It's still troubling for many of us who get maybe 2-3 hours a day to ply games to progress all of 0 checkpoints becuz it's too hard. I like DS3 though where I can summon folks
-
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.
Sekiro success, sales, and winning Game of the Year is a huge strike against the "difficulty equals bad" notion
- Thread starter CenturionNami
- Start date
No worries, figured it was something like that. Sorry if I came off as aggressive.
My whole point with the use of the disability argument comes from my confusion with what exactly the restriction comes from. What part of Sekiro makes the game inaccessible to people with specific disabilities? If it's the difficulty, why aren't other similarly "difficult" games under similar fire? I would love to be pointed towards some of the original sources in order to understand.
And this is just weak bullsh*t. My entire argument revolves around how successful From have been with their difficulty formula and how they are under ZERO obligation to change it. Their entire game catalog revolves around this formula and changing it would throw their whole game design philosophy out the window.
IF, somehow, they are able to add difficulty settings in the future to address these concerns, I have full faith that they would find a way to do it that would satisfy everyone, but most importantly, would keep Miyazaki's difficult-but-fair ethos intact. I also predict it won't be as simple as some here claim it should be. And I would be first in line to applaud them and would be there day 0 regardless.
Death penalty discourages exploration. If you're going to make people die constantly, at least don't take away their EXP.
See, the difficulty is why I will always buy From Software games on PC; so that I can use a trainer. I simply don't have the time or patience to 'get good' with these games. However, the lore and atmosphere attracts me. So while they're available on PC, I will always use a trainer.
I just didn't play Sekiro. I don't want or expect them to change it to suit me. That would be weird.
Nothing wrong with adding more difficulty options to games. But in a year filled with games that suffer due to their absence of any difficulty whatsoever (pokemon, bloodstained, fire emblem, outer worlds) sekiro was nice.
The whole "accessibility" part feels like a huge buzzword that's distracting from the actual conversation. "Games should have accessibility options" and "Games should have variable difficulty settings" are two incredibly different arguments, and the first plays on some deeply rooted ideals and Important Conversations in ways that kinda reek of bullshit. "Everybody should be able to play" and "Everybody should be able to beat the game without having to throw themselves at the wall so much" are two completely different lines of thought.
To say that younger players and players with disabilities should be able to play every/any video game is a no brainer, and it's important that games continue to push for design that increases that accessibility.
"This game is too hard, why does it have to be so hard?" is not an argument for accessibility, it's an argument for lowered difficulty, and it's honestly one I really can't argue for. Yes, these games could be easier. But they have no requirement to be that way, anymore than a JRPG has a requirement to drop turn based combat or a console based first person shooter a requirement to add scoping options. "But you can and people want you to" isn't a sufficient argument for "all super hard games should have easier difficulty levels". It's not a matter of elitism it's a matter of having a target audience, and not having a reason nor desire to grow it. "But I can enjoy it for another reason" yeah and I like Weezer's melodies and hate their lyrics, that doesn't mean that Rivers Coumo has a moral obligation to make albums that aren't about pretending to be an awkward angsty 15 year old band geek at the age of 50.
The only reason this is even like, a debate is because this whole meme turned into a whole hearings on the morality of "hard mode", and that's only a thing because Gamers use difficulty as a dick measuring contest, which makes people who like hard games look like cocky douchebags and people who don't look like insecure weaklings, and both sides resent the other for that perception.
To say that younger players and players with disabilities should be able to play every/any video game is a no brainer, and it's important that games continue to push for design that increases that accessibility.
"This game is too hard, why does it have to be so hard?" is not an argument for accessibility, it's an argument for lowered difficulty, and it's honestly one I really can't argue for. Yes, these games could be easier. But they have no requirement to be that way, anymore than a JRPG has a requirement to drop turn based combat or a console based first person shooter a requirement to add scoping options. "But you can and people want you to" isn't a sufficient argument for "all super hard games should have easier difficulty levels". It's not a matter of elitism it's a matter of having a target audience, and not having a reason nor desire to grow it. "But I can enjoy it for another reason" yeah and I like Weezer's melodies and hate their lyrics, that doesn't mean that Rivers Coumo has a moral obligation to make albums that aren't about pretending to be an awkward angsty 15 year old band geek at the age of 50.
The only reason this is even like, a debate is because this whole meme turned into a whole hearings on the morality of "hard mode", and that's only a thing because Gamers use difficulty as a dick measuring contest, which makes people who like hard games look like cocky douchebags and people who don't look like insecure weaklings, and both sides resent the other for that perception.
And how the fuck do you know you are being empathetic against all those who are disabled and love the FromSoftware games exactly the way they are. Once again you talk as if you know what they want and using examples that have nothing to do with FromSoftware games as a scapegoat.
And while you have every right to tell FromSoftware what you don't like stop talking as if you are speaking also for every disabled person when in reality you don't know one bit of what they think about their games and using their voices.
I am glad also FromSoftware have just as much right as you to call them out to completely ignore you.
End of conversation for real this time
Agreed, and thank you for summarizing something I was struggling to express.
I'd be surprised if someone hadn't already tried to split up difficulty and accesibilty at this point. I'm sure we've gone in a circles a few times by now.
I've never felt discouraged from exploring in a From game. The games are balanced around you losing all your souls every once in a while. It's really not a big deal.
It's just all so obnoxious because like, I absolutely sympathize with "I like these From Software games a lot, they have great writing, great game design, cool atmosphere and storytelling and some world class music... but they're super difficult and I don't like that kind of gameplay", but that the most common response to that is "From Software games should add options to make the game less difficult" and not "I want more game developers that take the best parts of From Games without the huge difficulty curve, hey do you guys know of any?" is really disheartening. Honestly I don't even think there's something wrong in wanting From games to be easier, but it's not a question of "right vs. wrong", it's just another fan requests in the huge, overwhelming sea of fan requests that doesn't get special priority hitching itself onto a conversation about accessibility and disability in society.
Because I am right and that comment proves it or you would have said something productive.
First of all thanks for the elaborate response!
Sure, different people play different videogames for different reasons. The thing is, some people love dying to a boss 30 or 50 times until they finally beat it. Those are the people this series got big with.
These things are finely tuned and honestly, personally I prefer that over a game with 5 difficulty options that all suck balancing wise. Some people tried to bring up Fallen Order as a good example, and it just isn't. And don't get me wrong, I love me some easy games. Tomorrow I'll start a playthrough of one of my favourite games ever, Okami, with my girlfriend who plays nothing but Animal Crossing and Sims.
DS2 is by the way the worst offender with cheap moments where you just go "seriously?" out of all of these games.
I fully agree these games are so much more. In fact, most people do. Just look at the Elden Ring announcement thread and take a look at how much difficulty is talked about compared to literally everything else.
A lot of games only allow one playstyle. If it's not your thing to jump around with Mario in one of the 3D platformers, you won't enjoy that game. This dying to bosses is an integral part of his game design philosphy, so saying he should accomodate for people not enjoying what he creates is just weird. He doesn't want to provide people with options to circumvent the challenge he carefully crafts with each and every frame of attack animation, hitboxes, and whatever else comes with designing a compelling moveset for a boss.
And it's just fact that their bosses are better than 95% of bosses out there. Which also comes back to only having to balance for one difficulty.
Taking things away when you die doesn't necessarily encourage you to explore, but it adds to the well known tension and atmosphere when you are in the middle of doing said exploring. That's part of the whole game's appeal for many people. Always contemplating whether to push on with all your stuff and risk of losing it or go back and having to fight most of the stuff again is also part of their core design. There's no other game where I sigh in relief after finding a checkpoint as much as in these games.
Well not that much in Sekiro though. In that game you can circumvent 90% of all enemies if you want to lol.
I'll provide some other reasoning here though:
One of the main reasons for why people don't want this approach to change is because the entire series got big that way. The community grew fast and large because everyone faced the same struggles in game. Everyone knew exactly what everyone else was dealing with. Together with being able to summon other players to help you out, it created a sense of companionship that makes for a really great and helpful community.
So saying people are only advocating for it for their e-peen and out of spite for people not as good as them at videogames is pretty misguided.
Yes I'm sure some folks honestly believe they gained something more positive by playing video games for thousands and thousands of hours as opposed those folks that had to do physically grueling training to make up for the fact they have a disability and need put more effort than a person without.
Not sure why you think that makes you right, but whatever. Sounds like a bad faith argument.
If you have read this thread and haven't seen any reasons for it, then you should check your Cyclops goggles. Or is it because you're...dismissing them?
That's funny because I find posts like these to be the ones who just "refuse to listen" and who invent motivations with regards to others.
Just because you disagree with someone doesn't mean they have their opinions "for no reasons". Plenty of reasons have been given. It's OK to disagree, but let's not attribute motives such as "pretending to be superior" when no one (except maybe a troll or two) said that.
I've read and responded but again you are exactly what I'm talking about. Your posts in this thread have shown that you want to hold it over because your happy with the options they give instead of improving accessibility including difficult.
we have had this conversation multiple times and it always boils down to one group refusing to think that from games could have multiple accessibility options including difficulty and down playing the complaints. I enjoy playing from games but they would be just as good with more options and there have been plenty of good suggestions.
If from never does it than fine but they are not immune from criticism with this and that's one of the things that seems to be ignored.
I don't want them to add any difficulty options because I'm selfish.
I see them trying to do that as a risk. they could knock it out of the park and make a great easier mode, but they could also fuck it up horribly and ruin a good game because of it. I don't want them to take that risk at all.
We don't get many games designed like this, so people who want these types of games don't have much options, well people who want easier games have a shit ton of games to choose from.
I don't have any faith From Software is competent enough to make it work.
I see them trying to do that as a risk. they could knock it out of the park and make a great easier mode, but they could also fuck it up horribly and ruin a good game because of it. I don't want them to take that risk at all.
We don't get many games designed like this, so people who want these types of games don't have much options, well people who want easier games have a shit ton of games to choose from.
I don't have any faith From Software is competent enough to make it work.
At least in regards to souls games, people have made cogent arguments for why difficulty settings would hurt their experience. People just continue to talk over it. With regards to sekiro, this would be a much easier game to create difficulty settings for without hurting anyone's experience. Thats not the case with Dark souls however.
No one should be making games under the pretense of if someone has a job. 90% of the people here have jobs (some of us hae more than one). Video gaming is a hobby. And even then I'm not sue why you think its troubling to only play these games 2-3 hours a day. Thats an incredible amount of time.
I have platinumed demon souls. Platinumed and fully gamer scored dark souls 1 and 2. Finished dark souls 3 and sekiro. Also platinumed Bloodborne. However, I think there should be options for more accessibility, I find as I am getting older my reflexes are not as sharp and with kids my time is more limited, so it is harder for me to dedicate the time and having an easier version would be awesome. For people saying it could ruin the game, what is the reasoning for this?
There are some games that aren't even fully subtitled. Accessibility options is nowhere near as abundant as you seem to think they are.
So you think I hold these opinions because I "want to feel superior" and for "no reasons", and not because of the reasons I actually gave in my posts? Like, what even is this? If Miyazaki decided tomorrow Elden Ring needs an easy difficulty, I wouldn't have anything against it. But I'm not the one telling a dev who develops games a certain way since a decade+ to chance their design philosophy and people who like that specific philosphy how they want to feel superior, are assholes, gatekeepers, elitists or even ableist.
Also can you stop lumping in difficulty with other accesibility options? Because absolutely noone is arguing against those.
I thought the whole Sekiro controversy was not about the difficulty, but Miyazaki's sorta ableist speech from the very beginning.
We don't want to include a difficulty selection because we want to bring everyone to the same level of discussion and the same level of enjoyment," Miyazaki said. "So we want everyone … to first face that challenge and to overcome it in some way that suits them as a player."
That's... a perfectly fine design philosphy?
All this shows me is that they understand how their games got this big and why they had such an impact on the industry.
"Ableist speech", really?
And more importantly, please show me all these games that can be completed by everyone, because somehow Fromsoft is the only dev on this planet worthy of criticism regarding accesibilty.
Tons of games get criticized for it. There was a huge thread about the lack of font size options in games. From is just the only one that has a fan base that is especially against them said options.
There is a difference between wanting text size options, colour blind options and so on, and wanting a dev to add multiple difficulties to a game that had it's whole niche carved by only providing one difficulty. Nobody is against the former, acting like anyone here is is really fucking disingenuous.
And yes, these games have more going for it than difficulty. But that quote I responded to shows they know exactly why their games became that popular in the first place. People demanding them to abandon that and acting like they know better than the devs is hilarious and sad at the same time.
I disagree. They're intrinsically linked; there is no hard line of "well this person has a ADA-recognized mental disability" or "age 16 is when you are old enough to handle a game of this difficulty".
When I say games should be accessible, I mean they should be accessible to anyone who wants to play them and have fun. For instance, some people have slow reaction time. Like, physically, using a test that just flashes the color red and asks the person to hit a button as fast as they can. This is *not a disability* in any normally recognized sense of the word, but for the purposes of Sekiro, it might as well be the same as someone with poor motor function in their hand, or whatever. Others don't have the specific types of intelligence that lets them focus on a wide number of things at once, or spatial reasoning, or whatever. Brains are complex and it's not anyone's fault if they're just baseline worse than others.
The point of accessibility to let people who ordinarily couldn't experience the game the way it was originally designed (for a very specific band of skill level; if you're above that band or below it, you're not getting the stated purpose of "overcoming great hardship and then succeeding") enjoy it anyway. And while there are game and situations where adding in difficulty settings means a *wild* amount of work, a twitch game is not one of them; Matt Thorson managed to add in Assist Mode at the last goddamn second and he either did it himself or with maybe one other engineer.
Every argument saying From Software *can't* add difficulty settings without compromising the core, original experience is disingenuous nonsense. Any argument saying they don't want to is fine, but I do think it limits their audience unnecessarily.
Last edited:
Shit noone I know plays them for the difficulty, me included. I know.many who have quit because of the difficulty. I like the weighted feel of the strikes, enemy and world design. Music and the combat is amazing. I am a die hard fan but options would not harm this game in my opinion. If you need to be validated by playing something difficult you can do that in most games on the hardest difficulty.
I've yet to see someone make a good business case for why From would deviate from what they are doing. They've carved out a nice size niche making difficult games with amazing atmosphere, and abandoning that identity is no guarantee of continued success. Most developers would likely kill to have such a strong identity that resonates with gamers and garners the sales numbers From does.
This is such bullshit and is exactly the kind of "talking over" points that continue to muck up the conversation which ignores all of the well reasoned arguments for why adding difficulty setting would indeed compromise core experiences of the game. Whether or not you think its worthwhile to change those aspects is a different conversation but saying any argument that lays out why this would interfere with the core experience with the game as being disingenuous is, well, disingenuous.
Their entire success is based on it. Their entire community is based on the fact that everyone had to face the same challenges in the game, the fact that you could summon someone whenever you wanted instead of not being able to because they played on a different difficulty.
The dev himself states this: "We don't want to include a difficulty selection because we want to bring everyone to the same level of discussion and the same level of enjoyment," Miyazaki said. "So we want everyone … to first face that challenge and to overcome it in some way that suits them as a player."
Why do you think you know better if it would do harm or not than the people making the game? This isn't about some game mechanic that could be improved, this is about the game itself, about how they approach their game design.
Nobody is talking about being validated. It doesn't even matter that much how hard these games actually are. What matters to the dev and a lot of players is that there is only one.
Most games on the hardest difficulty are inbalanced, unfun messes, because no dev has the time and resources to actually balance 5 different difficulties.
I said "sorta" because it was not intentionally discriminating, but there was some discrepancy and misunderstanding in what people were really asking for in all the "accessibility" arguments earlier this year. The quote I found is from 2018, but I remember he said something similar as a response to the accessibility criticisms after Sekiro was out.
It is OK to defend a game with "it's not for everyone" argument, but when the director has to bring up everyone while it's surely not, that... is a problem.
But the From community's response was way more toxic. Artistic vision my ass.
There are no well-reasoned arguments for why adding a difficulty setting would compromise core experiences of the game, because the core experience of the game would be untouched. If the player "can't resist", that's their problem, not the developer's. This is, again, like arguing against the existence of bumpers in bowling lanes because you don't think you'd be able to resist using them.
Celeste has already shown that adding in those functions doesn't in any capacity ruin the game's natural challenge for players who enjoy it.
I'm not going to bother arguing with someone who clearly either hasn't read the arguments for why the core experience would be different or if youre just being one of those disingenuous posters who pretend they werent made but a game that has an always online mode that effects other players and the core experience would in fact be altered. Whether or not you think it matters that that would be effected with the difficulty selection is besides the argument being made that nothing would change from it.
Darn, you could have really educated me and these poor other shmucks who know nothing about game design and haven't *personally* done difficulty balancing on numerous titles!
So because he brings it up and every other dev under the sun just...doesn't, makes this game more ripe for criticsm?
Someone here asked if you would tell every artists who paints that they have to include a second set of their work that is made for people with colorblindness. Obviously you wouldn't. Obviously you also wouldn't think artists who don't do that are being "sorta" ableist. Even artists who openly would say they won't do it because it's too much work and goes against their creative process wouldn't be ableist because of it. At least not any more or less thant he ones that just don't talk about it.
If you think that makes you an authrority to come in with disingenuous arguments all the more power to you. Just don't be shocked when you get called for it.
-Attacks that deleveled you
-Enemies getting stronger when you die
-Spawning stronger enemies when you die
-Grinding for health items
These are things from Demon Souls that were all but removed when Dark Souls (their most popular game) came out. And judging by how well Dark Souls is received by everyone I would say people appreciated these changes and more people got to play the game because of them.
That's the thing people keep forgetting. From has ALREADY shown that they are willing to abandon and add certain difficulty concepts for the sake of appealing to different people with different tastes.
If you're gonna try calling me out, try to actually make an argument so I can (easily) rebut them. Otherwise, keep it to yourself.
Plenty of things change from each insteallment to the next. Do you know what always stays the same since over a decade? Exactly. Miyazaki aknowledges when he can improve on a plethora of things, and then acts on it. He very clearly stated, multiple times, that multiple difficulty settings is not one of these things, and his last 6 games or so underline that.
Are you a game designer? I am not saying I know better I am saying I personally know noone and I have been part of the cummunity and put thousands of hours into the series; however adding an easy option that went "offline" so someone could enjoy it who is not as skilled as someone as myself is not a problem in my eyes. Maybe you are too narrow minded because you seem pretty hurt about any changes on the difficulty. It's a design choice but it's not proven it is why it is successful because they have not even tried to create a game with difficulty options. Maby if they did and it flopped I would concur with you but until it does happen you are worried over absolutely nothing.