Enduin]

Difficulty options do not inherently remove challenge, when done right they allow players to dial the challenge to a level commensurate with their skill set so they can experience a challenge they can actually overcome. Easy for you or me =/= easy for other people. One size does not fit all. This is also why most advocacy groups recommend granular options over set modes, as it lets each individual adjust the game to their specific needs or preferences.

Most people who want to play a FROM game want a challenge, but for some their skill ceiling is not at the level the game requires from them. That doesn't make for a challenging game, it makes for an often impossible one. Being able to adjust certain parameters means allowing people to experience a challenge for them. Most people are not asking for just a God Mode to remove all difficulty, nuance or challenge from the game. But simply options that would allow them to have a similar experience that others do. For many people reducing damage taken by 75% would still result in an incredibly hard fight for them, but it is at least a fight they can more realistically win and that's an accomplishment for them same as for those who can beat the game at default. This applies to all people too, not just those with diagnosed disabilities.

 

[Hero]

Ladies and gentlemen, here's the "entitled gamer I want everything now" answer.

Click to shrink...

I am quite capable of beating difficult games and yet I can still recognize that there is a large audience of players that cannot.

 

[Kainazzo]

And as long as that person owns the console they bought it for, or a PC if a PC copy, they can actually play what they bought.

"I bought a food blender and it doesn't automatically prepare my vegetables and create a Gordon Ramsay-tier salad!".

As long as what you buy is sold as intended, then you're getting the product you bought.

What is it with the current generation and removing all responsibility of the individual to complain everything is the fault of someone else? Keep in mind you're not making the argument "I want to play this" but actually outright stating "I went and spent my own money on something I don't now like... this is someone else's fault!".

Click to shrink...

Games are distinct from blenders in that the opportunity to allow all content to be accessible to everyone is much easier to realize. I guarantee if there was a blender that automatically created Michelin-quality food, people would use it. For better or worse, if you grew up with every luxury afforded to children today, you would use them.

Civilizations are built on the premise of making the lives of each generation easier than the last. While gaming is hardly at the same scale, I think reaching that possibility and removing that many vectors for experience, anxiety, and unnecessary responsibility is an important tiny step towards a better world.

 

[Kill3r7]

That's true but I'm not talking about the business aspect, generally games like god of war put more focus on the story and that's where a lot of the budget goes unlike japanese games, it's just different approaches to game design and it's great to have both instead of everything being easy.

It does, but telling people where the boss health (that is staring right at their faces) is...it's a bit much.

Click to shrink...

Agreed. Although, typically in the West you cannot separate the business of video games from the art/product.

 

[Deleted member 888]

The price argument "You should be able to play something you bought $60 for" wouldn't be an issue if Playforms had better refund policies worldwide.

On steam 2 hours let's you know if Sekiro is for you or not. On PS you'd be out of luck and MS would be particular cases (I think you only get 1 no questions asked refund a year).

So much of this conversation really comes down to options, options, options. Across the board.

Click to shrink...

But in that case you can say why not rent? Why not borrow a friends copy? Why not wait until there is a lot of reviews online? Why not wait till the game is on sale?

There are plently of ways not to spend full retail on a game you have a high chance of regretting.

Case in point, Anthem. Everyone pre-ordering like mad because if there is one thing developers and publishers can rely on in this industry, it's the hysterical approach the average gamer has to pre-ordering. As if a game needs to be bought 5 months before release based on E3 "slices" and hype.

Day 1 embargoes looked to weaponize gamers being impatient, you've got to tackle that yourself as these embargoes are rarely put a week or so before release.

Games are distinct from blenders in that the opportunity to allow all content to be accessible to everyone is much easier to realize. I guarantee if there was a blender that automatically created Michelin-quality food, people would use it.

Civilizations are built on the premise of making the lives of each generation easier than the last. While gaming is hardly at the same scale, I think reaching that possibility and removing that many vectors for experience, anxiety, and unnecessary responsibility is an important tiny step towards a better world.

Click to shrink...

Sometimes anxiety is an emotion that a content creator wants to harness and make you feel. Dread, fear, anxiety and worrying are key human emotions a lot of art, in film, TV and books try to tap into.

Yes, the detail is in the execution, but that is why the Souls series is praised for how it makes the player constantly feel from beginning to end. Always worrying about what is around the next corner, or feeling anxiety during a boss battle knowing death is a few mistakes away.

 

[Village]

controversial take: if a developer's "vision" is that only the "worthy" get to see their creation, they're an asshole.

For all the shit Kamiya gets for being a dick, and for all the infamous difficulties of DMC, Bayonetta and DMC both come with a myriad of accessibility and ease of use options.

You can get tones, narrative, themes, and everything across without being an elitist, and without circlejerking the git gud crowds.

Click to shrink...

... So if a dev makes a hard game you have to be good at to beat, they are an asshole? I think that's a bit too far.

I'm for accessablity, I have always have. I don't even like it when devs make fun of folks playing on lower difficulties, I find it tacky. Obviously you can't quite do that with multiplayer games, you gotta be on an even playing field, but outside of that specific scenario , play whatever video game however you like.

That said, a dev making their game hard and wanting to be hard doesn't make them an asshole, they just wanted to make that game. Is a director of film making the film hard to directly interpret an asshole, or a book that is pretty dense and requires a lot of reading comprehension to understand... are they an asshole. Video games are an artistic medium like everything else and the artists behind them can choose to make a hard video game... that's just difficult. Or at least very difficult parts of video games. And I feel like deciding that they are an asshole because of that is making things way too personal. They made a game a way, you assed out. That's sort of it, life sucks sometimes.

That said that doesn't mean the game isn't adverse to criticism. For example, I completed guacamelee 2 recently, 100%ed it. To do so , the hardest dungeon in the game , requires you to use an un precise slippery mechanic, precisely. I think that part is genuinely bad game design and speaks to poor choices regarding difficulty that Drinkbox made through out that game. And I think just because its their vision , doesn't mean the game isn't immune to criticism. I don't really get the people in this thread and on twitter suggesting that folks cannot criticize from softwares games because of vision, that's silly. You can criticize them and their vision. However to suggest that the developer not designing this thing a certain way makes them an asshole like they have somehow spited you personally is taking a far too personal and possibly unhealthy stance.

Like is the indie dev who really likes old school hard platformers , making an oldschool hard platformer type game spending time and money on this to make the game he wants to make, is he an asshole? Seriously? I don't think they are an asshole, ya'll got different goals.

Now obviously fromsoftware isn't an indie dev, at that same time given the generality of your first statement my point still stands.

 

[Patapuf]

I'm not saying that there are not hard western games since they have difficulty options, but what I don't see is western games on the shelves designed with challenge in mind because the fear of lost sales.

Click to shrink...

I just mentioned 3 games that are known for their challenge. XCOM and Paradox games in general are played primarily because they are hard and complex.

 

[ArcLyte]

So do you think having a book available in a braille version is self-censorship?

Click to shrink...

Not at all, creators should take care to provide accessibility options to allow all people to physically engage with the work. As far as modifying the content to fit someone else's idea of what it should be is where the idea of "all media should be for everyone" begins to cross into questionable territory.

 

[Village]

Imagine how much From Software games would sell if they were more accesible. The whole "git gud" mentality needs to die in the hottest of fires, is part of the "great" image the "gamers" give to the outside world.

Click to shrink...

Considering the reason these games were praised in the first place was because in a sea of accessibility they were genuinely hard , seems like a step backwards.

Study your history, destined to repeat it ect.

 

[Tpallidum]

Easy mode absolutely destroys the creator's intent and vision. Yes it does.

They should still include it.

 

[XNihili]

they dont get consequences

Click to shrink...

The consequence is that they don't sell as much as they could.
A piece of art is up to the creator only. He should be the only one to decide.
A sale product has to cater to the intended target. The larger the target the "better".
A videogame is supposed to be both but it is more of the 2nd.

 

[MillionIII]

I just mentioned 3 games that are known for their challenge. XCOM and Paradox games in general are played primarily because they are hard and complex.

Click to shrink...

And like I said, you can also play them on easy, saying that xcom is hard is like saying that halo is hard.

 

[Troublematic]

Here's a GDC talk I don't think has been posted here yet which is I think relevant to the topic of how difficulty of From's games has a major positive impact on the success of their product, and how adding an easy mode would not have lead to the success they enjoy these days.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vid5yZRKzs0

The short of it is, that by trying to please everyone, you'll likely please no one, and in game development terms, pleasing everyone also means costs associated in that attempt. From a cost efficiency perspective Souls games are tremendously good, which is why they're considered massive successes, while say some Square Enix games that sold multiple times more were still failures that didn't necessarily break even.

Looking at it from a financial perspective, adding an easy mode or otherwise catering to wider audiences isn't a slam dunk guarantee of more sales if your game has no targeted user base that truly feels its for them. This is what a lot of AAA's tend to forget when they pursue ever ever wider audiences with their franchises. The experience gets diluted, and at some point what may have made the original game special is lost.

I think there may be a point in all of this wailing over From games being too hard, that there really might be a market for what From games offer outside their combat challenge. Strong aspects like level design, indirect storytelling and atmosphere that people want from these games, may not be adequately catered to in the current AAA market.

I don't think the main appeal of Souls games is the difficulty, or to be able to gloat to people who can't get gud. While that certainly happens, I think this narrative is perpetuated more on the end of those people who are intimidated by this than the amount of people being obnoxious over it. I think Miyazaki's main game development challenge has been about how to best guide people into learning the systems naturally and facing the challenges of the games without being either too handholdy or obtuse.

I think there would be no latter Souls-like games to begin with, since the opposite of loving a game is not hating it, but being indifferent about it. If you'd just played Demon's or Dark Souls on industry standard difficulty, I think they would've been quickly forgotten mediocre titles, like certain someone at Sony once thought about Demon's Souls. Further titles simply wouldn't exist. This "easy mode needs to be a thing" is a horribly misguided idea when it comes to games that specifically cater to an audience that respects challenging gameplay. You gotta know your audience, and From knows theirs.

You could also look at games like XCOM as an example that if your title's main appeal is it's challenge, adding an easy mode won't really net you anything. XCOM totally has an easy mode, but people who need this complain about the difficulty regardless, and they're clearly not having a good time, since they're hardly engaging with what makes the design of that game special. They're ignoring the intricate systems put in place and just rush onwards without thinking, and proceed to be underwhelmed by the game that's supposed to be great, but they're just not getting it. It's because they're playing on easy mode and not engaging with what makes the game great for other people. And you certainly can't blame it on your slow response time in a turn based tactics game. The reality is, these games cater to an audience with a certain mindset and skillset, and trying to cater to people outside this group is bound to fail, and they will never like your game no matter how easy you make it, and instead they will dilute the word of mouth by stating your game was boring and it sucked.

 

[MadScientist]

I get that, and I can totally understand where you're coming from. That's why consoles have accessibility options, specialized controllers, etc. I just don't think it's fair to lambast games for not accommodating to every taste and player need. Fromsoft has a vision for their games centred around the reward and sense accomplishment that comes from beating a difficult challenge. They've made a name for themselves doing this for over a decade now. Strip that away and what are you left with?

Click to shrink...

But you're not stripping it away. The game can be that way for most people. An assist mode would yes, strip some of that away. But if would allow those gamers that need the assist to experience the game. Accessibility options and specialized controllers are not the only type of assist features that are needed in games.

Difficulty options do not inherently remove challenge, when done right they allow players to dial the challenge to a level commensurate with their skill set so they can experience a challenge they can actually overcome. Easy for you or me =/= easy for other people. One size does not fit all. This is also why most advocacy groups recommend granular options over set modes, as it lets each individual adjust the game to their specific needs or preferences.

Most people who want to play a FROM game want a challenge, but for some their skill ceiling is not at the level the game requires from them. That doesn't make for a challenging game, it makes for an often impossible one. Being able to adjust certain parameters means allowing people to experience a challenge for them. Most people are not asking for just a God Mode to remove all difficulty, nuance or challenge from the game. But simply options that would allow them to have a similar experience that others do. For many people reducing damage taken by 75% would still result in an incredibly hard fight for them, but it is at least a fight they can more realistically win and that's an accomplishment for them same as for those who can beat the game at default. This applies to all people too, not just those with diagnosed disabilities.

Click to shrink...

Very well said! Exactly how feel on the entire situation!

 

[KiLAM]

I hope people understand that every game isn't for every one. I am glad that FROM is sticking to their guts here. Best thing about gaming is that there is a game for everyone. It's okay for some games to not have easy option. It's not like every game is trying to do that.

 

[Patapuf]

And like I said, you can also play them on easy, saying that xcom is hard is like saying that halo is hard.

Click to shrink...

You said "designed with challenge in mind". And these games are.

Or would you say Ninja Gaiden or DMC weren't designed with challenge in mind because they also have an easy mode?

 

[Deleted member 32374]

I hope people understand that every game isn't for every one. I am glad that FROM is sticking to their guts here. Best thing about gaming is that there is a game for everyone. It's okay for some games to not have easy option. It's not like every game is trying to do that.

Click to shrink...

Did you not read the thread? This video was posted many times.

Its a bit offensive that you're basically straight up using this disabled gamer as a prop for your argument. Frankly, that sucks. I don't assume someone can't do a game just because of a disability, they'll let me know what they can do and they will strive to do as much as everyone else in every situation, just like I do. Also, it isn't nice when someone just assumes you CAN do something you can't or questions why you cannot do something or when you say that you need a specific assistance you're ignored.

People are using this video as a weapon in their argument, like hammer that says "if they can, so can you, you're disability can't be this bad, suck it up". I'm not saying that was your intention but understand why it may seem that way.

 

[MillionIII]

You said "designed with challenge in mind". And these games are.

Or would you say Ninja Gaiden or DMC wasn't designed with challenge in mind because it also has an easy mode?

Click to shrink...

They can be challenging, but if the option is one click away then it doesn't mean that they are hard by default.
And since I played the recent dmc, no the game is not challenging, at all.

 

[Retozhe]

Combat difficulty discussion is fine and all, but what about lore? I find it very hard to piece together story on my own especially after first playthrough. Hence countless community forums digging for details and exchanging theories. Hell, whole youtubers' careers exist solely because of it.
So, should From Software attach to the game a PDF file that details its lore and story? I mean, you don't have to read it... *shrugs*

 

[Bjones]

Would the Souls games be better without summoning? They sure would be objectively harder without that easy mode..

And because of this, summoning needs to go from every future Souls game. We do not want optional easy modes in our Souls games.

Click to shrink...

That still doesn't say if a game would be ruined with it or without. You can never know unless you can go back in time to release it both ways.

 

[Tpallidum]

People are confusing "add an easy mode" with "make the whole game easier". The normal difficulty would presumably still be there as the default. Nobody's asking for that to go away.

Idk why adding an extra mode for other people to enjoy would somehow compromise my experience playing the game "as intended".

 

[Deleted member 32374]

Combat difficulty discussion is fine and all, but what about lore? I find it very hard to piece together story on my own especially after first playthrough. Hence countless community forums digging for details and exchanging theories. Hell, whole youtubers' careers exist solely because of it.
So, should From Software attach to the game a PDF file that details its lore and story? I mean, you don't have to read it... *shrugs*

Click to shrink...

I know this is joking but it would be nice if every game had a lorebook/script book for accessibility. Pie in the sky kind of stuff but... you know.

YT videos auto subtitle function improving a lot in recent years. I remember having to wiki the Doom 3 story from years ago due to the fact that I played that game silently, due to my hearing issues. No subtitles in the audio logs in the OG release. (Issue with a lot of games that offer audio logs, subtitles are not labled/color coded as subtitle that is happening in the audio log vs outside environment)

Calling KiLAM Do you have a response to my reply to your post in this thread? Your profile is set to private.

 

[higemaru]

Combat difficulty discussion is fine and all, but what about lore? I find it very hard to piece together story on my own especially after first playthrough. Hence countless community forums digging for details and exchanging theories. Hell, whole youtubers' careers exist solely because of it.
So, should From Software attach to the game a PDF file that details its lore and story? I mean, you don't have to read it... *shrugs*

Click to shrink...

That would be cool actually. There's an argument to be made for convergence culture and how that enhances some media (The Matrix, for example) but I don't think people would complain if Miyazaki wrote out some of the lore in a little appendix file. Additionally, I'm sure they would gloss over a bit allowing fans to fill in the gaps.

 

[Mr. Genuine]

Combat difficulty discussion is fine and all, but what about lore? I find it very hard to piece together story on my own especially after first playthrough. Hence countless community forums digging for details and exchanging theories. Hell, whole youtubers' careers exist solely because of it.
So, should From Software attach to the game a PDF file that details its lore and story? I mean, you don't have to read it... *shrugs*

Click to shrink...

This is a good point. You could apply the logic of "it's for accessibility" for so many aspects of a game.

 

[Tetra-Grammaton-Cleric]

They can be challenging, but if the option is one click away then it doesn't mean that they are hard by default.
And since I played the recent dmc, no the game is not challenging, at all.

Click to shrink...

Really?

So you've beaten the game at the highest difficulty levels while getting SSS rankings across the board?

I ask because the metrics for mastering a game like DMCV are entirely different than those for a game like Souls or Sekiro.

 

[F4r0_Atak]

It is true that difficulty settings should be standard with most releases, but playing games like "The Last of Us" on easy for example kinda kills the survival elements when you receive too many ammos and resources while scavenging. So, depending on the game, an easy mode can ruin a game's vibe and mechanics. :/

 

[Deleted member 37739]

As someone who bounced off Sekiro because I found it too frustrating and stressful, I'm in no hurry to see From Software patch in difficulty settings.

I feel about this topic as I feel about certain poets: sometimes they're needlessly abstruse, overly grandiloquent or riddled with complex and obscure metaphors. Others have deliberately challenging rhythms, metres or structures or in some cases are so damnably entrenched in the moment that they were written that you'd need to be an expert on that particular place or time to extract any meaning whatsoever.

These poets also attract the same kind of stubborn elitists that insist you simply don't 'get it' and that only with time and patience will you unweave the wonders that have been put before you. However, much like games, not all poems are this way and there's a great deal of poetry out that will be sensible to even the least initiated readers.

The major difference is that I don't think anyone would ever demand that writers or publishers create simplified versions of complex, high-end poetry - like having someone painfully explain a joke only to find that you get it but you're not even remotely amused, some things lose their proper effect if they're not experienced on their own terms.

This is simply how I feel, because I think games are a craft and an art-form and that the careful tuning that goes into them, even when we don't understand it, is often deliberate.

 

[Deleted member 888]

People are confusing "add an easy mode" with "make the whole game easier". The normal difficulty would presumably still be there as the default. Nobody's asking for that to go away.

Idk why adding an extra mode for other people to enjoy would somehow compromise my experience playing the game "as intended".

Click to shrink...

Because Miyazaki has spoken about it multiple times and stated what he intended to do with these projects.

It's not as if we're waiting in limbo to find out what From Software think. They've been asked and have spoken their feelings, as the creator. From that, people including myself, have tried to explain at length how when it comes to game design there are multiple ways to handle accessible difficulty.

From Kotaku's strawman article title that no one is even really contesting, to continual hot takes that ignore what the creator has already addressed, this is going to keep being a roundabout every time a From Software game releases. We've reached the points of calling Miyazaki an asshole, stating From Software are actively/intentionally ableist, implying they don't care about their disabled fans and who knows how many times "gatekeeping" has been mentioned?

 

[Kainazzo]

Sometimes anxiety is an emotion that a content creator wants to harness and make you feel. Dread, fear, anxiety and worrying are key human emotions a lot of art, in film, TV and books try to tap into.

Click to shrink...

I agree, that's very important. However, in a perfect world it should be the consumer's choice to decide how much stimuli they need to match the creator's vision and receive a complete experience. Perceptions of emotions are unique to each individual; it may not take much to fill someone with the fear a creator was looking for.

Implementing this is, presently, extremely difficult. Yet games are special in that they actually have the potential to do this someday. I think that's amazing!

 

[MillionIII]

Really?

So you've beaten the game at the highest difficulty levels while getting SSS rankings across the board?

I ask because the metrics for mastering a game like DMCV are entirely different than those for a game like Souls or Sekiro.

Click to shrink...

I don't need to, the game lets me get to the credits with ease. To master sekiro and souls means seeing the ending which not all people can do.

 

[Enduin]

Not every game needs to APPEAL to everyone, but that's completely separate from being accessible by everyone. Yes the latter is not always possible, but it should be something we strive to achieve more and more. Plenty of people want to play FROM games, they find them appealing and do want a challenge, but for one reason or another are not able to ever live up to the skill requirements the game demands from them. So they want options to alter those parameters to a level that matches their own abilities to experience a challenge they can overcome. That's entirely different from saying you don't like JRPGs or Loot Shooter or RTS games because you find X, Y, Z about them boring or tedious and wish they were different. There is a huge difference between not being interested enough or patient enough to engage with a game as it demands and not being able to physically engage with it at all. The former is a choice, the latter is not.

 

[Deleted member 888]

I agree, that's very important. However, in a perfect world it should be at the consumer's discretion to decide how much stimuli they need to match the creator's vision and receive a complete experience. Perceptions of emotions are unique to each individual; it may not take much to fill someone with the fear a creator was looking for.

Implementing this is, presently, extremely difficult. Yet games are special in that they actually have the potential to do this someday. I think that's amazing!

Click to shrink...

And given the critical acclaim of FS games, the almost new sub-genre they have created and other developers now seeking their own "Souls-like", I think there is an ability to say the balance of what From Software intended has been pulled off. The emotions they wanted players to feel largely came through and weren't just drowned out by rage and anger. A lot of that is just marketing and building hype claiming these games are "impossible".

They do iterate as well and improve their games. Go back and play Demons Souls, one could argue some of the challenge in it truly is the jank and iffy combat. But then you get to Dark Souls and a bigger budget and taking what worked in Demons Souls and improving on it really starts to shine.

People are nostalgic for Demons Souls, but Dark Souls is a far better-designed game. Especially on the accessibility front.

 

[Patapuf]

As someone who bounced off Sekiro because I found it too frustrating and stressful, I'm in no hurry to see From Software patch in difficulty settings.

I feel about this topic as I feel about certain poets: sometimes they're needlessly abstruse, overly grandiloquent or riddled with complex and obscure metaphors. Others have deliberately challenging rhythms, metres or structures or in some cases are so damnably entrenched in the moment that they were written that you'd need to be an expert on that particular place or time to extract any meaning whatsoever.

These poets also attract the same kind of stubborn elitists that insist you simply don't 'get it' and that only with time and patience will you unweave the wonders that have been put before you. However, much like games, not all poems are this way and there's a great deal of poetry out that will be sensible to even the least initiated readers.

The major difference is that I don't think anyone would ever demand that writers or publishers create simplified versions of complex, high-end poetry - like having someone painfully explain a joke only to find that you get it but you're not even remotely amused, some things lose their proper effect if they're not experienced on their own terms.

This is simply how I feel, because I think games are a craft and an art-form and that the careful tuning that goes into them, even when don't understand it, is often deliberate.

Click to shrink...

Actually, people do. Most abstract art has extensive explanations about it's significance. Sometimes from the author, sometimes from third parties. But like, most art galleries i got to explain the shit that's in them to me. Most collection of poems do the same.

 

[AtmaPhoenix]

So I haven't read the whole thread, but is the reason Souls/Sekiro games are always so focused on for needing an easy mode simply because they are single-player games? (Yes I know there's summoning and PVP but in general, the main aspect of the game is a single player experience.)

Fighting games, MOBAs, multiplayer shooters, BR games nobody complains about skill levels in these. To get better at multiplayer games you often have to beat your head against a wall repeatedly, train, learn animations, map placements, etc. There is definitely a "get good" attitude for any competitive multiplayer game.

But when this attitude is applied to a single player game like Sekiro, it is wrong? Because we're not competing against other humans, the challenge should always be adjustable?

 

[Figgles]

If the developer only wants 1 difficulty setting, that's their decision. If you don't like that, the game isn't for you. Play something else. There are a lot of design aspects in games that don't appeal to me, so I don't play those games.

 

[Nerokis]

The reliance on parrying is something that has even put me off, because I mostly avoided that in Souls. I will likely give it a go one day.



One thing I always find interesting to do with games that are designed with a lot of player freedom is watch a speed run. Here is one in 33 minutes, but don't ask me how. You pick up on tips and tricks and ways to use the game against itself.

A blind playthrough of Souls is certainly more challenging than if you just sit and go throw a Wiki and know how to do everything and the best ways to beat bosses. But the fact these FAQs and WIKIs exist is often a sign of good game design, that it's not simply "the game pretty much cheats here, it's pure luck".

Click to shrink...

Miyazaki agrees with you:

From Software doesn't take pleasure in your pain over the punishing difficulty of Dark Souls: Creative director Hidetaka Miyazaki tailored the game to his own wants.

Edge asked Miyazaki how he felt about being called cruel and sadistic.

"If I had to say for myself, it's actually the opposite – I'm more masochistic," he replied.

"Because I created Dark Souls while thinking about what type of game I would personally like to play. I wanted somebody to bring out a really sadistic game, but I ended up having to make it myself."

That said, Miyazaki is aware that not everybody wants to be relentlessly beaten to a pulp, and gave assurances that using "cheap strategies" is a perfectly valid way of playing.

"I want people to have fun with strategising," he said, mentioning tactics like poison arrows and coaxing enemies off ledges.

"That was definitely something that was intentional. There's one approach to combat that involves a head-to-head collision, but luring enemies and using cheap strategies is one of the joys of this game as well."

Click to shrink...

 

[Mungan]

The attempts at making music, movies, art, architecture etc. appeal to everyone has ruined a lot of the mainstream parts of those art forms (according to snobs). With the way games are progressing, mainstream (or AAA) video games also seem to follow this trend.

With that said, I don't think you should actively try to make an excluding product, but altering something just to make it appeal to a broader audience can be pretty bad. The original idea might get squashed if you try to consider everyone. An easy-mode might not be such a big deal, but if you start including things because you want broader appeal the idea of accessibility would probably permeate into other parts of the product.

 

[Tpallidum]

There are Shakespeare publishers that put Shakespeare on one half of the page and the translated "modern English" version of the text on the other half. you can have both right? It doesn't have to be a compromise. The original work is still intact. The work is still the work. You can choose to get the full experience or not.

 

[Deleted member 4976]

Can't find any lies with the Kotaku title.

 

[Deleted member 32374]

The attempts at making music, movies, art, architecture etc. appeal to everyone has ruined a lot of the mainstream parts of those art forms (according to snobs). With the way games are progressing, mainstream (or AAA) video games also seem to follow this trend.

With that said, I don't think you should actively try to make an excluding product, but altering something just to make it appeal to a broader audience can be pretty bad. The original idea might get squashed if you try to consider everyone. An easy-mode might not be such a big deal, but if you start including things because you want broader appeal the idea of accessibility would probably permeate into other parts of the product.

Click to shrink...

Accessibility =/= Appeal to everyone.

 

[Tetra-Grammaton-Cleric]

I don't need to, the game lets me get to the credits with ease. To master sekiro and souls means seeing the ending which not all people can do.

Click to shrink...

And getting SSS rankings across the board on the highest difficulty of DMCV isn't something many can do either.

I'd argue fewer people can do it than could beat a From Software game.

Regardless, the addition of an easy mode doesn't - in any way - detract from the difficulty and mastery available to player in DMCV. If somebody opts to play on easy mode because they don't want to challenge themselves - which you clearly did - that doesn't change the challenge inherent to that game's mechanics.

And just to be clear, I'm not arguing that Souls games should have an easy mode but trying to claim DMCV isn't a challenging game merely because it contains that option is laughable.

 

[Deleted member 37739]

Actually, people do. Most abstract art has extensive explanations about it's significance. Sometimes from the author, sometimes from third parties. But like, most art galleries i got to explain the shit that's in them to me. Most collection of poems do the same.

Click to shrink...

I'm not quite sure you followed my point. There's plenty of explanation out there about tough games - official guides and wikis and plenty of in-game tutorials in the same way that there's been extensive critique written about poetry, by professional and amateur pundits alike.

Notes like these can help you understand the system and reading, learning and comprehending the thing are an acknowledgement of that inherent complexity - your ability to enjoy that thing however rests on your patience and your ability with understanding and apprehending it.

 

[Patapuf]

So I haven't read the whole thread, but is the reason Souls/Sekiro games are always so focused on for needing an easy mode simply because they are single-player games? (Yes I know there's summoning and PVP but in general, the main aspect of the game is a single player experience.)

Fighting games, MOBAs, multiplayer shooters, BR games nobody complains about skill levels in these. To get better at multiplayer games you often have to beat your head against a wall repeatedly, train, learn animations, map placements, etc. There is definitely a "get good" attitude for any competitive multiplayer game.

But when this attitude is applied to a single player game like Sekiro, it is wrong? Because we're not competing against other humans, the challenge should always be adjustable?

Click to shrink...

MP games are a different kettle of fish but people complain about fighting game and moba difficulty all the time and extensive work has been done to make them more acessible.

 

[BearPawB]

I don't think a From game with
"easy"
"normal"
"hard"
works at all.

But a celeste like menu? Maybe.
What if you could turn on autoparry if you were holding the block?
What if you could make healing gourds always heal 100%?

Small little tweaks for people who want them? I have less of a problem with that.

 

[sora87]

People are confusing "add an easy mode" with "make the whole game easier". The normal difficulty would presumably still be there as the default. Nobody's asking for that to go away.

Idk why adding an extra mode for other people to enjoy would somehow compromise my experience playing the game "as intended".

Click to shrink...

It doesn't take away anything, not a damn thing.
People are so caught up on the "intended way" and "creators vision" that they don't realise those two things would still be there, front and center.

 

[Deleted member 888]

Miyazaki agrees with you:

Click to shrink...

And you can definitely see it given many enemies are placed in locations a baited dodge means the enemy goes flying off a ledge to their death. Or bosses start with a critical R1 drop down to take a chunk of their health off. And lots of other clear conscious decisions to rewards players who explore and think when playing.

There is plenty of trolling in these games at times, even from the developer (your very first mimic), but the hand-crafted world if it's respected often shares its secrets and flaws to the player, to help them win.



Quite a few bosses have "cheese spots". Now is that intentional or "unfortunate" geometry design? Sometimes you could give the benefit of the doubt and say, intentional.



Even back to Demons Souls many of the bosses have "cheese solutions". It's a reoccurring theme in this series, and not everything miraculously gets patched out the second the world knows.

Given what Miyazaki said it's quite clear even if not intentional game design, they're simply happy if players find some ways to use the game against itself to overcome adversity.

 

[KiLAM]

Did you not read the thread? This video was posted many times.

Its a bit offensive that you're basically straight up using this disabled gamer as a prop for your argument. Frankly, that sucks. I don't assume someone can't do a game just because of a disability, they'll let me know what they can do and they will strive to do as much as everyone else in every situation, just like I do. Also, it isn't nice when someone just assumes you CAN do something you can't or questions why you cannot do something or when you say that you need a specific assistance you're ignored.

Click to shrink...

I apologise if it came out as a wrong thing. I am just following the thread from last few pages and I didn't see this video posted. Neither was I trying to use this video to make my point. I shared this video that not every disabled person wants this either and people shouldn't speak for every person. Just saw some posts saying Miyazaki and FromSoftware don't respect disabled people just because their games are hard and frankly that got on my nerve. I understand and respect people for wanting more options but I also don't want people to speak for every disabled person as example.
Maybe I am late and that part is already discussed multiple times so I accept my mistake of not reading the whole thread.

 

[MillionIII]

And getting SSS rankings across the board on the highest difficulty of DMCV isn't something many can do either.

I'd argue fewer people can do it than could beat a From Software game.

Regardless, the addition of an easy mode doesn't - in any way - detract from the difficulty and mastery available to player in DMCV. If somebody opts to play on easy mode because they don't want to challenge themselves - which you clearly did - that doesn't change the challenge inherent to that game's mechanics.

And just to be clear, I'm not arguing that Souls games should have an easy mode but trying to claim DMCV isn't a challenging game merely because it contains that option is laughable.

Click to shrink...

Mastering a game is not the same as progressing through it, I assume that most people that want an easy mode for games like Sekiro can't get to the next area because they are simply not good enough. You don't need to be good at dmc v to see it's content and conclusion but you do for sekiro hence why it's more challenging by default.

 

[Auto]

That's like asking for Silent Hill to have a "not so scary" mode. It completely defeats the purpose.

 

[Manu]

I was thinking about what an Easy Mode for a Souls game would entail.

The idea I liked the most was an option to revive on the spot, but any enemies on screen you haven't killed, including bosses, get healed to full HP again. Would that be a good compromise?