Support NeoGAF

[TheEndOfItAll]

I don't agree at all. I think that they are a core element of action-based games; adding in an option to skip them would be akin to skipping entire sections of books. You won't be engaged completely with the work and therefore it will have much less of an impact.

There are plenty of games that do not require many discrete inputs in a small window of opportunity.

You cannot compare books to video games, though, exactly for this reason. Games do not let you skip content. Books do.

Trails in the Sky does this very well: if you run into a hard boss fight, and lose, you can choose to reduce the difficulty in order to get past it.

 

[ebullientprism]

Every one of these threads where someone suggests something quite timid that would make the experience more user friendly for a lot of people without compromising on the core gameplay for others is immediately descended upon by nerds looking to polish their credentials.

"hur durr the intended experience blah blah not how the developers want you to play "

And I swear to god, 75% of them are inevitably Souls fans. Gaming's absolute worst fanbase.

Feels like browsing https://www.reddit.com/r/gatekeeping/ in these threads.

 

[Ordinaryundone]

it's a fair compromise. You can skip the boss and continue the game, but you don't get to pretend you beat it.

Nier Automata's take on this was great. SPOILERS

Spoiler

After you beat the game completely you get the option to just outright buy any achievements you have left to get before going for the real ending. They are all pretty cheap, making the game ridiculously easy to 100% if you want, but if you have screenshot on trophy turned on your "proof" will just be a picture of you buying it off the menu."

 

[James Scott]

Not sure I agree with letting people skip boss fights, but giving options to make it easier or harder sounds reasonable.

Someone dropping a game due to a difficult bossfight is probably not preferable to giving some the option to make it easier.
Maybe if you die x amount of times you’re given something to make it easier like in Mario.
Devs can be sneaky and make the game slightly easier after each death in a segment. Player would still feel good for conquering a challenge since they wouldn’t be told about it

 

[Kazuhira]

Optional=/=skippable right? like op wants the boss to be considered 'defeated' by walking past its area?
I get that if you're stuck with a boss,but most games nowadays allows you to lower the difficulty without the need to start all over again.
I fail to see your point if there's another to reason to make all bosses optional or skippable,why would you do that? but all depends on how the game is designed around that mechanic.

 

[Marcel]

I would also make the argument that the people who care about trophies/achievements are probably more valuable customers in terms of user engagement than the ones that don't so it makes sense that those people are more catered to.

 

[poodaddy]

They could you know, just play something else.

This concept is ridiculous. I don't pick up a book and think, hey this sucks! But I should be able to finish it, I paid for it after all. I just don't read it and read something else.

People should stop playing games that aren't for them.

See my earlier post in this thread. The concept is not at all hard to understand, and you'd never actually have to use it personally. How does including more accessibility options for disabled gamers actually negatively affect your experience in any way if you never have to use them?
You're coming off very insensitive.

 

[specdot]

What games even have traditional boss fights nowadays?
Pretty much just niche games catered to an audience that wants that kind experience. Pretty selfish to demand they change their style to suit your needs, when you're not the audience they even want.

What are you even going on about?
By this logic I should be able to skip all the bosses in a Destiny raid and just collect all the loot.

 

[Glass Shark]

.

 

[Pompadour]

I guess I don't have a problem with this idea, in theory, but the people they're targeting with this change probably wouldn't appreciate such a mode from turning off achievements or distinguishing it as an "easy mode". There's people who don't care, of course, but there's plenty of people who want games to be easier but without them thinking they were made easier to accommodate them.

Like how you can do autocombos in ASW fighting games but they sell that mode as "Stylish" instead of "Casual" or "Beginner". Same reason why there's "Story" difficulty in some games opposed to "Very Easy".

I'm not against this because this could be a change that some players would embrace while not harming other players whatsoever. But it won't fix it for everyone because there's very much a contingent of players who don't want to lower themselves to an "Easy" difficulty and will instead believe that "Normal" difficulty must be a mistake on the part of the developers. It's not about making a choice that best suits the player but rather the player comes in wanting a specific choice and then finds out it's not what they expected.

 

[Lo_Fi]

What's the point of a game if you're going to skip the parts that make it a challenge? You're taking all of the fulfillment out of it.

People play games for more than just a challenge.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bartle_taxonomy_of_player_types

 

[Javier23]

Let people play the games however they want to within the comfort of their own living rooms. Not sure what problem many have here with it. As long as it's a singleplayer game, people have been cheating, God mode-ing and hacking the hell out of games forever. It's not exactly OPTIONS in games that we should be against.

 

[Wagram]

What games even have traditional boss fights nowadays?
Pretty much just niche games catered to an audience that wants that kind experience. Pretty selfish to demand they change their style to suit your needs, when you're not the audience they even want.

Ahh yes, the superiority complex.

 

[khaaan]

Do you guys also get upset when people enjoy playing a game using cheat engine? The gate keeping going on is ridiculous.

 

[BRocknRolla]

Here's another compromise I can live with

I love this game, but that was a really dumb image (Same thing with the tutu in Splosion Man). Don't belittle your players.

 

[Mesoian]

Every one of these threads where someone suggests something quite timid that would make the experience more user friendly for a lot of people without compromising on the core gameplay for others is immediately descended upon by nerds looking to polish their credentials.

"hur durr the intended experience blah blah not how the developers want you to play "

And I swear to god, 75% of them are inevitably Souls fans. Gaming's absolute worst fanbase.

Feels like browsing https://www.reddit.com/r/gatekeeping/ in these threads.

I mean, in a world where most games, the grand majority of AAA games on the market don't have boss fights, are meant to be finished once by literally everyone that plays it, and what few difficulty modes are present serve to only make the gameplay loop faster, what else do you really want?

What Walker doesn't understand is that this has already happened, games have been made dramatically easier. Even in his Zelda example, he has the option to leave and return in a state that makes him literally unkillable if he so chooses. What he's asking for is being done, whether we like it or not.

 

[RangerX]

I understand what he's saying to some degree but calling Dark Souls "boss fights with string in between" is some reductionist bullshit.

 

[pa22word]

I love this game, but that was a really dumb image (Same thing with the tutu in Splosion Man). Don't belittle your players.

They're not. It's a funny homage to the original game.

 

[Mesoian]

I love this game, but that was a really dumb image (Same thing with the tutu in Splosion Man). Don't belittle your players.

It's a call back to the old game

 

[WarRock]

Just skipping boss fights just feels weird to me. Maybe create an easy story mode that makes all battles a joke like a one hit kill for each enemy. I would love this for shooters since i tend to suck at them.

This is more or less Megaman Zero Collection easy mode. You have so many power ups and HP that you can just walk forward mashing attack until everything dies.

 

[tengiants]

Ahh yes, the superiority complex.

Who, you or them?

 

[poodaddy]

I love this game, but that was a really dumb image (Same thing with the tutu in Splosion Man). Don't belittle your players.

Huh? It's just a joke man.

They're not. It's a funny homage to the original game.

This.

 

[7DollarHagane]

I don't know. I guess If you really want to.

But i think allowing this will lead to a dumbing down of game mechanics as developers have incentive to simplify boss fights or other mechanics so players won't simply skip them.

Having to use the skip option is inherently a negative experience for the player and results in a negative impression on the game. Therefore developers will try to avoid the player using the skip.

Who loses out? People who enjoy figuring out complex game mechanics or being challenged and would never use the skip option because the developer isn't encouraged to serve their requirements.

 

[Marcel]

I love this game, but that was a really dumb image (Same thing with the tutu in Splosion Man). Don't belittle your players.

If you actually took a line of difficulty text personally then I don't know what to tell you. You better travel back in time to tell id software that a gamer's feelings might get hurt decades later.

 

[Baraka Obama]

This isn't that simple, character action games like dmc rely on players learning from boss to get better sometimes making bosses common enemies. Tons of games offer story modes where the encounters are made insanely easy for the player but a game like dark souls can't do this because difficulty isn't tied to mode but on how you decide to play the game. I understand the argument but it over simplifies game design to an insane degrees.

 

[Ferr986]

Every one of these threads where someone suggests something quite timid that would make the experience more user friendly for a lot of people without compromising on the core gameplay for others is immediately descended upon by nerds looking to polish their credentials.

"hur durr the intended experience blah blah not how the developers want you to play "

And I swear to god, 75% of them are inevitably Souls fans. Gaming's absolute worst fanbase.

Feels like browsing https://www.reddit.com/r/gatekeeping/ in these threads.

Yeah in a world when big chunks of the communities of some popular games sistematically harass people via voice chat or even fanbases that play games about rape, the worst fanbase is Souls for some reason (when almost no one here said anything about Souls here).

 

[jett]

Watch a let's play in YouTube and be done with the pretense that you enjoy playing that particular game.

AssCreed:Origins stands aside because it offers a wholly different experience in its tour mode.

 

[Sylas]

I think it’s a bit complicated, honestly. There are some games where boss fights are absolutely trite and—as the article says—at odds with the game they’re in. However, I also view boss fights and the bosses themselves as integral to a lot of game stories. They add tension to the atmosphere, knowing that everything you’re doing is building up to an encounter that you absolutely HAVE to win. It adds conflict because you, as the player, want to overcome this obstacle so you can see the next portion of the story. A villain is only as good as the resolution of said villain.

It adds a roleplaying aspect to a game; You and the character have a similar goal in that singular moment, to overcome and to win against something that’s difficult.

It’s also a form of catharsis. This asshole has been giving you a hard time and if they just... fell over without any input, I don’t see much that’s exciting or interesting about that. When I defeat a boss, I feel good about that because I did it. The character wouldn’t have overcome that obstacle without me. It’s a direct result of my achievement, not the person on the screen.

I think it’s one of the things that makes storytelling in games fundamentally different from a different medium. Overcoming the evil is dependent on me, not the inevitability that comes with finishing a book or movie. If I can just sit back and watch the Big Bad Evil Guy die, it just means my impact on the story meant absolutely nothing.

For people that watch LPs or watch their friends beat games, I think that achievement is shared. It wasn’t written in a script someone won. Cloud beat Sephiroth but I had to make sure he did it and the people watching know that.

A lot of this is hyperbole, but I genuinely think that boss fights in story-based games that have a central conflict that stems from a villain of some sort benefit greatly from boss fights.

 

[RavageX]

Really? Why even play a game if you don't want to "play" it?

Watch a playthrough on YouTube or something and just hold a controller in your hand.

Most games have an easy difficulty, or even cheats. If you need more than that then I don't know what to tell you.

It's starting to seem like some gamers are asking too much.

 

[Glass Shark]

.

 

[Croash]

Not limiting myself to bosses, I just like the sound of being able to Chapter Select from the start.

It might have been a mediocre game, but 2009's Alone in the Dark had a movie player UI that didn't care about the state of your save file, you could just load any chapter

Black Ops 3 also allows you to unlock all story missions for the price of not earning trophies for them. Came in handy when a game crash made me lose an entire mission's worth of progress but I was able to pick the next mission to keep going.

Can be nice to launch a game with no save file and still be able to show a specific part, especially if most of it sucks "except that one memorable moment".

 

[SmokedMeat]

I used to love the Commodore 64 port of Pac-Man because you could start off with the key stage (or whatever you wanted), so there was no trudging through all the slow moving stages.

 

[Junahu]

Professor Layton games have an interesting way of dealing with difficulty spikes. You can pay Hint Coins to reveal increasing amounts of information about a puzzle, with the final tier just pointing you to the correct answer.
The Hint Coins themselves are somewhat limited in quantity. But more importantly, they are hidden all over the place. So to get Hint Coins to "skip" puzzles, you have to search around for them, which is sort of like a game in itself.

 

[Marcel]

It was dumb in the old game too. I’m not offended by it or anything, but it just feels like the wrong approach to me. Contrast with Shadow Warrior 2’s easy mode where it’s something along the lines of “play this mode if you want to unwind and feel like a superhero.” Much better way to frame it.

Wolfenstein managed to become a hugely important game series regardless of what is in the difficulty text so it seems like your concern is misplaced.

 

[Arkeband]

Do you guys also get upset when people enjoy playing a game using cheat engine? The gate keeping going on is ridiculous.

I truly haven't met someone who uses cheat engines since I was a pre-teen, because they're a cheap thrill.

 

[Ordinaryundone]

It’s funny that Automata is one of GAF’s favorite games of the year and it basically already does everything suggested in the article. I don’t see anyone complaining that the game essentially let you skip boss fights... which it did.

I wanted to experience the game’s story but didn’t want to bother with combat and the game totally let me do that. The many difficulty options offered were really nice, and I imagine they would be very useful for a disabled gamer. I didn’t end up liking the story all that much, but I will always look back fondly on the myriad options the game gave me to experience that story in a way that made sense for me.

You see, I'd legitimately argue that you might have enjoyed the story more if you'd played the game at a higher difficulty level, if just for experience of struggling alongside the main characters. Also, Nier doesn't let you outright skip anything but end-game content; you still have to actually play through pretty much the entire game to see the ending even if you don't go for 100% completion. Nobody is against easy modes, at least, I'm not. What I'm against is games being presented in an a la carte format. The idea that you can simply excise anything that doesn't appeal to you and yet still think you've experienced the complete experience. That's not conducive to story telling OR art.

That said, the idea of modular difficulty selection IS brilliant and should be implemented more often. Even something as simple as Silent Hill's tendency to let you set the difficulty of combat and puzzles separately.

 

[Lothars]

Sure why not. The more options the merrier.

I want to recall GTA V displaying a prompt asking if you would like to skip to the next section after you've failed X amount of times. Seems a sensible approach.

That's the one of the only ways I would be okay with this, the other is an easy difficulty that like someone elses example of one hit killing everything would be just as good.. Skipping portions of the game just because is not a good solution.

Every one of these threads where someone suggests something quite timid that would make the experience more user friendly for a lot of people without compromising on the core gameplay for others is immediately descended upon by nerds looking to polish their credentials.

"hur durr the intended experience blah blah not how the developers want you to play "

And I swear to god, 75% of them are inevitably Souls fans. Gaming's absolute worst fanbase.

Feels like browsing https://www.reddit.com/r/gatekeeping/ in these threads.

What a shitty post. The authors solution is not a good solution. This is not a timid response, this is I want to skip bosses just because and I don't care if I miss anything else. There's better solutiions than skipping bosses.

 

[pa22word]

It was dumb in the old game too. I’m not offended by it or anything, but it just feels like the wrong approach to me. Contrast with Shadow Warrior 2’s easy mode where it’s something along the lines of “play this mode if you want to unwind and feel like a superhero.” Much better way to frame it.

Like someone else said: if your ego is so fragile a goofy homage from a 25 year old game gets you riled up then maybe a game like Wolfenstein isn't for you.

 

[Linkura]

I don't know if just skipping the fight is the answer. I'm cool with cheat codes coming back though.

 

[SomTervo]

It's all about choice. It's a valid choice to offer.

 

[Sane_Man]

It was dumb in the old game too. I’m not offended by it or anything, but it just feels like the wrong approach to me. Contrast with Shadow Warrior 2’s easy mode where it’s something along the lines of “play this mode if you want to unwind and feel like a superhero.” Much better way to frame it.

So you'd rather be patronised than teased.

 

[btrboyev]

editing my post to just say I disagree and don’t understand where the OP is coming from.

 

[Baraka Obama]

What kind of bullshit pussies call for this stuff? If you don’t want to play a game then don’t buy it.

Settle down

 

[Roshin]

I mean, I get the argument but isn't it easier to just add a wider range of difficulty options to most games?

It's a problem that the industry tried to solve years ago by implementing difficulty levels into games. If a game was too difficult for you, try an easier difficulty level. If you want a tougher challenge, try a harder difficulty level.

It was a good idea, but many "easy" difficulty levels are not actually very easy at all. Some will punish the player by disabling trophies or only letting you proceed a bit into the game. If you want to get further, play at a higher difficulty level.

And the "hardcore" are ever ready to deride and ridicule anyone who thinks a game is too difficult. Stick your head into any forum for games that pride themselves for being hard and difficult. Keeping the casuals and the new players out of "their" game is a surprisingly big deal for many. Watch an LP on YouTube, the game is not for you, etc, but stay away.

A book or a film will never stop you from proceeding or call you an idiot, if you don't understand something. I think there is a lot that could be done in this area (ie user-friendliness) and I wish more developers would explore it.

 

[Glass Shark]

.

 

[Truant]

Bosses are my least favorite part of Souls games. I hate them, and would love the ability to skip them. Co-op helps, though.

 

[supernormal]

Skippable boss fights or levels would be a game mechanic specific to a game where the developer agrees with this sentiment. It wouldn't be across the board. Forza 3 introduced the rewind ability and that just became a Forza thing not a racing game thing.

If you want to cater to a certain audience that believes in being invested in mastering the games mechanics in order to make progress, you can still make that game.

 

[Aters]

There are other ways such as changing difficulty.

Western games should offer this option though, if only because the boss fights suck ass.

 

[SliceSabre]

I enjoy seeing something I earned only having <2% of the players who have played the game actually get it. It takes time and skill to earn them.

Being able to just get trophies by skipping things essentially makes them "You tried" stickers/participation trophies.

This makes more sense to me.

Make the bosses easier, don't make them skippable. Let someone actually experience the boss even if they will beat it by simply farting once in its general direction. The way some games go, entirely skipping the boss to the next scene would be weird considering how some bosses talk shit and such or do cool shit during the fight and the skipper would miss all of that awesome stuff.

 

[MidnightCowboy]

I don't agree. He brings up chapter select, but if you skip parts of anything you didn't fully engage with the product no matter how you try to justify it. Would you skip a scene in a movie if it's your first time watching it? If so, in the words of the immortal sage Reggie, what's wrong with you? I suppose I'm in favor of options that lower difficulty if you die a lot, but I'm not about outright skipping content. Why should games be accessible to the biggest audience possible? I mean I love tons of games like that, Mario for instance, but if something wants to be hard as balls and alienate potential customers, I'm all for it.