• Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
  • We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.

freetacos

Member
Oct 30, 2017
13,617
Bay Area, CA
Personally, I understand the concept. What's difficult for one isn't necessarily for another. And if someone has a disability, a game that's "easy" may be as difficult as a standard Souls game for them. Totally get it.

The problem lies in the fact that it's impossible to account for everyone. Some need a tiny boost, some a much larger one. You can't account for them all, unfortunately. So the director probably just goes for what he feels the average gamer can complete with enough time and perseverance.

The problem with adding lower difficulty options is that people who *could* finish the game (but with a lot more time and effort required, which we've established Miyazaki feels is integral to these games) would likely pick the path of least resistance. There are people in this thread attesting to this, stating they don't want to waste hours and hours on a single area or boss. And that's understandable. The problem is, that's the Dark Souls experience. It's not just that people do it to brag (which I find tasteless,) but the difficulty keeps the game's tone and ludonarrative consistent. Clearly, From feels this is the case as well.

So, yes, it kind of is a case of "people can't be trusted to adjust the game's difficulty" -- at least not if they are going to have the experience the creators intended. Yes, a large amount of people would likely still enjoy Souls games immensely if they could adjust the difficulty. But they wouldn't be playing the game From intended at that point, and it's the developer's choice to minimize the chance of that happening. Unfortunately, that's the reality of the situation, as I see it.
I don't think that argument holds a ton of weight, personally. "Let's exclude huge swaths of people because others don't have the self control to choose the difficulty that would present them a good (but doable) challenge". If that's the trade-off, I'd gladly take multiple difficulties and make others be honest with themselves about what difficulty is right for them. Just me, though
 

gogosox82

Member
Oct 25, 2017
4,385
Ok, let's say the next FS game, let's call it "Shadow Keeper - Serenity in Existence: RE", is so absurdly hard that only 100 people in the whole world can finish it.

Maybe any enemy in this game kills you in one hit, and you have to begin from scratch again, and this mechanic is all explained by some nonsensical background story, so it's deeply manifested into the game's core philosophy, which means options like easy modes absolutely cannot be added (as this would undermine the game's design philosophy!!!1).

Would that still be ok with you? After all, in this hypothetical case, From is still following their own design philosophy, right? And the 100 people who actually manage to beat the game and are satisfied with it just say: "Well if you think the game is too hard, then it's just not for you. That's ok. Not every game has to be for everyone."


What I'm trying to say is: There must be SOME limit to when a game is just too difficult for its own good, right? How many people have to say a game is too hard to a point it's not fun anymore until this statement can be considered legit? Just because a game is still selling well does not mean its design philosophies are fine snd developers should continue with them, see the Battlefront 2 lootbox debate.

The fact that we get articles like the one from Kotaku, which about half the people in this already very extensive thread agree with, and that even hardcore Dark Souls fans, for example on this forum or via 1 Star scores on Amazon, feel Sekiro is too absurdly hard and unfair, I'd say this is pretty telling that something might not be quite right.

Yes it would be ok with it. If it was too much for me, I'd just walk away like I did with the Hollow Knight dlc. That shit was just too hard for me so I never finished. Its fine, i enjoyed playing through the base game and am totally fine with walking away.

Difficulty is different for everyone. You can't just say a few people said its too hard so therefore its too hard and it should be changed. If you think its too hard, that's fine. You can respond by not playing or buying any of their games. I think From is totally fine with that. I'm sure they know they would get more sales if they made it easier but they aren't so I think they are fine with the loss of sales and some people being upset.
 

Deleted member 8001

user requested account closure
Banned
Oct 26, 2017
7,440
Side 1
Hey From can you add a easy mode so I can enjoy the game more for my preferences?

Side 2
Easy mode would ruin the game cause it's about accomplishments. If you add the option it means my accomplishment means less.

Side 1
If you don't like the option don't use it and let me have my fun.

Side 2
No.

Side 1
Well uh ok...
 
Oct 26, 2017
1,032
Yes

Person with disability: I'd like to play games but I need better accessibility options, or really any accessibility options
Dev: Hmm we never really thought about that
Some peeps: Don't ruin the devs' art

Like if movies and almost every other creative medium on earth can accommodate for people with various disabilities, games can too. Netflix supplies descriptive audio for the blind, subtitles for those with hearing impairment have been around for decades, braille books exist, I can keep going
I've already addressed this in a previous post. There are plenty of works that can't be made more accessible to everyone because doing so would interfere with the work's core identity. Miyazaki has even said he feels this is the case, so you can't claim he "never really thought about that" and it's just the community being elitist gatekeepers. He's clearly thought about it; he's just come to a different conclusion than you.

I also addressed why just adding in difficulties may be problematic for some (not all) titles. You can disagree with that, obviously. But it doesn't mean you have to assume the worst of people and start mudslinging.
Almost no one refers to Twitter as a website. You can visit it from a website, but it's a platform. Plus, you posted that in a thread having the discussion you're commenting on. I'm not pointing that out to nitpick, but to explain why it's easy to read it as I did.
 

Glass Arrows

Member
Jan 10, 2019
1,414
I don't think that argument holds a ton of weight, personally. "Let's exclude huge swaths of people because others don't have the self control to choose the difficulty that would present them a good (but doable) challenge". If that's the trade-off, I'd gladly take multiple difficulties and make others be honest with themselves about what difficulty is right for them. Just me, though

I can only speak for myself, but I also find this argument a little weird. I think there is a nugget of truth to it, but personally the only time I have ever switched to an easier difficulty mid way is if I find the challenge in the difficulty i'm playing on to be unfun/poorly designed. I don't think I would have switched to an easier difficulty in any of the Souls games I've played if they had some kind of option to do so, precisely because I know it would have robbed me of the feeling of accomplishment I would have gotten if I had persisted.
 

Deleted member 1120

user requested account closure
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
1,511
Side 1
Hey From can you add a easy mode so I can enjoy the game more for my preferences?

Side 2
Easy mode would ruin the game cause it's about accomplishments. If you add the option it means my accomplishment means less.

Side 1
If you don't like the option don't use it and let me have my fun.

Side 2
No.

Side 1
Well uh ok...

Hey From can you add a easy mode so I can enjoy the game more for my preferences?
From Software: No

If you don't like the game, don't play it, let me have my fun
 

Deleted member 42

user requested account closure
Banned
Oct 24, 2017
16,939

Yeah my guy this shit is simple

If someone with a disability wants to consume art/play a game, etc, and someone tells them no, I'm throwing snow cones at that person until they change their mind because I've never seen that happen in a serious conversation about a creative medium and not get laughed out of the goddamn building

I don't care about the rest
 

Deleted member 17952

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 27, 2017
1,980
Side 1
Hey From can you add a easy mode so I can enjoy the game more for my preferences?

Side 2
Easy mode would ruin the game cause it's about accomplishments. If you add the option it means my accomplishment means less.

Side 1
If you don't like the option don't use it and let me have my fun.

Side 2
No.

Side 1
Well uh ok...
If you guys put the same amount of effort in playing Souls the way you create strawmans, I bet you can also finish the game.
 

gogosox82

Member
Oct 25, 2017
4,385
Yeah my guy this shit is simple

If someone with a disability wants to consume art/play a game, etc, and someone tells them no, I'm throwing snow cones at that person until they change their mind because I've never seen that happen in a serious conversation about a creative medium and not get laughed out of the goddamn building

I don't care about the rest
Who is saying no? Most people are saying is that From doesn't want to add an easy mode and that's their right to do so but if they added one later that would be fine as well. Also From have already added some accessability options like remappable inputs so its not like they haven't tried to address it on some level.
 

RoKKeR

Member
Oct 25, 2017
15,472
Yeah my guy this shit is simple

If someone with a disability wants to consume art/play a game, etc, and someone tells them no, I'm throwing snow cones at that person until they change their mind because I've never seen that happen in a serious conversation about a creative medium and not get laughed out of the goddamn building

I don't care about the rest
This is about where I stand on things.
 
Oct 26, 2017
1,032
I don't think that argument holds a ton of weight, personally. "Let's exclude huge swaths of people because others don't have the self control to choose the difficulty that would present them a good (but doable) challenge". If that's the trade-off, I'd gladly take multiple difficulties and make others be honest with themselves about what difficulty is right for them. Just me, though

And From apparently isn't willing to make that tradeoff. They see the difficulty as an all-or-nothing affair, as any ability to lessen it would hamper the experience, in their eyes. They want you to bite the bullet, not giving you an option to tap out in a moment of weakness (or start on a difficulty that they feel would, in the long run, not resemble the game they designed or experience they envisioned.)

Again, if they found a way to make it work, I'd be totally cool with that. I'm not in the camp that says "You being able to beat it on a lower difficulty ruins *my* experience." I think that's silly and kinda selfish. As long as From felt they could offer lower difficulties without compromising elements they deem essential, I'd be all for it!
 

KamenRiderEra

Member
Oct 25, 2017
2,162
This argument about accessibility for disabled people does not make sense and is been used with ill intent to argue against Fromsoft... What about multiplayer games? Much more popular that really want to be played by everyone? Like the most popular battleroyale games in the world been unplayable to disabled people? But suddenly a niche game must have difficult levels to acomodate everyone?.......
 

Wumbo64

Banned
Oct 27, 2017
327


That exact video is what I had in mind when I made that point.

David Lynch, Taratino, Speilberg, Scorcese, Soderbergh and even Alfred Hitchcock worked in TV. Clearly, at one point or another, they acknowledged that conveying good content through the medium of film is secondary to the format it is presented in.

It's why I object to people placing so much emphasis on the format of Dark Souls. If people don't play it how one person envisions it (even though it was actually made by multiple creative professionals, all with likely differing perspectives), then it isn't substantial. The notion is staggeringly reductive. The game is a multi-million dollar project, funded and overseen by multiple committees of people. It isn't some solo art-house piece attempting to desperately defy industry conventions, though some folks on this forum behave like it is.

So when actual and perspective members of your audience come to you, asking politely to consider people with different needs, it isn't even remotely unreasonable. In the end, you are providing a product that people are paying for, specifically one that requires their agency to see through. I wouldn't expect to make a product and not receive feedback. Whether you have to act on that feedback is a different story. In the case of Dark Souls, I see it as wasted potential. Namco and From Software's leadership might not feel that way, but I will keep on pushing my views in good conscious.

Also, I saw some folks insisting that disabled people were being used as a moral strong-arm. That is a disgusting counterclaim to people who have a legitimate interest in empowering folks who demonstrably cannot participate in certain experiences because of physical or mental deficiencies. As someone with sporadically crippling panic and emotional fits, I have nothing but sympathy for people with problems much more serious than my own. It's fortunate that I exist in a minority of high-functioning people with mental illness, but not everyone has the same needs, nor do they often ever have them fulfilled.

I also never pretend to know better, just because of my own anecdotal experiences.

There was a fair point that we should differentiate between accessibility and difficulty, though I think examples like Dishonored 2's configurable difficulty is an instance where both can overlap.
 
Last edited:

Glass Arrows

Member
Jan 10, 2019
1,414
This argument about accessibility for disabled people does not make sense and is been used with ill intent to argue against Fromsoft... What about multiplayer games? Much more popular that really want to be played by everyone? Like the most popular battleroyale games in the world been unplayable to disabled people? But suddenly a niche game must have difficult levels to acomodate everyone?.......

I don't think this is an either or situation. I'm sure there's plenty of conversations being had elsewhere about how multiplayer games can accommodate disabled people. People are just arguing about From's games because they just released one.
 

Deleted member 42

user requested account closure
Banned
Oct 24, 2017
16,939
Or maybe people should be able to make games however they want to make them. 🤷🏻‍♀️

People who are good at artistic mediums tend to want their art to be able to be enjoyed by as many people as possible.

Accessibility in gaming is tough because it's far more of an interactive medium, input controls can be quite complicated, et cetera. Sony's pretty good with customization/accessibility options. Microsoft put millions of dollars into a controller they will never make a profit off of, simply to provide a popular and universal option.

If a dev wants to make a game and specifically not care about/ignore gamers with disabilities, then they're doing their content a disservice.
 

Glass Arrows

Member
Jan 10, 2019
1,414
Also, I saw some folks insisting that disabled people were being used as a moral strong-arm. That is a disgusting counterclaim to people who have a legitimate interest in empowering folks who demonstrably cannot participate in certain experiences because of physical or mental deficiencies. As someone with sporadically crippling panic and emotional fits, I have nothing but sympathy for people with problems much more serious than my own. It's fortunate that I exist in a minority of high-functioning people with mental illness, but not everyone has the same needs, nor do they often ever have them fulfilled.

I just want to make the point that multiple disabled people have posted in this thread saying that their disability heavily constrains their ability to play certain games. Saying that disabled people are being used as a mask to demand an easy mode seems like a bad faith argument to me.
 

Deleted member 8001

user requested account closure
Banned
Oct 26, 2017
7,440
If you guys put the same amount of effort in playing Souls the way you create strawmans, I bet you can also finish the game.
Truth hurts doesn't it?

That's all this boils down to and to me what's actually the issue is we have this amount of effort in telling people they are wrong to want a easy mode.

And bruh I don't have any issue with beating any of these games but I'm not so close minded to gatekeep the damn game either.

Hey From can you add a easy mode so I can enjoy the game more for my preferences?
From Software: No

If you don't like the game, don't play it, let me have my fun
You equate the option to telling someone to not play the game entirely? Way to show proof how toxic this mindset is.
 

KCsoLucky

Member
Oct 29, 2017
1,585
You already know the answer lol. This ride never ends. What I do wonder though is how many people will stop arguing for others who can't beat the game as soon they can beat it themselves.

That's painting opposing opinions with a wide swath as much as the other side of the argument is(mine comes from purely anecdotal evidence based on interactions I've had). I platinumed DeS(for the first time) before the vast majority of people even knew what the series was. I was super active on the DeS forums for PvP, since they were still the go-to when DkS came out on console, which I 100% on all 3 systems. I never 100'd DkS2, mostly because I hated Shrine of Amana that damn much. Platted Bloodborne and pretty close to it in DkS3, I just have to take breaks because I burn out playing 1 series so much sometimes. Barely into Sekiro.

I say all that to say that not everyone(you didn't imply EVERYONE, but your tone seems to imply that you believe most.......also this isn't some stupid flex, just giving context to my experience) who believes in easier modes only does so out of their own ineptitude. Some of us genuinely want more people to experience these games.

You know what my favorite experiences are in the series so far? The first time I stumbled onto the Painted World of Ariamis(including Crossbreed Priscilla, what a great bit of lore/storytelling there). Finding Cainhurst Castle. Making it to the Old Hero fight for the first time. None of those are in their respective games' most difficult parts, but they had the most profound effect on me.

The oppressive nature of Tomb of Giants or No-Man's Wharf would still be present even with an easier difficulty there(which most of us would never select as the games aren't that hard after your first one), as it's due to the art, atmosphere and storytelling. I personally don't think difficulty is the key that makes these games great, or I would have hated DkS2 and 3, as I had so much experience by then. I don't even think i died more than 3 times total before Shrine of Amana in DkS2.

Sorry I'm kinda all over the place here, just giving an opinion from someone who isn't awful at these games.
 

Deleted member 1120

user requested account closure
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
1,511
Truth hurts doesn't it?

That's all this boils down to and to me what's actually the issue is we have this amount of effort in telling people they are wrong to want a easy mode.

And bruh I don't have any issue with beating any of these games but I'm not so close minded to gatekeep the damn game either.


You equate the option to telling someone to not play the game entirely? Way to show proof how toxic this mindset is.
If the game is too hard, of course I'd tell them not to play it. Since From seems perfectly content on taking away options in their game.
 

Xiaomi

Member
Oct 25, 2017
7,237
I don't think this is an either or situation. I'm sure there's plenty of conversations being had elsewhere about how multiplayer games can accommodate disabled people. People are just arguing about From's games because they just released one.

If you want to have those conversations, please do, as I think they're important, but distance them from the "I have three kids and a job and I paid 60 dollars for this game" conversations, because those people are commandeering your concerns to make an already reasonable video game easier for able-bodied people. Make specific recommendations of what would allow people with different levels of motor and mental control to experience the same amount of challenge as others do without disabilities getting in the way. That's a conversation we can have, as no one wants to exclude people based on disability if they want to play the game without using mods.
 

Designer_Fake

▲ Legend ▲
Member
Oct 25, 2017
439
People who are good at artistic mediums tend to want their art to be able to be enjoyed by as many people as possible.

That's simply not true though. There are a lot of insanely talented musicians, filmmakers, painters, etcetera, that make art that caters to one specific audience only. Take Aphex Twin, an example that I used earlier in this thread. Most of his music would be considered unlistanable by most people, painful to the ear even. But for those who are into this kind of music, he is considered a genius.

Making art that appeals to as much people as possible is mostly achieved by watering it down, which From is obviously not willing to do.
 
Oct 26, 2017
1,032
Yeah my guy this shit is simple

If someone with a disability wants to consume art/play a game, etc, and someone tells them no, I'm throwing snow cones at that person until they change their mind because I've never seen that happen in a serious conversation about a creative medium and not get laughed out of the goddamn building

I don't care about the rest
If you don't want to engage in the discussion, why are you here?

Again, I've seen plenty of art that would be impossible to make more accessible. I, and many others, have said they'd be fine with making concessions for disabilities if it were possible without it creating the issues I've already discussed.

We can have discussions about it, but if your responses boil down to "I don't care about your arguments," then I honestly don't know where you want people to go from there. Agree or be shamed, because you won't engage in a discussion?

That's only really understandable if people are being decidedly vile. If someone goes "Screw disabled people!" yeah, ignore them. But that's clearly not the vast majority's opinion, and it's not fair to try to paint it in that light -- especially when you say you won't listen to any arguments to the contrary.
 

meph

Avenger
Oct 29, 2017
996
Yeah my guy this shit is simple

If someone with a disability wants to consume art/play a game, etc, and someone tells them no, I'm throwing snow cones at that person until they change their mind because I've never seen that happen in a serious conversation about a creative medium and not get laughed out of the goddamn building

I don't care about the rest

People who are good at artistic mediums tend to want their art to be able to be enjoyed by as many people as possible.

Accessibility in gaming is tough because it's far more of an interactive medium, input controls can be quite complicated, et cetera. Sony's pretty good with customization/accessibility options. Microsoft put millions of dollars into a controller they will never make a profit off of, simply to provide a popular and universal option.

If a dev wants to make a game and specifically not care about/ignore gamers with disabilities, then they're doing their content a disservice.

This isn't totally accurate though.

I do think there should be across-the-board options for colorblindness, or other similar disability-oriented features to toggle for games in all games, or at an OS-level setting, but trying to impose rules on difficulty is no longer any kind of issue about access. People have access, it's just too hard, and those are not the same things.

In your own media examples, there are absolutely films, books, and whatever else that might be in a foreign language that you just aren't very proficient in. No one is stopping you from consuming the content, but you are going to struggle with comprehension of the material until you learn the language better.

Nintendo's increased their accessibility by introducing mechanics to bypass sections that players find difficult because they don't want people to be frustrated with their games. Celeste, as has been pointed out, has game modding sliders built-in. Clearly the models are already there, and some developers are intentionally choosing to make the challenge of the game intrinsic to the game itself. There are always going to be games designed around being difficult, like Super Meat Boy or Dustforce, and demanding their difficulty be reduced or eliminated seems as fruitful/reasonable as me demanding that Kirby games need to be made harder because the default design is way too easy and I demand that they allow me to make it harder because I prefer those games.
 

Arthoneceron

Member
Oct 27, 2017
3,024
Minas Gerais, Brazil
I would prefer an optional tutorial mode: A small place, like a sandbox where people do some challengers and understand most of the basic concepts of the game.

After the tutorial, then the people is up to start the game.
 

Glass Arrows

Member
Jan 10, 2019
1,414
That's painting opposing opinions with a wide swath as much as the other side of the argument is(mine comes from purely anecdotal evidence based on interactions I've had). I platinumed DeS(for the first time) before the vast majority of people even knew what the series was. I was super active on the DeS forums for PvP, since they were still the go-to when DkS came out on console, which I 100% on all 3 systems. I never 100'd DkS2, mostly because I hated Shrine of Amana that damn much. Platted Bloodborne and pretty close to it in DkS3, I just have to take breaks because I burn out playing 1 series so much sometimes. Barely into Sekiro.

I say all that to say that not everyone(you didn't imply EVERYONE, but your tone seems to imply that you believe most.......also this isn't some stupid flex, just giving context to my experience) who believes in easier modes only does so out of their own ineptitude. Some of us genuinely want more people to experience these games.

You know what my favorite experiences are in the series so far? The first time I stumbled onto the Painted World of Ariamis(including Crossbreed Priscilla, what a great bit of lore/storytelling there). Finding Cainhurst Castle. Making it to the Old Hero fight for the first time. None of those are in their respective games' most difficult parts, but they had the most profound effect on me.

The oppressive nature of Tomb of Giants or No-Man's Wharf would still be present even with an easier difficulty there(which most of us would never select as the games aren't that hard after your first one), as it's due to the art, atmosphere and storytelling. I personally don't think difficulty is the key that makes these games great, or I would have hated DkS2 and 3, as I had so much experience by then. I don't even think i died more than 3 times total before Shrine of Amana in DkS2.

Sorry I'm kinda all over the place here, just giving an opinion from someone who isn't awful at these games.

I have also completed most of these games (not platinum'd but I have beaten DeS, DS1 and DS2 and have done multiple challenge runs in DS1) and have been a fan since very early on as well. I don't personally mind accessibility options being considered, not only because I also have a disability (though not a physical one) but also because I don't think it would really impair my enjoyment and wouldn't get in the way of From designing a game with a satisfying challenge for their core audience, since they would still be able to play without those concessions and get the same experience they are accustomed to with From games beforehand.
 

gogosox82

Member
Oct 25, 2017
4,385
Side 1
Hey From can you add a easy mode so I can enjoy the game more for my preferences?

Side 2
Easy mode would ruin the game cause it's about accomplishments. If you add the option it means my accomplishment means less.

Side 1
If you don't like the option don't use it and let me have my fun.

Side 2
No.

Side 1
Well uh ok...
This is pretty disengenious framing of what has been going on this thread. You left out the part where side 1 has implied if not outright stated that side 2 are a bunch of gatekeeping, elitist, ableist, assholes who don't want anyone to enjoy From Soft games during this entire thread for reasons that are beyond my understanding since side 1 never explains why side 2 would think that

From has stated they don't want to add an easy mode and why and all side 2 is telling is what From themselves have said about their views on a easy mode. Like I said earlier in this thread, if From wants to add one later, I'd be ok with that but they don't seem to want to add one because it will alter the way the game is designed. And that comes from From Software, not me.
 

Tpallidum

Member
Oct 28, 2017
2,177
If you guys put the same amount of effort in playing Souls the way you create strawmans, I bet you can also finish the game.
Plenty of people that have finished sekiro have posted here saying they support an easy mode for people that want it.

I plan to finish the game soon. I'm about halfway. I'm going through the gauntlet. I'm enjoying it. The game's great as is. I would still think an easy mode for people that want it would be nice. I myself would never use it though.
 

Deleted member 42

user requested account closure
Banned
Oct 24, 2017
16,939
That's simply not true though. There are a lot of insanely talented musicians, filmmakers, painters, etcetera, that make art that caters to one specific audience only

In your own media examples, there are absolutely films, books, and whatever else that might be in a foreign language that you just aren't very proficient in. No one is stopping you from consuming the content, but you are going to struggle with comprehension of the material until you learn the language better.

I own Italian versions of Murder on the Orient Express and other various textbooks and I can't read them for shit. But they were translated so people who don't know English can also enjoy the book. I also own braille versions of some other books.

Exceptions don't prove the rule.

If you don't want to engage in the discussion, why are you here?

I'm engaging just fine, please do not try and browbeat me about this again because I do not appreciate it whatsoever.
 

freetacos

Member
Oct 30, 2017
13,617
Bay Area, CA
And From apparently isn't willing to make that tradeoff. They see the difficulty as an all-or-nothing affair, as any ability to lessen it would hamper the experience, in their eyes. They want you to bite the bullet, not giving you an option to tap out in a moment of weakness (or start on a difficulty that they feel would, in the long run, not resemble the game they designed or experience they envisioned.)

Again, if they found a way to make it work, I'd be totally cool with that. I'm not in the camp that says "You being able to beat it on a lower difficulty ruins *my* experience." I think that's silly and kinda selfish. As long as From felt they could offer lower difficulties without compromising elements they deem essential, I'd be all for it!
I'm fully aware of From's standpoint and their right to make it how they want. I don't really know that your reply added a lot.

My specific post referenced people who claim there should not be easier modes because they would simply choose "the path of least resistance". I think that is an incredibly weak argument
 

Nanashrew

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
6,328
If the game is too hard, of course I'd tell them not to play it. Since From seems perfectly content on taking away options in their game.
I'd definitely recommend watching this video. He brings up Assassin's Creed and how it used to be a series with a preset difficulty, but in recent games they've been adding in difficulty settings. He played every Assassin's Creed title but could never fully enjoy them because of his disability. He'd get walled at certain segments of the game. But now that AC has been adding in difficulty settings, he's finally been able to progress, actually given the chance to enjoy the games and be part of the experience and community.

 

gogosox82

Member
Oct 25, 2017
4,385
If they were all saying 'yeah it's fine if From puts in an easy mode' this thread wouldn't exist. Clearly there is more than a small number of dips saying From shouldn't compromise even a little bit on this matter and that's the dang problem.

I did say most and I can't claim to speak for everyone. Everyone's got different opinions on this stuff and they may not match up with I think and I just have to be ok with that.
 

Feep

Lead Designer, Iridium Studios
Verified
Oct 25, 2017
4,625
I think Celeste is a perfect example of why all this "it would ruin the experience" is a bunch of overblown pearl-clutching. I don't have much unique to offer after 84 (!!!) pages of discussion thus far, but I'm a developer, and I'd like my games, even if very difficult, to be accessible and fun to a wide audience.
 

Glass Arrows

Member
Jan 10, 2019
1,414
That's simply not true though. There are a lot of insanely talented musicians, filmmakers, painters, etcetera, that make art that caters to one specific audience only.

I think there's a difference between fundamentally changing a work and just making something that makes it accessible to someone else. Like if I have a braille version of a book but it doesn't change anything about the actual prose or content, am I making a version of the book for a "different audience" or am I just making it available to someone with similar preferences but who can't meaningfully engage with the book because of a disability? The original work is unchanged and exists for people to consume.

This is a complex subject but I don't think that FromSoft adding difficulty options would "water down" their product because that implies that the experience that was there previously would cease to exist without the option to access it, and that it would instead exclusively cater to another, broader audience. Which is not really what any of the people arguing for accessibility options want either.
 

KCsoLucky

Member
Oct 29, 2017
1,585
I have also completed most of these games (not platinum'd but I have beaten DeS, DS1 and DS2 and have done multiple challenge runs in DS1) and have been a fan since very early on as well. I don't personally mind accessibility options being considered, not only because I also have a disability (though not a physical one) but also because I don't think it would really impair my enjoyment and wouldn't get in the way of From designing a game with a satisfying challenge for their core audience, since they would still be able to play without those concessions and get the same experience they are accustomed to with From games beforehand.

The worst part of Dark Souls would be just as hard to people playing in an easy mode(Tomb of Giants) lol.

The nuance here is that the game is designed with an intended experience and adjusted from there for different difficulty settings. Remember all the CRYING over the statements that Dark Souls 2 was going to be more accessible? Yet it still ended up being harder than Dark Souls 1(with some bullshit DLC bosses to boot). I trust that these designers are talented enough to get their vision right and iterate from there without any compromise, even if they have to work on an easier difficulty post launch.

I think there's a difference between fundamentally changing a work and just making something that makes it accessible to someone else. Like if I have a braille version of a book but it doesn't change anything about the actual prose or content, am I making a version of the book for a "different audience" or am I just making it available to someone with similar preferences but who can't meaningfully engage with the book because of a disability? The original work is unchanged and exists for people to consume.

This is a complex subject but I don't think that FromSoft adding difficulty options would "water down" their product because that implies that the experience that was there previously would cease to exist without the option to access it, and that it would instead exclusively cater to another, broader audience. Which is not really what any of the people arguing for accessibility options want either.

This is what nearly everyone for an easier difficulty is trying to say. It doesn't keep the default setting from existing, and that's why it's so hard for us to fathom how the other side thinks that it's changing anything. Comparing it to niche music or movies is a complete fallacy. I literally can't think of a single negative, as long as the games are made first how Miyazaki wants, then easier options considered from there, such as a great idea Crushed had early in the thread. Anything else comes off as elitist or someone not able to control their own impulses, which shouldn't be everyone else's problem.
 

Deleted member 8001

user requested account closure
Banned
Oct 26, 2017
7,440
This is pretty disengenious framing of what has been going on this thread. You left out the part where side 1 has implied if not outright stated that side 2 are a bunch of gatekeeping, elitist, ableist, assholes who don't want anyone to enjoy From Soft games during this entire thread for reasons that are beyond my understanding since side 1 never explains why side 2 would think that

That is what's going on though. It's elitism full stop. A huge problem in gaming communities is this very aspect.

From has stated they don't want to add an easy mode and why and all side 2 is telling is what From themselves have said about their views on a easy mode. Like I said earlier in this thread, if From wants to add one later, I'd be ok with that but they don't seem to want to add one because it will alter the way the game is designed. And that comes from From Software, not me.

From can have their views, but just like with any gaming company we are allowed to disagree with those views and suggest a alternative.
 

freetacos

Member
Oct 30, 2017
13,617
Bay Area, CA
I think Celeste is a perfect example of why all this "it would ruin the experience" is a bunch of overblown pearl-clutching. I don't have much unique to offer after 84 (!!!) pages of discussion thus far, but I'm a developer, and I'd like my games, even if very difficult, to be accessible and fun to a wide audience.
Oh cool, we have an actual developer weighing in on this
 

Mr. Genuine

Member
Mar 23, 2018
1,628
Guys, what if they made an easy option but there are still some people who can't do it? What do they do then?
 

Glass Arrows

Member
Jan 10, 2019
1,414
Oh cool, we have an actual developer weighing in on this

There's been a few of them chiming in on these accessibility threads, I think.

Guys, what if they made an easy option but there are still some people who can't do it? What do they do then?

I don't think anyone is under the illusion that a perfect solution exists or that absolutely everyone will be able to play. Even an imperfect solution that allows a chunk of disabled people to play would still be of value. If the accessibility options are deemed insufficient then we can try and discuss the merits of that critique and how these options can be improved in the future.
 

meph

Avenger
Oct 29, 2017
996
I own Italian versions of Murder on the Orient Express and other various textbooks and I can't read them for shit. But they were translated so people who don't know English can also enjoy the book. I also own braille versions of some other books.

Exceptions don't prove the rule.

I think the point that I and others are trying to make is that it's not an exception.

You have translated versions so that others might be able to enjoy the fiction or understand the course material, but it still requires a certain degree of proficiency to understand. You can't demand that all of it be made suddenly accessible to someone who's not equipped for coursework at that level, or for someone who's uninterested in that genre of fiction.

I think Celeste is a perfect example of why all this "it would ruin the experience" is a bunch of overblown pearl-clutching. I don't have much unique to offer after 84 (!!!) pages of discussion thus far, but I'm a developer, and I'd like my games, even if very difficult, to be accessible and fun to a wide audience.

And that's fair, but the question is: how would you feel about another developer who doesn't include different difficulty levels and accepts their niche market? Is that something that needs to be added to every game?
 

Gentlemen

Member
Oct 25, 2017
9,600
Then those are the people that are fine to ignore/dismiss. However, that isn't the argument or attitude myself and others are engaging in.
But...bronson was talking about derps on twitter, which you slapped aside for no real good reason apart from a semantic "'but twitter isn't a website and tweets that say 'this website' aren't talking about twitter, the website therefore you are attacking resetera or something"

I am also talking about derps on twitter, who are unfortunately inserting themselves into the conversation and 'splaining as hard as they can to dissenting voices from the mobility-challenged population and from devs themselves advocating on the plus side of difficulty sliders in otherwise difficult games.

"Just ignore them" didn't work the last fifteen times we've seen these 'harass dissent online' brigade tactics work and it won't work now.
 

Deleted member 1120

user requested account closure
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
1,511
I'd definitely recommend watching this video. He brings up Assassin's Creed and how it used to be a series with a preset difficulty, but in recent games they've been adding in difficulty settings. He played every Assassin's Creed title but could never fully enjoy them because of his disability. He'd get walled at certain segments of the game. But now that AC has been adding in difficulty settings, he's finally been able to progress, actually given the chance to enjoy the games and be part of the experience and community.
I'm not against From adding difficulty settings. I've said this before.
Here's what I'm saying. If someone who has a disability, whatever it may be, tells me they want to play a game. Unlike some who think I'd tell them no for some reason, of course I'd say yes and show all the games out there. If a game was too hard for them, I'd simply show them another one. I wouldn't want them to get frustrated because a game was too hard. Or hell, if they had a PC, I'd offer to mod the game for them, granted that process was easy enough for me to understand myself, to make it to their liking. I have no problem with someone using guides, watching videos or asking for help. Now as for console games where there really aren't any mods, there'd be nothing I could do besides show them another game to play. Now, with my personal taste, I like From Software games and their difficulty. Would there be any skin off my back if there was an easy mode added? No. However, From has been consistently taking options away in their game, like how they took out a lot of build variety from Souls to Bloodborne and then took out Online and build variety completely with Sekiro. Again, I'm fine with these changes as they cater to my niche. and I'd continue to buy games that cater to my niche. Get me?
 

pauloshinobi

Banned
Apr 3, 2018
428
IMO these articles are cowardly using 'accessibility' as a shield to express frustration. People can't just be bothered into trying to learn from their mistakes, get used patterns,and manage their frustrations anymore.

How many of these articles features opinions from people with any kind of physical disability?

Meanwhile, people like famous speedrunner HalfCoordinated are enjoying the game just fine, even streaming on Twitch.

Also this guy: https://twitter.com/LimitlessQuad/status/1111888552671887360?s=19
 

Feep

Lead Designer, Iridium Studios
Verified
Oct 25, 2017
4,625
And that's fair, but the question is: how would you feel about another developer who doesn't include different difficulty levels and accepts their niche market? Is that something that needs to be added to every game?
It's a decision I don't agree with, and think it hurts their game in a variety of ways. I'd react the same way I react any time I see what I consider to be a poor design decision in a game: not play it, not recommend it, whatever. But part of being a game developer is realizing that every game released is a miracle, so if the game doesn't have literally harmful or problematic content, I'm not going to shit-talk anybody.
 
Oct 26, 2017
1,032
I'm fully aware of From's standpoint and their right to make it how they want. I don't really know that your reply added a lot.

My specific post referenced people who claim there should not be easier modes because they would simply choose "the path of least resistance". I think that is an incredibly weak argument

It's not though; it's a well documented psychological impulse.

https://www.psychologytoday.com/ca/...703/were-wired-take-the-path-least-resistance

The answer, this study suggests, is that the low-hanging fruit will probably look more appealing to you. "Our brain tricks us into believing the low-hanging fruit really is the ripest," said the lead researcher, Dr. Nobuhiro Hagura. Conversely, when one option is harder to get, we're more likely to think it's the wrong choice.