Support NeoGAF

[jahasaja]

Great article! More nuanced look at the issue than most discussion where it is either git gud on one extreme and everybody has the right to see everything in a videogame on the other extreme.

Mark Brown has an excellent video on the difficulty in dark souls. The intent of the game is not to punish the player but instead to make them feel satisfied when they finally conquer something they previously thought impossible.

 

[Arion]

Nah. The damage resistence is tiny if you only summon 1 person. Three people pummelling a boss would be over in 5 seconds with normal health.
You can also just play offline and summon npcs.

Not just that but summoning also requires you to use a finite resource like humanity. Summoning is not a straight up easy mode in the souls games.

 

[daninthemix]

Every mention of the word difficulty on gaf seems to really set the cat out amongst the pigeons.

 

[Ratrat]

Not just that but summoning also requires you to use a finite resource like humanity. Summoning is not a straight up easy mode in the souls games.

Humanity/embers are not finite as they can be farmed, bought or gained after beating a boss.
You can even practice bosses with no consequence by being summoned yourself.

 

[Necron]

I feel that for especially Souls games, difficulty is just another part of the game design. Blight town just wouldn't have the same feeling if there was an easy option. The high difficulty was absolutely a part of dark souls design on making a bleak and scary world.

Exactly. I feel that it also ties into the camaraderie of its online mode as well. There is so much thought and attention to detail put into the game mechanics that everything feels cohesive, something that a game seldom has.

Souls/Bloodborne is just a really special case that should make it exempt from this discussion of difficulty modes, in my opinion. Let it be its own thing it so desperately wants to be. Demon's Souls alure was its uncaring nature, which extends from not having an objective marker and no map. It's unforgiving world and atmosphere are part of the reason why it found success.

That said, I love playing games on easy difficulty where I'm perfectly fine with it. Why? Because it doesn't feel like an essential component of the game's design.

 

[MajinSweet4]

Sounds like we're mostly on the same page about games moving forward as a medium and more people playing them on the regular, but did you read the article? There is something to worry about; the people who aren't leaving the old exclusive ways behind, the people harassing journalists and filling communities with toxicity at every turn. Hell, all you need to do is boot up a competitive shooter and you'll probably find a good few in no time.

Maybe these hardcore elitists are a minority, maybe you're right about that - I don't know, it's likely that you are. But they're souring the gaming community as a whole with their archaic mindset.

Seems like some serious conflating to me. Journalist also get harassed if Zelda doesn't get a good score. Zelda players by and large are not considered "hardcore elitists". Most people on either side of this issue just want a game they like.

 

[Boss Doggie]

Possibly the most sense I've seen in this thread so far.

More like a faraway, throwaway post that sounds generic.

 

[Moral Panic]

I think the author touches on a few interesting points, especially towards the question of what makes a video game an interesting medium for entertainment and storytelling. For me personally, a videogame without an aspect of difficulty is not much of a game at all. That's not to say that the game has to be balls to the walls hard but there has to be an underlying threat of failure. There has to be a wall that is blocking progress and the enjoyment comes from overcoming that. Sometimes like in puzzle games like The Swapper it is simply a mental challenge. In other games there is a greater element of timing and concentration. Others disagree and feel the medium is way more varied that that - a guy at my work who is really into games loves text based adventure games and walking simulators. For me I'd rather watch a movie or a tv show.

 

[Syril]

Take a game like Undertale. The difficulty in that game is an entirely self imposed challenge. The game gets insanely easy if you level up, but keeps challenging if you don't. This difficulty is the entire point of the games plot, and adding an easy mode would somewhat compromise that narrative. If in that game the player wants an easier time, they can level up, but doing so is itself a narrative choice. Adding an easy mode option would rob the player of the in-game moral dilemma centered around the difficulty. It's existence would be outright removing an aspect from the game.

Undertale totally has a secret easy mode though.

 

[KKRT00]

The thing is that critic of the medium, must know the medium to know what to critic it for.
If the the review cant play the game (so be able to finish it), he/she cant review the game, its simple as that.

Also not all games are for everyone and not all games should or could have easy modes.
Lets take example of a games like TIS-100 or Shenzhen I/O, you cant really make an easy mode for them, so most gamers on the planet wont be able to play past few levels of them and thats fine.

 

[Snoopycat]

The elitism that some gamers display is pretty sad. I actually feel sorry for them. They obviously have very little going on in their lives if a video game becomes their main focus. As for difficulty in general I have no problem with it. Cuphead looks like a really excellent game. I love the artstyle but I'll never play it because I'm shit at that type of game. I wouldn't enjoy it even if there was an easy mode. It's just not for me and that's fine. There are a lot of games that aren't for me but millions of people love. In fact there are entire genres that aren't for me. Should I go and demand that EA remove the football and add an open world rpg element to Fifa? No that would be ridiculous, as ridiculous as asking developers of challenging games to lower the difficulty in order to cater to people who don't want to be challenged

 

[Syril]

The thing is that critic of the medium, must know the medium to know what to critic it for.
If the the review cant play the game (so be able to finish it), he/she cant review the game, its simple as that.

I don't agree, the perspective of an unskilled player can be useful when that perspective is communicated clearly.

 

[Boss Doggie]

Looking back, the "books and movies have the ability to move around in chapters" is a flawed argument - the fact that you are reading it to begin with means you are already enjoying its content from the start.

The elitism that some gamers display is pretty sad. I actually feel sorry for them. They obviously have very little going on in their lives if a video game becomes their main focus. As for difficulty in general I have no problem with it. Cuphead looks like a really excellent game. I love the artstyle but I'll never play it because I'm shit at that type of game. I wouldn't enjoy it even if there was an easy mode. It's just not for me and that's fine. There are a lot of games that aren't for me but millions of people love. In fact there are entire genres that aren't for me. Should I go and demand that EA remove the football and add an open world rpg element to Fifa? No that would be ridiculous, as ridiculous as asking developers of challenging games to lower the difficulty in order to cater to people who don't want to be challenged

Now this is a great post.

 

[Manu]

Man, everyone is raving about this death metal album, I wanna listen to it too, can you make a version without death metal vocals? Then I can say I also heard it and tell my friends.

What? The vocals are part of what makes it death metal and the album wouldn't be the same without them? You sound like an elitist.



Man, everyone is raving about this gory as fuck horror movie, I wanna watch it too, can you make a version without any gore at all? Then I can say I also watched it and tell my friends.

What? The gore is a part of what makes it so good and the movie wouldn't be the same without it? You sound like an elitist.

 

[KLoWn]

Multiple difficulty are fine, but I'll never get behind the people who demands it in games where the creators don't want 'em. They clearly made it that way for a purpose that supports their story they want to tell (mainly thinking of the Souls games here). Just respect that.

The people that shouts "elitism" at everyone and everything nowadays are way worse than the "git gud!" twats. In fact, they're the same kind of twat, just on different ends of the spectrum.

*Edit*
Also, if a someone is supposed to review a game I'd really prefer if if that person is someone who is decent at his job. I don't know how this is even a discussion.

 

[Arion]

Humanity/embers are not finite as they can be farmed, bought or gained after beating a boss.
You can even practice bosses with no consequence by being summoned yourself.

My point is Dark souls 2 has a covenant that made the game unilaterally harder. The argument the souls games have a unified difficulty mode no longer holds up. So what if there was a covenant that made the game unilaterally easier? Summoning adds a lot of convenience to the game but it does not make the game unilaterally easier.

*Edit*
Also, if a someone is supposed to review a game I'd really prefer if if that person is someone who is decent at his job. I don't know how this is even a discussion.

It's good to have reviews coming from multiple prospective. If someone is bad a strategy games they would want the prospective of someone who is also bad at strategy games to know if they will enjoy a game or not. You can just ignore the reviewers that don't share your prospective.

 

[JustAnotherOtaku]

More like a faraway, throwaway post that sounds generic.

Not to me

 

[redcrayon]

Uh, thats like a totally different topic.

No, it's not, it's a justification for why easy modes are important and not just relevant to people who want to fly through 'difficult' games. It's sure convenient in conversations like this to be able to badge 'easy mode' fans as casuals by bracketing off accessibility concerns rather than accept there might be people who struggle on standard difficulty levels due to the complexity of modern controllers rather than lack of commitment though.

 

[Calabi]

Multiple difficulty are fine, but I'll never get behind the people who demands it in games where the creators don't want 'em. They clearly made it that way for a purpose that supports their story they want to tell (mainly thinking of the Souls games here). Just respect that.

The people that shouts "elitism" at everyone and everything nowadays are way worse than the "git gud!" twats. In fact, they're the same kind of twat, just on different ends of the spectrum.

*Edit*
Also, if a someone is supposed to review a game I'd really prefer if if that person is someone who is decent at his job. I don't know how this is even a discussion.

There's no demanding, there's just asking, where is the harm in asking? Its up to the dev's if they want to include more people or not. Its there choice and fair enough if they dont. But whats unnecessary is the gamer's over reaction to these people asking.

I'm confused so the people whom are asking for more inclusion are worse than the "git gud twats"?

 

[redcrayon]

Additional difficulty levels also impose additional costs to the development team though. They need to add new UI elements, QA those, QA the whole game on different difficulty levels to ensure it's balanced across the board, etc. It's a ridiculous amount of effort if you want to do it right. Just asking the developers to add more content can be infeasible.

That's true, adding modes that are inclusive is always going to be more effort, but you could say the same about just about every element that not everyone will use, like the higher difficulty settings, alternate endings, conversation trees, optional characters, online elements, DLC etc. I don't see why an easy mode could be seen as unreasonable effort when any of the above is seen as fair enough when included, but sure, developers prerogative.

 

[Maximo]

Doesn't Neir essentially have an autoplay difficulty mode? Couldn't care less hell every developer could put a autoplay mode in their game and it wouldn't effect my personal enjoyment of playing them on the hardest difficulty.

 

[KLoWn]

It's good to have reviews coming from multiple prospective. If someone is bad a strategy games they would want the prospective of someone who is also bad at strategy games to know if they will enjoy a game or not. You can just ignore the reviewers that don't share your prospective.

I'm pretty sure that'll just lead to an uninformed review, but whatever.

If the reviewer tells people that he didn't finish the game because it was to hard/he didn't understand/whatever other reasons then it's fine, then I'll know if it's something I can trust or not, and move along to other reviews if necessary.

 

[Sanctuary]

One of the most disappointing trends in the industry (among fandom anyway) in the last few years is the notion of 'not all games are for everyone'.

By all means, keep Demon's Souls hard and challenging at its default level, but offering an easier mode (or harder) in addition to this hurts no one, except, apparently, the fragile ego of the 'git gud' crowd.

Give us more difficulty options, more accessibility options, more diversity and the industry will keep moving forward in a positive, healthy and inclusive way.

I hope the irony of your words isn't lost on you.

 

[Glass Rebel]

TL;DR "Gamer culture" is toxic. It thrives on excluding others and protecting video games as a totem for a select few as their bastion of worth in the world. I say this as a man who, as a child and teenager, thrived on the very same thing I now condemn. It's not a good place for anyone to be, socially, looking for those who are in and judging or berating those who are out.

Games are evolving and the concept of a "gamer" should go. Not everyone plays games to git gud or get the highest score or learn all the hitboxes or have the highest ilvl or what have you, and not everyone has to be.

Good article.

This is a flawed argument because it completely ignores the reality of the market offerings. A short glance at my libraries across multiple platforms is enough to tell me that "inclusive" games are way more prominent than the likes of Dark Souls. Let's face it, most games are stupidly easy and/or offer an Easy mode already.

Those of us who like a challenge have no problem skipping "walking simulators", why is it so hard for inexperienced players to ignore Bloodborne?

 

[KLoWn]

There's no demanding, there's just asking, where is the harm in asking? Its up to the dev's if they want to include more people or not. Its there choice and fair enough if they dont. But whats unnecessary is the gamer's over reaction to these people asking.

There's no harm in asking, but many people do not just ask, they're sound extremely forceful about it, and that's why many people get annoyed with them.

I'm confused so the people whom are asking for more inclusion are worse than the "git gud twats"?

In any of the "I want easy mode in Dark Souls" threads you'll find plenty of people who gives reasonable explanations on why the game's difficulty is the way it is, and there's never a shortage of drive-by "A LOT OF ELITISTS IN THIS THREAD" comments.

I don't know how you could have missed that if you've ever been in one of those threads.

Those of us who like a challenge have no problem skipping "walking simulators", why is it so hard for inexperienced players to ignore Bloodborne?

This.

 

[Maintenance]

 

 

[xRaizen]

This is a flawed argument because it completely ignores the reality of the market offerings. A short glance at my libraries across multiple platforms is enough to tell me that "inclusive" games are way more prominent than the likes of Dark Souls. Let's face it, most games are stupidly easy and/or offer an Easy mode already.

Those of us who like a challenge have no problem skipping "walking simulators", why is it so hard for inexperienced players to ignore Bloodborne?

QFT

I can’t stand walking simulators, but I’m not going to go on a forum and complain that it isn’t made for me. I jist ignore it and move on.

 

[Majukun]

eh,both sides have good points and bad ones.

for my personal taste,difficulty, is a necessity, or at least the game must not be piss poor easy,because it detracts from the experience..you can have the tighter gameplay in the world,you still need to give to the player a reason to use it to its fullest.

I always make the example with football (the real one,not handegg)..it's a great sport for those who like it,both to practice and watch...but what happens if we destroy the difficulty of the game by, i don't know, making the goal as big as the penalty area? now it becomes way less enjoyable to play and to watch,scoring becomes too easy, it doesn't take much skill so it isn't fun for who plays and doesn't impress who watches.

but that being said, does the existance of some lower difficulty setting that makes the game piss poor easy for someone else hurt my enjoyment? of course not, as far as my level of difficulty is still there ,go ahead and put it in the game if you want.

problem is, that's not at all where the industry is going....and it's not in favor of difficult games.

Easy games made to be played by "anyone" are by a large margin the norm right now,and there is no hard version of them for people that wants a challenge either.
That's why i kind of understand the "eletists"...not wanting an easy mode looks to me less like a douchebag move to feel superior to others, and more like a defensive response to the vast number of historical franchises that have lowered their difficulties to sell more to the "masses"...

it's the slippery slope argument basically, they think that this time is gonna be an easy mode,next time the game's difficulty will be rebalanced in total to make it more accessible...it's a gut response sure..but not entirely unmotivated given the current direction the industry is following.

long story short,yes,a more accessible level of difficulty in an hard game hurts no one, but you can't blame people that like hard games to be defensive about their small niche when the entirety of the industry is rowing against them and has been doing it for years.

about the reviews, yes, games should be reviewed by reviewers that know how to play them. I don't know why it's even considered debatable.

 

[ArkhamFantasy]

I used to be on "team difficulty options" but after playing Bloodborne i can definitely see why they aren't in there. One thing i will recommend for people who want to get into those types of games but have trouble with them is to play Bloodborne with the strategy guide. It helped explain what the game was trying to teach me, once i got a grasp on that i didnt need a guide for Dark Souls 3 or Nioh and they are some of my favorite games now.

I will point out however that the biggest problem those games have right now is overly aggressive fans telling people how bad their favorite games are compared to Souls and the "git gud" attitude, rather than taking a few minutes to explain how invincibility frames work so they can try and understand the mechanics better.

Jim Sterling has a new show called commentacracy, where he plays an 1800s aristocrat reading quotes from gamers who think to highly of themselves, every single episode features someone bragging about their Dark Souls skill.

 

[KLoWn]

I will point out however that the biggest problem those games have right now is overly aggressive fans telling people how bad their favorite games are compared to Souls and the "git gud" attitude, rather than taking a few minutes to explain how invincibility frames work so they can try and understand the mechanics better.

There is plenty of helpful people in the Souls community that are more than willing to help people out with information, there's just way more people that ignores asking for advice and go straight for "Easy mode plz!".

 

[LeleSocho]

One of the most disappointing trends in the industry (among fandom anyway) in the last few years is the notion of 'not all games are for everyone'.

Nah that's actually a good thing, the step from accessible and losing the focus to make sure to sell a bajillion copies of the game is very small.

 

[Blobbers]

We live in the Golden Age of gaming where a lot of indie games thrive on being different and special. Stories Untold, Her Story, Late Shift, and dozens more. There is no better time to realize that an auteur should be able to realize their vision, because they might find an audience. If their vision is making a game with its own way of easing you into the challenge, where dying is an integral part of the experience, and yet almost never feels unfair, so be it.

It's time to reconcile that not every game needs a difficulty slider, and that we should commend developers that carve out new paths in the industry.

 

[Mr_Moogle]

The only game I was ever glad had a difficulty mode was FTL. Normal mode is brutal in that game.

Most of the time if a game is properly balanced, difficulty modes are completely unnecessary. I wouldn't want From Software to have to spend precious development time balancing an easy difficulty mode into the Souls games because a few people are unwilling to persevere a little bit. If Souls is too challenging for you, read a guide or play something else. I'm not even that good at Souls and I still got through all the games just fine with the occasional youtube video to help me through some of the tougher bosses. I didn't even learn how to parry.

 

[Marcel]

After years and years of these hot take articles and go-nowhere debates on GAF I've come to the conclusion that the people who want games to be arbitrarily easier across the board are more obnoxious than anyone who enjoys hard games. And that's saying something since Souls fanboys can be fucking annoying.

 

[Heartskips]

Creators should make the game as hard as they want, but it's obnoxious how some people get offended at optional easy modes. If you think the easy mode is making the game design worse, then it's the developer's fault - not the concept of easy modes existing.

 

[xealo]

There is plenty of helpful people in the Souls community that are more than willing to help people out with information, there's just way more people that ignores asking for advice and go straight for "Easy mode plz!".

This tends to be my experience in quite a lot of games that are legitimately hard to grasp or have a steep learning curve.

If you actually ask about how something work rather than just wanting the content nerfed, people are more than happy to assist, but if you skip straight to "it's too hard, nerf it!" in games successfully targeting more niche audiences, that's when the sarcasm and rudeness comes out.

 

[Marcel]

This tends to be my experience in quite a lot of games that are legitimately hard to grasp or have a steep learning curve.

If you actually ask about how something work rather than just wanting the content nerfed, people are more than happy to assist, but if you skip straight to "it's too hard, nerf it!" in games successfully targeting more niche audiences, that's when the sarcasm and rudeness comes out.

Those are usually the same people who jump to "This game doesn't respect my time! I'm a dad who needs pause and yadda yadda yadda" with all this laughable "righteous" fury. Just play something else. Not every game has to be tailored for your personal situation. Expecting media/art to be a custom fit for everyone is unrealistic and foolish.

 

[Ratrat]

My point is Dark souls 2 has a covenant that made the game unilaterally harder. The argument the souls games have a unified difficulty mode no longer holds up. So what if there was a covenant that made the game unilaterally easier? Summoning adds a lot of convenience to the game but it does not make the game unilaterally easier.

Why would there be a covenant that does that? The fact that the game allows you a kind of early ng+ mode along with kindling bonfires for higher risk/reward should tell you what the devs are trying to achieve.

Personally, I dont have the patience to read every item discription and listen to all the npcs, so I miss the story. The last thing I'll do is demand the devs compromise and add flashy cutscenes and more traditional exposition.

 

[Shifty]

Good article, if a bit flowery in its phrasing here and there.

I don't expect reviewers to be gaming gods, just competent enough to understand the systems they're interacting with and passing judgement on.

Seems like you're addressing a different subject than the OP article?

Yeah, as I said in my response to another poster above, I was tying in my thoughts on the recent difficulty/accessibility debates we've had here recently. The article covers some of that.

Well personally, I think the taxation of rubber grommets is absolutely unacceptable and frankly needs an industry overhaul.

 

[Plum]

What I don't like about this whole discussion is that able-bodied people who want to finish a game use the fact that all people should be able to simply play a game as reason for including an easy mode. Those with a disability that affects their motor functions aren't going to suddenly defeat Ornstein and Smough in Dark Souls if their damage was reduced and the PC had extra Estus Flasks, they aren't suddenly going to be able to beat Cuphead if they let you get the full ending with Simple mode. Unless you gut those games and/or add a NieR-style "auto-play" option they'd still require a high level of dexterity to get through. With a simple easy mode you'd just have a whole bunch of new able-bodied people to make those who can't beat those games feel like they're missing out.

To me, this whole difficulty discussion seems to have stemmed from a few really awesome, heavily publicised, yet really difficult games (Cuphead, Dark Souls, Bloodborne, etc) that able-bodied people aren't able to beat without 'gitting gud' (for lack of a better term) and not a widespread epidemic of overly-challenging games in the industry. Outside of those very few titles this battle was already over nearly a decade ago, and easy mode was the definitive victor.

So, essentially, this 'battleground' isn't on the field of video game difficulty, it's on the field of Dark Souls difficulty.

 

[Ratrat]

Does Monster Hunter World have an easy mode?

 

[shimon]

Another good piece from Eurogamer. I really enjoy their articles.

 

[BLACK AMERICAN PSYCHO]

If game devs want to essentially make a different game for each difficulty I'm all for it, otherwise challenging games like souls should stay as they are.

 

[wild wild rice]

Saving this to read when I’m not hungover. I’ve been playing Super Ghouls N Ghosts recently and it (obviously) has me thinking about difficulty.

Game is brutal.

 

[Shifty]

Does Monster Hunter World have an easy mode?

If it's anything like past entries, the early game 'Low Rank' quests will be the game's equivalent of an easy mode.

Since it's online, they'd have to split players up or do some clever per-player damage/health logic to integrate an actual difficulty selection into the game.

 

[Mihos]

One of the most disappointing trends in the industry (among fandom anyway) in the last few years is the notion of 'not all games are for everyone'

Give us more difficulty options, more accessibility options, more diversity and the industry will keep moving forward in a positive, healthy and inclusive way.

Gaming becomes inclusive and diverse by making games for every niche, adding more flavors, providing more specific experiences to cater to certain subsets that wouldn't get represented in a 'one size fits all' model. American Horror Story doesn't need to produce a rated G version for TV to be inclusive, we have Disney and Nickelodeon for that. If any group is the entitled, fragile ego, group.... it is the ones trying to tell a producer that their game needs to make changes to cater to their personal preferences, lifestyle, or skill level. I am glad EVE online exists, even though I could never break the learning curve personally. I am glad Nintendo exists, although I don't personally like most of their games. Hardcore racing simulators arent for everyone, but there are also arcade racers, you need both in a healthy ecosystem. It is like the 'Marvel movies are shit' crowd... what they are really mad at, is that so many people enjoy them and that they find success in catering to that crowd.

 

[RockmanBN]

Those are usually the same people who jump to "This game doesn't respect my time! I'm a dad who needs pause and yadda yadda yadda" with all this laughable "righteous" fury. Just play something else. Not every game has to be tailored for your personal situation. Expecting media/art to be a custom fit for everyone is unrealistic and foolish.

Similarly people love comparing games to movies. Horror is a easy genre that many people avoid(myself included) due to the movies being too gory or scary to some. There seems to be no argument to this type of media regarding a need slider for gore or scary. There's no issue with a dev wanting multiple difficulties, but there shouldn't be a problem if they have only one difficulty in mind. A game like Undertale wpuld have loss its meaning in the story if it was cake walk to everything. The difficulty intertwined with the story itself.

 

[Glass Rebel]

Does Monster Hunter World have an easy mode?

For those of us who have played MH on PSP and 3DS having a second analogue stick is easy mode

 

[thumb]

American Horror Story doesn't need to produce a rated G version for TV to be inclusive, we have Disney and Nickelodeon for that. If any group is the entitled, fragile ego, group.... it is the ones trying to tell a producer that their game needs to make changes to cater to their personal preferences, lifestyle, or skill level. I am glad EVE online exists, even though I could never break the learning curve personally. I am glad Nintendo exists, although I don't personally like most of their games. Hardcore racing simulators arent for everyone, but there are also arcade racers, you need both in a healthy ecosystem. It is like the 'Marvel movies are shit' crowd... what they are really mad at, is that so many people enjoy them and that they find success in catering to that crowd.

I feel like there's a misunderstanding happening in these discussions. I don't think many people are arguing that every game should be for literally everyone. Instead, the argument is that game developers should consider being more accommodating of how players want to experience their game. Difficulty options do not suddenly make a game "for everyone," they simply make them for more people than they would be otherwise. Just like adding subtitles helps hearing-impaired gamers enjoy a title, and thus broaden its audience.

 

[thumb]

Similarly people love comparing games to movies. Horror is a easy genre that many people avoid(myself included) due to the movies being too gory or scary to some. There seems to be no argument to this type of media regarding a need slider for gore or scary. There's no issue with a dev wanting multiple difficulties, but there shouldn't be a problem if they have only one difficulty in mind. A game like Undertale wpuld have loss its meaning in the story if it was cake walk to everything. The difficulty intertwined with the story itself.

This is because people can engage with horror films in a much more flexible manner. I can fast-forward parts of horror movies I don't want to see. I can skip entire chapters if I like. I usually cannot do so with video games.