Kotaku: An easy mode has never ruined a game

[Tetra-Grammaton-Cleric]

Dark Souls does give you options, it just does so within the game. That's a core part of the game design Miyazaki and From Software are aiming for.

People are saying they're unhappy it's not the options that they want, but they still cannot imply these games do not offer the potential for making things easier or more straight forward.

Sekiro is probably the most restrictive in that sense, but it's loot/mechanics have been streamlined and the game appears to be more of a linear experience (no real stressing about builds). Which can sometimes reduce the difficulty, in a way. I'm not sure either how vertical movement opens the game up for finding ways to exploit enemies.

Click to shrink...

I'm referring to options in the most upfront and rudimentary sense, namely being able to decide at the very beginning of the game if you want to play with the difficulty level neutered or, at the very least, toned down.

You're correct that the Souls games do give you a way to farm/grind your way to making encounters much easier, though let's admit that such an option requires an insane amount of repetition that no doubt grates on people looking to progress through the game world in a more expeditious manner. I personally have no problem with it because I understand the design philosophy and find the gameplay compelling enough to soldier onward but I can understand how such an experience could turn many off pretty rapidly.

The thing is, I would opt to play the game as intended but my point is that as long as those easier modes don't bleed into the default experience and corrupt the core integrity of the game, I really don't see the harm.

As to Sekiro, I love the game at its core but I've already mentioned I think the fusion of Souls with more action-centric games is flawed and – at least for me – the game has been a much more frustrating experience than any Souls game I've ever played. The inability to increase combat stats outside of defeating bosses and sub-bosses doesn't work for me and I also think the upgrades for moves and latent abilities progresses at a glacial pace when compared to action games like DMC.

The verticality certainly opens up new opportunities but the bosses in this game are so incredibly powerful and relentless that it really comes down to trial-and-error and memorizing patterns instead of grinding stats to overwhelm adversaries to give yourself an edge. I've put some serious time into Sekiro and I still don't feel particularly powerful the way I do by the time I've reached a certain level in something like Bloodborne or Dark Souls.

I dunno. Maybe that's the point.

 

[Troublematic]

Catering to "an audience with a certain mindset and skillset, and trying to cater to people outside this group" is neither "bound to fail" nor mutually exclusive, as evidenced by Dark Souls itself! The implication that Dark Souls' success owes to the absence of an easy mode is a patently false narrative considering all Soulsborne games had a built in easy mode in the form of summoning and grinding/leveling. If anything, games like Dark Souls and Cuphead are largely successful because while they were marketed as being difficult games that respect players who want a challenge, they still provided options or gameplay mechanics that made them accessible to less-skilled or time-constrained players. The reason why Sekiro has sparked up this conversation lately is because it doesn't cater to those players to the same extent that past From games have, essentially telling a segment of their existing fan base to "git gud" to experience all the game has to offer. I love the game, but I could see From's success hitting a ceiling if they continue down this path and forget about the more "casual" players that have contributed positive word of mouth for their franchises and to their bottom line.

Click to shrink...

My guess is these people didn't actually contribute to positive WoM, largely because I believe that those people who scraped by with the aid of summons obviously did not engage with the mechanics enough to survive without the help of others carrying them. I don't think people like this contribute positively, at best they're indifferent about the game. While I personally find enjoyment in the co-op in terms of PVP, I think the co-op mechanic really destroyed the balance in those games when it came to PVE and bosses, and simply made it unfun game design. From a co-op perspective there's plenty of other games I'd play just to have PVE fun with friends. Beyond the PVP setting the co-op seriously diluted any point in what you were doing getting through the levels. The greatest idea that Miyazaki had was to tie the invasion mechanic to those co-opping to retain some sort of balance, but most of these people who scraped by absolutely detested that, and the most of the co-oppers were gank squads who weren't doing it to have an easier go at the game.

I don't think the summoning system is what people are really looking for in an easy mode, and that's what really is the "patently false narrative" as you put it. Co-op is just co-op, and people complained over the difficulty of these games just the same as they did with Sekiro. I don't believe Sekiro is getting any special attention due to its lack of summoning. I don't think the people who were scraping by summoning left the previous games with positive word of mouth at all. I think that experience would've been objectively weak, beyond what fun they might have with friends, but I don't think any of them would attribute it to the game where they were constantly interrupted by invaders who would mop the floor with them regardless. If I still had my GFWL messages saved there'd be plenty of proof of that lol. Everything I've experience in the Souls community has made me believe people that were relying on others carrying them had only a lot of negative things to say about the game and particularly its online component. Which goes back to my initial point of why it's not a good idea to try to cater to people who are essentially diametrically opposed to the core idea of a challenging game. They will simply not engage with the game in the manner that's required to find that fun. You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make it drink.

 

[Necromanti]

You're correct that the Souls games do give you a way to farm/grind your way to making encounters much easier, though let's admit that such an option requires an insane amount of repetition that no doubt grates on people looking to progress through the game world in a more expeditious manner. I personally have no problem with it because I understand the design philosophy and find the gameplay compelling enough to soldier onward but I can understand how such an experience could turn many off pretty rapidly.

Click to shrink...

I feel like being able to summon help does a better job of modulating the difficulty when stats alone don't cut it, though with the right build and equipment, most encounters can be made trivial. I guess that's one of the key things missing in Sekiro. Though I wonder if a difficulty mode in that scenario would fracture the player base.

 

[Deleted member 888]

I'm referring to options in the most upfront and rudimentary sense, namely being able to decide at the very beginning of the game if you want to play with the difficulty level neutered or, at the very least, toned down.

You're correct that the Souls games do give you a way to farm/grind your way to making encounters much easier, though let's admit that such an option requires an insane amount of repetition that no doubt grates on people looking to progress through the game world in a more expeditious manner. I personally have no problem with it because I understand the design philosophy and find the gameplay compelling enough to soldier onward but I can understand how such an experience could turn many off pretty rapidly.

The thing is, I would opt to play the game as intended but my point is that as long as those easier modes don't bleed into the default experience and corrupt the core integrity of the game, I really don't see the harm.

As to Sekiro, I love the game at its core but I've already mentioned I think the fusion of Souls with more action-centric games is flawed and – at least for me – the game has been a much more frustrating experience than any Souls game I've ever played. The inability to increase combat stats outside of defeating bosses and sub-bosses doesn't work for me and I also think the upgrades for moves and latent abilities progresses at a glacial pace when compared to action games like DMC.

The verticality certainly opens up new opportunities but the bosses in this game are so incredibly powerful and relentless that it really comes down to trial-and-error and memorizing patterns instead of grinding stats to overwhelm adversaries to give yourself an edge. I've put some serious time into Sekiro and I still don't feel particularly powerful the way I do by the time I've reached a certain level in something like Bloodborne or Dark Souls.

I dunno. Maybe that's the point.

Click to shrink...

The music box in Bloodborne is a way to literally stun Gascoigne and IIRC it works twice, giving you two large windows of beating the shit out of him. There is a story element to why it works, and it does make that fight easier (one of the first bosses in the game and quite challenging). It's also noted how beasts are weak to fire, and, with item placement you get fire paper and IIRC firebombs near the entrance to the fight.

There are other items in the game that make it easier if you take the time to explore and read. Throw a charm at a mimic (a pretty hard fake chest) and it won't attack you, but instead give you its contents without battle. Look at the chest closely and depending on how the chain is placed, you can tell if it's a mimic.

That's before more obvious things like summoning (even in-game NPCs like Solaire).

There's a lot of people spouting off about the series who are clearly a bit ignorant to the game design and some of the things I've mentioned above. Okay, that's fair enough if you haven't played the games or gave up really quickly. But you should be open to listening to why the games get praised as they do and a lot of that is not simply "lol hard game git gud this is fun". It's the careful and intentional design which rewards thinking, not just looking at a map GPS line and driving from objective A to B on autopilot.

To call From Software games "old school game design" feels both wrong and ignorant, because really, there's space in this industry for games right now that maybe do ask you to think and try/learn, rather than just "hold down X to win and here's 1,000 map markers for you to fast travel to and clear up". I don't mind what games individuals find fun, fun is subjective, but I am going to challenge what can be ignorance at times or the downplaying of varied game design. Opportunity has to exist for trends to be shaken up or devs try different things.

 

[Illusion]

Don't you think this is an entitled attitude?

FROM specifically makes their games challenging as they want their players to be challenged and have a sense of learning and satisfaction of overcoming a difficult fight/area. They want tension.

If the way you most enjoy games is by breezing through them without challenge, who are you to say that they aren't making their best version of the game?

Click to shrink...

Never said anything about easy difficulty. I'm saying this in a more broad sense, even games being made harder still fit into what I'm trying to get across.

For another example, if a game was too easy wouldn't you want a more challenging game or woild that make you too entitled to ask for that?

Or if a game doesn't offer control changing options, they aren't making the best possible version of their game.

I mean I could insert the blank here with a lot of things. I'm not saying that any game without more difficulty modes is a bad game, it just not the best game it could be to every player. If a developer wishes their game to only be one thing, that's their decision. It's not good, it's not bad, it's just disappointing.

 

[Tetra-Grammaton-Cleric]

DMC can be challenging but at the same time it can also be easy, so the game is a mix of both.
If dark souls 4 had an easy mode then it's no longer just challenging, it's both.

Click to shrink...

Okay, fair enough but why should that matter as long as we can still play the challenging version?

Do you really think those people posting ridiculously advanced DMCV combo strings on YouTube are deflated because you mashed your way through the game on easy?

Do you feel you are losing something if more people can play a From game and get to the end?

 

[Kainazzo]

I suppose I'm excited because AI is on the path to making the very concept of "difficulty" optional in videogames. It's an external factor developers cannot account for. I can't speak for how AI might change how content is created, but in games it can play a new role in permanently changing how people choose to consume them. It provides all the options anyone could want, with none of the extra effort, and is invisible unless a user makes it known.

It's a transcendent way to experience games in ways traditional media can't be. If anything, it bolsters the flexibility and diversity available to the medium.

 

[jman912]

I agree.

I also think it's okay for there to not be an easy mode.

I also think it's okay for there to be 10 difficulty modes.

I mostly think I'll just play whatever the developers make and if it's too hard, too easy, too boring, too uninteresting, or too whatever-makes-me-want-to-put-it-down, then I'll put it down and play another one of the seemingly infinite games that release every day.

Click to shrink...

Heck, Kid Icarus: Uprising had a difficulty slider from 0.0 to 9.0, giving you about 90 levels of difficulty, and it worked really well.

 

[MYeager]

"Stephen Kings' books could be so much more accessible if only he made them less scary."

"If HP Lovecrafts' stories weren't so disturbing, more people might read them."

"If Bloodborne wasn't so violent then a wider audience might enjoy the game."

Or...it would change the vision the content creator's had for thier creations and completely remove what makes them enjoyable for their fans, all in an effort to make them "accessible".

Click to shrink...

Lovecraft and King literally have tons of essays, articles, etc, deconstructing their creations including a lot of criticism concerning themes and content. Artistic vision isn't and should never be a deflection from criticism, critique of art has existed as long as art.

Other video games studios throughout the history of the medium have figured out how to communicate their vision and ideal way of playing the game to audiences and I believe From Software would be perfectly capable of doing so if they in fact wanted to.

They don't have to for any reason, but the vision argument is a hollow one.

 

[regenhuber]

And one of the top rated comments doesn't surprise me, because it's been the case since Demons Souls

Finding out the pattern, item, weapon, spell or technique that works best in an individual situation and exploiting it.

Click to shrink...

Yes and no.
First of all, yes, the commentor has a point. You can lower the difficulty in Sekiro quite a bit by using the toolchest the game hands you along the way.
But picking up on those little hints is actually the hardest part in FROM games for me. Never had a problem with the combat, but still miss a ton of shit and have to look up stuff online.

 

[Bruceleeroy]

Sekiro is the hardest of the soul games for me by far but this article is ludicrous and seems to basically boil down to - "I'm not good at this game and hate seeing people finish it and enjoy it because it makes me insecure" the whole "elite" talk is nonsense and all of us that play these games and "get it" are people that remember games that were difficult and didn't hold your hand. I think by having no difficulty settings it ensures all of us Young and old are having the same experience. To me that is a special thing.

 

[Nerokis]

After browsing Twitter a bit more, which is usually a mistake, I'm just left scratching my head seeing the seething rage and anger coming around this. It's almost as if people have been saving themselves up to just explode. Is it because it's a "hot topic of the moment" everyone is suddenly jumping on board with their takes/implications?

Click to shrink...

The most anger I've seen around this issue has been people reacting unfavorably to the idea of additional difficulty options/the entire existence of this conversation, and then people reacting to those reactions. Almost none of it has been centered around From Software themselves or a specific game.

Except the vision is not intact. If the developers want you to struggle and you breeze through, the vision has been compromised.

Click to shrink...

That vague thing, The Vision, is compromised either way. The point is to struggle, learn, and overcome, right? As much as people act like Dark Souls is for the hardcore, that vision speaks more to those of us who don't feel like we're amazing at games. You'd think it speaks most to people who have disabilities that already make a number of games more difficult for them. If someone with a disability is willing to invest time and effort into Dark Souls, but can't succeed because the game didn't allow a path for them to, doesn't that undermine so much of what the game is trying to do?

 

[Black Chamber]

At the end of the day, the creators get to decide this and From has decided that difficulty settings are incongruous with their design philosophy and how they want their games experienced.

Click to shrink...

People need to learn that if a creator decides they don't want to make a game catered to them that is a-ok. Go play something else.

Click to shrink...

Sekiro is the hardest of the soul games for me by far but this article is ludicrous and seems to basically boil down to - "I'm not good at this game and hate seeing people finish it and enjoy it because it makes me insecure" the whole "elite" talk is nonsense and all of us that play these games and "get it" are people that remember games that were difficult and didn't hold your hand. I think by having no difficulty settings it ensures all of us Young and old are having the same experience. To me that is a special thing.

Click to shrink...

End of thread.

These 3 posts sum it up very nicely.

 

[Tetra-Grammaton-Cleric]

The music box in Bloodborne is a way to literally stun Gascoigne and IIRC it works twice, giving you two large windows of beating the shit out of him. There is a story element to why it works, and it does make that fight easier (one of the first bosses in the game and quite challenging). It's also noted how beasts are weak to fire, and, with item placement you get fire paper and IIRC firebombs near the entrance to the fight.

There are other items in the game that make it easier if you take the time to explore and read. Throw a charm at a mimic (a pretty hard fake chest) and it won't attack you, but instead give you its contents without battle. Look at the chest closely and depending on how the chain is placed, you can tell if it's a mimic.

That's before more obvious things like summoning (even in-game NPCs like Solaire).

There's a lot of people spouting off about the series who are clearly a bit ignorant to the game design and some of the things I've mentioned above. Okay, that's fair enough if you haven't played the games or gave up really quickly. But you should be open to listening to why the games get praised as they do and a lot of that is not simply "lol hard game git gud this is fun". It's the careful and intentional design which rewards thinking, not just looking at a map GPS line and driving from objective A to B on autopilot.

To call From Software games "old school game design" feels both wrong and ignorant, because really, there's space in this industry for games right now that maybe do ask you to think and try/learn, rather than just "hold down X to win and here's 1,000 map markers for you to fast travel to and clear up". I don't mind what games individuals find fun, fun is subjective, but I am going to challenge what can be ignorance at times or the downplaying of varied game design. Opportunity has to exist for trends to be shaken up or devs try different things.

Click to shrink...

That may be true (I beat Bloodborne without the Music Box) but there's still the reality that these games are – by their very nature – punishing in terms of difficulty and somewhat cryptic in terms of in-game tutorials and explanations.

That's not a knock against the design – I love these games (even if I'm mediocre at best when playing them) but as enthusiasts – and hardcore enthusiasts at that – I think it's easy to forget how this game might come off to people who don't invest nearly as much time as we do to playing this or any other type of game.

And yes, your argument that these games are fair and provide options is a valid one and to be clear I'm not saying an Easy Mode is owed but I do think there's little harm in providing one IF said mode doesn't – in any way – adversely affect the game as the rest of us want to and intend to play it.

At the same time, they have every right to keep doing as they have.

 

[Tirisfal]

The most anger I've seen around this issue has been people reacting unfavorably to the idea of additional difficulty options/the entire existence of this conversation, and then people reacting to those reactions. Almost none of it has been centered around From Software themselves or a specific game.



That vague thing, The Vision, is compromised either way. The point is to struggle, learn, and overcome, right? As much as people act like Dark Souls is for the hardcore, that vision speaks more to those of us who don't feel like we're amazing at games. You'd think it speaks most to people who have disabilities that already make a number of games more difficult for them. If someone with a disability is willing to invest time and effort into Dark Souls, but can't succeed because the game didn't allow a path for them to, doesn't that undermine so much of what the game is trying to do?

Click to shrink...

It's hard to answer that last bit without specifics. When you say the game didn't allow them a path to succeed, could you be specific on what you mean. Perhaps an example?

 

[Enduin]

Danny O'Dwyer(NoClip) has a fairly good take on the whole debate that many would do well to heed.

 

[Deleted member 888]

Yes and no.
First of all, yes, the commentor has a point. You can lower the difficulty in Sekiro quite a bit by using the toolchest the game hands you along the way.
But picking up on those little hints is actually the hardest part in FROM games for me. Never had a problem with the combat, but still miss a ton of shit and have to look up stuff online.

Click to shrink...

That may be true (I beat Bloodborne without the Music Box) but there's still the reality that these games are – by their very nature – punishing in terms of difficulty and somewhat cryptic in terms of in-game tutorials and explanations.

That's not a knock against the design – I love these games (even if I'm mediocre at best when playing them) but as enthusiasts – and hardcore enthusiasts at that – I think it's easy to forget how this game might come off to people who don't invest nearly as much time as we do to playing this or any other type of game.

And yes, your argument that these games are fair and provide options is a valid one and to be clear I'm not saying an Easy Mode is owed but I do think there's little harm in providing one IF said mode doesn't – in any way – adversely affect the game as the rest of us want to and intend to play it.

At the same time, they have every right to keep doing as they have.

Click to shrink...

I'll just reply to both of you because you cover a similar point, how cryptic the games are. That is something I don't deny, but like any click and point adventure game (Broken Sword) or other puzzle games, that is part of what Dark Souls is. It doesn't hold your hand. It expects you to make mistakes and learn from them. People don't do zero death playthroughs from their first experience. Nor do they even possibly pick up all the items or know what to do with them.

Having to really spend time and attention thinking, or, failing that, you can just rely on the excellent community and wikis to do it all for you. Miyazaki himself implying that is part of the community his games made that he is fine with. Even if it involves all the cheese and tactics players come up with.

Even the sidequests can be quite convoluted and not quite clear how you keep NPCs alive or progress their quests. That's part of the experience. There is a market for that. It's okay that not every game needs to have big quest markers and a detailed journal entry telling you everything you've to do.

Again, that probably being the reason some fans get a bit defensive. They've found one developer in a AAA industry who isn't conforming to what the open world map/quest log looks like in any given WRPG right now.

Because of how these games are, that's why we get videos like this



And all the other hundreds of lore videos and "things you missed".

 

[giraffereyn]

Sekiro is the hardest of the soul games for me by far but this article is ludicrous and seems to basically boil down to - "I'm not good at this game and hate seeing people finish it and enjoy it because it makes me insecure" the whole "elite" talk is nonsense and all of us that play these games and "get it" are people that remember games that were difficult and didn't hold your hand. I think by having no difficulty settings it ensures all of us Young and old are having the same experience. To me that is a special thing.

Click to shrink...

If it's such a special thing why don't you want the most amount of people to experience it? You're being elitist in exactly the way the article is referring.

The design of the game doesn't have to change to allow more people to play Sekiro. I'm sure you can imagine one single option that they could add that would allow like a thousand new players without anything about your "speciel feeling" changing at all.

Options like controller layout options, third-party controller support, voice-over menus, text font options, there are even accessibility menus in your old special games, we just called them cheats back then. I love Final Fantasy VII now because at the age of ten I could only beat it with my PS1 codebreaker disc.

 

[Doctor Avatar]

The most anger I've seen around this issue has been people reacting unfavorably to the idea of additional difficulty options/the entire existence of this conversation

Click to shrink...

Actually the entire conversation is mostly driven by the anger of people who feel left out. Who spend their time criticising the game and the fans of the game because the game doesn't cater to them. Just look at all the name calling of both FROM and the people who support FROM in making the game they want to make (how controversial and angry!) in this thread.

Ultimately the people who are angry are the ones not getting what they want and acting like they have some moral right to get what they want, rather than take or leave what they are offered which is their actual right.

Some people just can't handle the fact that something isn't made for them, or the creators right not to cater to them if they don't want to. And honestly that is very sad.

 

[Tetra-Grammaton-Cleric]

"Stephen Kings' books could be so much more accessible if only he made them less scary."

"If HP Lovecrafts' stories weren't so disturbing, more people might read them."

"If Bloodborne wasn't so violent then a wider audience might enjoy the game."

Or...it would change the vision the content creator's had for thier creations and completely remove what makes them enjoyable for their fans, all in an effort to make them "accessible".

Click to shrink...

These analogies are meaningless.

Passive entertainment can be experienced by anyone fully, regardless of whether they enjoy it or understand it. There's no barrier to finishing a Stephen King novel or watching an unsettling or esoteric film.

These games are so incredibly difficult that many people - including experienced gamers - often can't complete them.

Now, that doesn't mean people are owed an EASY MODE but the comparison of games to passive media is simply not accurate.

 

[DerpHause]

Really?

You can quickly read through the twitter discussion to find plenty of people blaming other people for not being "up to standard", how they should just go look for more "suitable games" paired up with a couple of good old gitgud memes and how two people playing on different difficulty are not having the "same experience" and its bad thing because reasons.

Also:

Click to shrink...

What you quoted was someone doing the same thing you are, pulling that sentiment out of your own nethers and using it to label others.

 

[FallenGrace]

I demand easy mode for hollow knight, without easy mode how else can I experience the touchy cutscene at the end of Path of Pain? Think about the player who has a stupid thumb and can't do platforming!

Seriously, "making things easier to broader audiences" is a slippy downhill without bottom if people use accessibility as a standard to lower difficulty (and it's ableism). How easy should things get? There are people out there who can't figure out Uncharted on easy mode, maybe ND needs to add a promt to skip gameplay or puzzle when player get stuck too long.

Click to shrink...

Your exagerated post as many others here do nothing to support whatever it is you have against difficulty settings, it just makes you look ridiculous. Hollow Knight could have an easy, normal and hard selection like multitudes of games have and it wouldn't lesson the game or experience in any way, it would just allow players to experience the game at a level suitible for their skill. Sure some people may even find easy too hard for them but that doesn't mean they can't put the option in. Your preference is not to try at all? :/

 

[Tpallidum]

Unless having everyone accomplish things on the same level is part of the vision.

Click to shrink...

It would fragment the playerbase yes. It's true. Those who choose to do so will not get the full experience. There are pros and cons to having everyone jump though the same hoops. You can build communities that are all on the same page. Bring up any boss and everyone instantly knows what each other went through. Everyone has a similar story of how they eventual beat him. This is the best and as far as I can tell the only argument against an easy mode.

Except the vision is not intact. If the developers want you to struggle and you breeze through, the vision has been compromised.

Click to shrink...

for people that choose easy modes, they absolutely compromise their experience yes. That's a given. This goes for any game.

Look at the end of the day I just want people that are not as awesome at video games as you and I to enjoy these games in some (admittedly shittier) capacity. I think that would be really nice and it hurts no one. It does not affect my experience in the slightest because I wouldn't play these games on anything other than the intended difficulty. The community aspect as a whole takes a hit but I don't think it's that bad.

 

[Gankzymcfly]

Playing Ff7 right now on xb1 and the game has all these features the original didn't...you can fast forward 3x speed, turn on a battle boost and turn off random encounters... Or you can play the game without any of the boost. The game is still as good now as it was several years ago, infact it's arguably better now. The inclusion of these features hasn't diminished my experience in any capacity as somebody who rarely uses anything outside the X3 speed feature.

 

[DerpHause]

The most anger I've seen around this issue has been people reacting unfavorably to the idea of additional difficulty options/the entire existence of this conversation, and then people reacting to those reactions. Almost none of it has been centered around From Software themselves or a specific game.

Click to shrink...

Most of the anger here has been people assuming malice and even manufacturing idea of promoting exclusion. The people who are fine with the game as is are just that, fine.

 

[Professor Beef]

I'm not really into watching someone else play lol.

Click to shrink...

Well then it looks like your options are severely limited.

 

[DerpHause]

We don't know it will compromise anything though. People use cheat engines/trainers to get through the games and still love them. Surely that's a fan made easy mode and it doesn't hamper anything.

Click to shrink...

The dev thinks it will. But the armchair devs seem to know better than the genre defining creators it seems.

 

[Deleted member 37739]

These analogies are meaningless.

Passive entertainment can be experienced by anyone fully, regardless of whether they enjoy it or understand it. There's no barrier to finishing a Stephen King novel or watching an unsettling or esoteric film.

These games are so incredibly difficult that many people - including experienced gamers - often can't complete them.

Now, that doesn't mean people are owed an EASY MODE but the comparison of games to passive media is simply not accurate.

Click to shrink...

My wife can't handle specific types of violence or horror, she has to carefully vet what she watches for this reason as it can lead to full-blown panic attacks. Being a passive experience is no qualifier of being broadly accessible, and one need only take a look at something like Samuel Beckett or William S. Boroughs to recognise that even reading comprehension is, in itself, no guarantee, irrespective of content. This is to say nothing of specific cognitive disabilities like dyslexia.

 

[Deleted member 4093]

Sekiro is the hardest of the soul games for me by far but this article is ludicrous and seems to basically boil down to - "I'm not good at this game and hate seeing people finish it and enjoy it because it makes me insecure" the whole "elite" talk is nonsense and all of us that play these games and "get it" are people that remember games that were difficult and didn't hold your hand. I think by having no difficulty settings it ensures all of us Young and old are having the same experience. To me that is a special thing.

Click to shrink...

This

 

[Nerokis]

It's hard to answer that last bit without specifics. When you say the game didn't allow them a path to succeed, could you be specific on what you mean. Perhaps an example?

Click to shrink...

One example would be someone for whom pressing L1 repeatedly to deflect might cause substantial pain.

There are quite a few examples, though, of disabilities that might make the games difficult in an unreasonable way. There are different answers to that depending on the specific disability, for sure, but I think the general idea that "the execution of the vision falls short for the people it should speak to most" still holds either way.

Actually the entire conversation is mostly driven by the anger of people who feel left out. Who spend their time criticising the game and the fans of the game because the game doesn't cater to them. Just look at all the name calling of both FROM and the people who support FROM in making the game they want to make (how controversial and angry!) in this thread.

Ultimately the people who are angry are the ones not getting what they want and acting like they have some moral right to get what they want, rather than take or leave what they are offered which is their actual right.

Click to shrink...

I mean, this is demonstratably false. Look at your own post as an example. It certainly isn't a calm, thoughtful read of the conversation being had around accessibility.

 

[Resiverence]

If a game developer wants you to play a certain way and not the way you most enjoy the game, the developers aren't making the best possible version of their game.

Click to shrink...

There will always be a better possible version of the game

Key word being possible.

 

[Doctor Avatar]

If it's such a special thing why don't you want the most amount of people to experience it? You're being elitist in exactly the way the article is referring.

Click to shrink...

Can we please stop with the "elitism" ad hominem attack that is poorly thought out, illogical, and a way of basically name calling people who accept FROM have the right to create any kind of game they want to, and that it's OK not to cater to everyone?

 

[SoundLad]

A bad game can often prompt the emotions of sadness, anger, and/or disappointment because the game is bad. From games are some of the only games out there that prompt these emotions very frequently, but not because the game is bad, rather these emotions are a part of the intent of the game developers to help generate other (very good) emotions. Parsing the difference can be pretty hard, and there's certainly an argument to be made that if a game makes you feel these emotions, then it is bad, or "not for you."

From games tend to instill satisfaction from overcoming difficulty, and they have chosen failure -- the feeling of failure -- to be a contrast for the player. Because of this, it's often not the case (and it is not the case in Sekiro, either) that lightening-fast reflexes, or 50-hit combos will win the day in a From challenge, but rather patience, and a willingness to fail and learn. Of most of the people who frequented the Sekiro threads (that I saw) who complained about Sekiro, many were honest in admitting that they had neither the patience nor the desire to see it through.

I fundamentally believe that anyone with time, patience and of normal capability can overcome the challenges in *any* From game. Sekiro is not special in this regard; being good at Sekiro means having an algorithmic approach to its bosses; pattern recognition and careful study will serve you far, far more than "button mashing" ever will, and if people are genuinely hurting their hands playing the game, they are probably missing a valuable lesson or need some additional assistance in the form of a video tutorial or one of the many helping hands in the threads we have. I do not feel like anyone should be playing any harder for Sekiro than they do for Dark Souls, or Bloodborne -- just differently.

I also believe that From reducing the emotions of anger, frustration, or disappointment from their titles would probably make them worse. That doesn't mean I think they would be "bad" -- just, worse than they are. I support an "easy" mode for the games for people as a general rule, but From would likely never put one in the game for the reasons I describe: evoking these emotions are a part of From's design and (often) proportional to the satisfaction one gets from completing a challenge in the games. Nearly by definition, removing -- in part -- the weight of these emotions, by accident or by intent, would likely effect the quality of the emotion of satisfaction that these games tend to want to create. In other words, while in general it is probably true that an easy mode has never ruined a game, most games aren't centered around the ideas that From games are, and were it possible to make a good game worse through the inclusion of an "easy" mode, it probably *would* be a From game.

Which is probably why they are so damned loved and dogmatically defended. To this day, people playing around with the Souls formula haven't quite figured out what makes these games tick, and people will naturally be afraid of messing with the secret sauce.

TLDR; I support an easy mode, even though I do think it'd make From games worse for the reasons I describe. But From will never do it, so it's more an intellectual curiosity than anything else.

Click to shrink...

Excellent post! Thanks for articulating what I couldn't.

 

[giraffereyn]

This used to happen a decent bit in the past. I haven't beaten Contra or Battletoads or Ghouls n Ghosts purely because of the difficulty. And I'm okay with that.

Click to shrink...

Who is okay with that? Is the person who couldn't play Battletoads saying that? or you? If either of you are okay with not doing something, then we aren't talking about you.

 

[Doctor Avatar]

I mean, this is demonstratably false. Look at your own post as an example. It certainly isn't a calm, thoughtful read of the conversation being had around accessibility.

Click to shrink...

My post isn't calm? You not liking something I'm saying doesn't mean it isn't true, or that I'm not calm. Ultimately the people name calling in this thread are not the ones supporting FROM's right to make whatever game they want to make. You're free to take issue with that right, but that is a pretty illogical hill to die on. And when you hide behind name calling you're showing who is angry. Why would I be angry? FROM make games for me. I get what I want, I have nothing to be angry about.

If you think I care so much about your opinion on the matter, which means nothing to me or anyone from FROM and will not change how they make their games then you're once again thinking the world revolves around you just like the attitude that it's wrong for FROM not to make games for you. I don't care. FROM don't care. We don't care enough about you or your opinion to be angry, this thread and the people whining because a game doesn't cater to them is literally old man yells at cloud territory. It's nonsense rooted in FOMO .

 

[Manu]

These arguments keep popping up and have been discusses many times:

"If you like the game so much, you don't want the game to sell more?"

Yes! I do. I want more people to experience these games because they are special, and the uncompromising difficulty is a big part of what makes them special.

"From are leaving money on the table!"

You think they don't know this? They made her choice and are obviously okay with catering to a niche.

"Don't you want more people to experience something you like?"

Of course I do. I want them to play the same game I did so they can realize how well designed it is on its current form.

 

[Deleted member 41520]

The dev thinks it will. But the armchair devs seem to know better than the genre defining creators it seems.

Click to shrink...

You're just as much an armchair developer in this scenario as I am, pal.

From Software/Miyazaki's development processes are a black box. For all we know the lack of "easy" modifiers could be entirely budgetary related and nothing to do with their philosophy.

 

[Deleted member 17207]

Well then it looks like your options are severely limited.

Click to shrink...

Thhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhat's the point, they shouldn't be. Why should they? Because of "muh art"?

pfft.

People are also acting like difficulty is the only thing that makes these games special - stop selling them short. If brutal difficulty is all that's important, why aren't you all playing more NES games?

 

[Flame Lord]

I find some of the posts and tweets I've seen on this topic pretty off putting; you'd think people were talking about fucking civil rights the way they act about one game. So many games are made at a base line that makes them way to easy, and when you bump up the difficulty it either still isn't very hard, or they stoop to simply raising enemy health while lowering your health and damage which always just feels like frustrating shit. It's nice to have an occasional game where you have one level of difficulty that feels well balanced, and given tha

 

[Tirisfal]

One example would be someone for whom pressing L1 repeatedly to deflect might cause substantial pain.

There are quite a few examples, though, of disabilities that might make the games difficult in an unreasonable way. There are different answers to that depending on the specific disability, for sure, but I think the general idea that "the execution of the vision falls short for the people it should speak to most" still holds either way.

Click to shrink...

Your hand hurting from repeatedly pressing a button is not what I'd call the game not allowing you a path to succeed, especially since you can remap every button in the options. Do you have a better example?

 

[Ferrs]

So one thing I've heard multiple times, is that in regards to the Souls games: "They're more than just their difficulty"

This is true but also downplays it.

Difficulty isn't solely a numbers game (It's why NG+ can sometimes feel really lazy outside of DS2). Difficulty is Level Design, Enemy Placements, Character and Enemy Animations and more. And in the case of the Souls and Bloodborne games, the difficulty is also thematically in tune with the world. It's a world of constant death and struggle. It's why in universe, dying is something expected.

Click to shrink...

Ding ding ding.

There's a reason why Bloodborne's "La La La..." is iconing compared to others, and it's not because the monster is a good singer. Bullshit enemy or not, is such a big part of the experience that is tied with the enemy design and the atmosphere of the level. Being a challenging game enhances the atmosphere of these games that are always acclaimed, and also enhances a combat system that otherwise would be pretty barebones.

That doesn't mean an easy mode can be devoid of challenge, but difficulty is an important pillar in these games. So, adding difficulty choices (something that I'm not against per se) has to be something really fine-tuned, compared to say an Uncharted game.

 

[Deleted member 37739]

My post isn't calm? You not liking something I'm saying doesn't mean it isn't true, or that I'm not calm. Ultimately the people name calling in this thread are not the ones supporting FROM's right to make whatever game they want to make. You're free to take issue with that right, but that is a pretty illogical hill to die on. And when you hide behind name calling you're showing who is angry. Why would I be angry? FROM make games for me. I get what I want, I have nothing to be angry about.

Click to shrink...

Even as someone was disappointed to find I lack both the skill and patience for Sekiro, it's hard to argue that a creator should make things that work for everybody. If from ever decide to patch in difficulty settings for Sekiro I won't be incandescent with outrage, but nor will it draw me back to the game either (despite the fact there was a lot I liked about it).

Thhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhat's the point, they shouldn't be. Why should they? Because of "muh art"?

pfft.

Click to shrink...

I mean, that doesn't show a great deal of respect for the creator...

 

[giraffereyn]

Can we please stop with the "elitism" ad hominem attack that is poorly thought out, illogical, and a way of basically name calling people who accept FROM have the right to create any kind of game they want to, and that it's OK not to cater to everyone?

Click to shrink...

I was only throwing it back to him. He accused people who ask for options as being elitist. Just like you are doing. Read the rest of that post and address it if you think I'm wrong.

 

[Skbzi]

While for most games, I wouldn't mind if an easy mode was present; however, for FromSoft games, keep that shit far far away.

Also, for games with multiple difficulty options, let me start on the hardest difficulty if I want. Please, do not make me complete normal before accessing hard. *Looking at you DMC5*

 

[Professor Beef]

Thhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhat's the point, they shouldn't be. Why should they? Because of "muh art"?

pfft.

Click to shrink...

Most games in general dont include free roam spectator modes so people can see the surroundings, etc. That's entirely different from an easy mode, and if you're gonna ignore the suggestions given to you then that's on you, not the devs.

 

[Sephzilla]

While for most games, I wouldn't mind if an easy mode was present; however, for FromSoft games, keep that shit far far away.

Also, for games with multiple difficulty options, let me start on the hardest difficulty if I want. Please, do not make me complete normal before accessing hard. *Looking at you DMC5*

Click to shrink...

There is a way to unlock the harder modes right away.

Spoiler

Beat Urizen in the prologue

 

[LiK]

Came across this post about how great Ninja Dog mode was in NGB. Worth a read. Props to the guy who wrote it. I never played Ninja Dog mode so I didn't know how well made it was.

https://medium.com/@shanedent20xx/ninja-gaiden-black-has-an-incredible-easy-mode-93847ce93505

 

[Thisisme]

My wife can't handle specific types of violence or horror, she has to carefully vet what she watches for this reason as it can lead to full-blown panic attacks. Being a passive experience is no qualifier of being broadly accessible, and one need only take a look at something like Samuel Beckett or William S. Boroughs to recognise that even reading comprehension is, in itself, no guarantee, irrespective of content. This is to say nothing of specific cognitive disabilities like dyslexia.

Click to shrink...

Exact point I was going to make. I can see certain scenes in movies/books triggering people with certain conditions. Does that mean those scenes should be removed? The simpler solution would be to advise people not to watch those movies.

 

[DerpHause]

You're just as much an armchair developer in this scenario as I am, pal.

From Software/Miyazaki's development processes are a black box. For all we know the lack of "easy" modifiers could be entirely budgetary related and nothing to do with their philosophy.

Click to shrink...

No, I'm not. I'm saying maybe the actual devs know what they're doing. I'm also taking Miyazaki at his stated word on the matter of difficulty being intentional and purposeful.

 

[Enduin]

Your hand hurting from repeatedly pressing a button is not what I'd call the game not allowing you a path to succeed, especially since you can remap every button in the options. Do you have a better example?

Click to shrink...

Don't dismiss chronic pain or other conditions like arthritis that cause people serious pain and discomfort from every day tasks and actions. Remapping does not always alleviate problems people may have with their hands or motor functions. Plenty of people have all sorts of conditions that affect their reflexes, motor functions, ability to process information quickly, and on and on that can only be partially or not at all alleviated by special control inputs and remapping. It can be quite impossible for some people to react in time and as rapidly as the game demands. For them the only option that would allow them to play the game would be to provide options to adjust the difficulty to better match their abilities.