kraspkibble
Permabanned.
lol no.
I'm surprised so many people are against more people been able to play more games that they otherwise couldn't.
It wouldn't effect us in anyway. If you think someone playing a game you enjoyed in a lesser difficulty would ruin the experience you had... well I dont really know what to say.
I've played hundreds upon hundreds of games and not one would have been ruined by adding a extra difficulty mode to let more people play IMO.
Telling other people they should ignore entire experiences or watch on youtube rather than ask the developers to be more inclusive of peoples abilities/disabilitys/time, that just seems crazy to me.
Why not just have a mode where the game plays itself and you can press buttons on the controller but they don't actually do anything.
Like when you have a little kid pressing buttons on the 2nd controller while you play and they can make believe that they are beating the game on the screen.
There amazing games but not because they don't have an easy mode. I think your giving a disservice to the games there. Theres so much more to them than that.
I think the argument that devs made artistic choices is flawed. They make choices based on their own biases and with limited feedback. If they are incapable of understanding that some people don't like the level of challenge but still want to enjoy the game, then they really should find a different line of work.
I think the argument that devs made artistic choices is flawed. They make choices based on their own biases and with limited feedback. If they are incapable of understanding that some people don't like the level of challenge but still want to enjoy the game, then they really should find a different line of work.
If I make a game with Satan as the final boss, and I want Satan in that game be the example and epitome of ultimate struggle, and I want players to experience that and possibly conquer that, and I want the game to have the possibility of Satan being unbeatable by many to make a point, then why should I offer a mode where he becomes easier?
Wouldn't it go against the whole idea if I would make an option for people who don't like the struggle to be able to beat him more easily? Why would I make my creation who should be the symbol for ultimate struggle to have a version that isn't that.
There will be people who like the idea and there will be people who don't like the idea. Why would the will of those who don't like the idea go above the will of the developers and the players who like the idea? To even go so far that you would say if the developers don't ditch the idea but instead cater to those people who don't like the idea they should quit their job as game developers, dude............. *insert greta_how_dare_you.gif here*
Would you not agree a less skilled player playing on easy, would be the equivalent of a skilled player playing on hard?
I think your problem in your scenario would be people choosing the wrong difficulty for them. Even if that happened I wouldn't think it would be the worst thing in the world.
Every artist who doesn't practice their art solely for its own sake is faced with the exact same issue, so I don't see how you could say these choices aren't artistic. Do you really believe that Hidetaka Miyazaki and other designers out there making hard games without an easy mode only do it because they're too stupid or stubborn to understand that there are people out there who'd buy their games if they were easier? I'm fairly sure they understand perfectly well, but that does not mean they have to agree with these people or change their games to appease them.I think the argument that devs made artistic choices is flawed. They make choices based on their own biases and with limited feedback. If they are incapable of understanding that some people don't like the level of challenge but still want to enjoy the game, then they really should find a different line of work.
I was in the camp of "no" a few years ago. Now I'm in the camp of I'd rather have as many people experience the game as possible. As long as it's optional there's no reason for it not to exist.
Imagine being so entitled you think devs need to cater more to the lowest common denominator.
Play something else, get better, etc.
They were always easy. I remember all these retarded ass 4th graders that were failing fucking history had all beaten the game within a month of it coming out.The new pokemon games are too easy, but I do not demand that the devs make an entire difficulty system just to appease me.
Not every game should be for everybody so the answer is a NO.
I'm a Souls-Borne-Kiro fan, if FROMsoft releases one of those with Easy mode I'm not buying it or at least i'm not doing it on 1st day (as I always do with those games).
If those games are too hard for some people, too bad. There are millions of easy games in the market. Football and Driving games are too hard for me and I don't intend to change them to please me.
Heres one for the people that argue it would affect "a developers vision". Weve looked alot on this thread about a game such as Dark Souls and how that would be perceived as a lesser game with an easy mode. Let's look at it the other way round can you explain a time you've played a game that's got difficulty levels and you actively believe you've had a lesser time because you knew an easier mode existed?
Also likewise have you ever played a game on anything above normal difficulty? If you have have you not compromised the developers vision? If an easy mode does that in your opinion surely a hard mode would also do that by your same logic.
The problem with this is that you assume that seeing the whole of a game is that important... There are many games that were too hard and I could never finish them (I love racing games and I am not so good at them).... I keep coming back of the challenge is good, sometimes I eventually get through, and it means something.Most games difficulty don't give me trouble (apart from Sekiro) but I'm thinking about other users more. I believe if someone buys a game no matter the skill level they should be able to see everything just like any other piece of entertainment.
I think it'd be fascinating to get a cross-poll asking -- if deciding between the two -- whether the individual wants a good story/lore/atmosphere from their game or a stimulating challenge?
I imagine those who want "games to be for everyone" are thinking of stories, of characters, of settings, of songs that had a great impact on themselves as they played through the game.
But what about people who want a stimulating challenge? The satisfaction of finally beating Seven Ashina Spears can never be conveyed by a "Top 100 RPG soundtracks" video or a "Saddest plot twists" clickbait article. The satisfaction of finally chaining Stage 4 in Daioujou can never be conveyed by watching a streamer or a Let's Play online.
That gut-exhale of "finally" is entertaining to me as a gamer. I'm sure feathers would be ruffled if I suggested that New RPG #3,715 cut out all the nonsensical teenage-drama cutscenes.
Its unfortunate you and your friend had opposite views on this as theres no real middle ground but at least you both dont have to compromise in single player as you both have a choice.
I would appreciate the game never giving me the choice to do that in single player mode.
It's like with Kid Icarus and Zelda 2 on Wii U virtual console. I thought I would FINALLY beat both of those games LEGIT! At first I thought I'd just use the saving ability in between levels if I have to stop playing. Then it was just saving this one time here. Then it was just once more there. And by the end I was save scumming like hell, and especially the further I was the lower the barrier to save and load was.
Sure, using whatever choices there are is on me, but I can't help but feel that me and a lot of other players would get far more interesting and ultimately satisfying playthroughs that actually go hand-in-hand with the designed integrity of the games if that choice wasn't given to us in the first place. I would even go as far and say that Nintendo has ruined part of the magic of their original games by offering the chance to save in the Virtual Console versions. Sure it's convenient that we have the ability to continue to play if we have to go somewhere, but it has come with the cost of giving everyone the possibility to save scum their way through the games instead of playing them the way they were designed to play.
Old school JRPGs were pretty hard, at least Phantasy Star 1 & 2, especially the 1st one, you won't get away with only grinding, you need to manage your inventory pretty well in some portions of the game to get through.That gut-exhale of "finally" is entertaining to me as a gamer. I'm sure feathers would be ruffled if I suggested that New RPG #3,715 cut out all the nonsensical teenage-drama cutscenes.
I think player skill -- whether that's mental knowledge or reflexes or both -- should be rewarded. I'm not against RPGs that provide the player the ability to grind. It's a feature of the genre.Old school JRPGs were pretty hard, at least Phantasy Star 1 & 2, especially the 1st one, you won't get away with only grinding, you need to manage your inventory pretty well in some portions of the game to get through.
And there wasn't that much high school level drama back in the days.
It's interesting to me the most vocal critics of this topic are souls type fans. You even go as far as to say if they made a game with an easy mode you wouldn't buy it. I don't understand that logic at all. After all, it would be the creator's intent and vison if they did. Beating a souls game isn't getting you laid.Not every game should be for everybody so the answer is a NO.
I'm a Souls-Borne-Kiro fan, if FROMsoft releases one of those with Easy mode I'm not buying it or at least i'm not doing it on 1st day (as I always do with those games).
If those games are too hard for some people, too bad. There are millions of easy games in the market. Football and Driving games are too hard for me and I don't intend to change them to please me.
It's interesting to me the most vocal critics of this topic are souls type fans. You even go as far as to say if they made a game with an easy mode you wouldn't buy it. I don't understand that logic at all. After all, it would be the creator's intent and vison if they did.
Beating a souls game isn't getting you laid.
No, games should be made however the dev wants. If that includes an easy mode, no problem. But that's a developer decision
The thing with Sekiro, you have so many tools to make fights easier for yourself.sekiro should have co-op (or in lack of co-op, an easy mode)
I think it'd be fascinating to get a cross-poll asking -- if deciding between the two -- whether the individual wants a good story/lore/atmosphere from their game or a stimulating challenge?
I imagine those who want "games to be for everyone" are thinking of stories, of characters, of settings, of songs that had a great impact on themselves as they played through the game.
But what about people who want a stimulating challenge? The satisfaction of finally beating Seven Ashina Spears can never be conveyed by a "Top 100 RPG soundtracks" video or a "Saddest plot twists" clickbait article. The satisfaction of finally chaining Stage 4 in Daioujou can never be conveyed by watching a streamer or a Let's Play online.
That gut-exhale of "finally" is entertaining to me as a gamer. I'm sure feathers would be ruffled if I suggested that New RPG #3,715 cut out all the nonsensical teenage-drama cutscenes.
And that is setting aside the fact that 99.999% of all games can be learned and cheesed with a bit of persistence.
What, you don't like learning? Not the game's fault.
I think that instead of experiencing the game you mean beating the game.
I think one can experience the game without beating the game.
The experience for some will be not being able to get far in a game. The experience for some will be to get halfway through the game. The experience for some will be getting to the last boss of the game. The experience to some will be getting to see the victorious ending of the game.
I'm firmly of the opinion that it should.
Most games difficulty don't give me trouble (apart from Sekiro) but I'm thinking about other users more. I believe if someone buys a game no matter the skill level they should be able to see everything just like any other piece of entertainment.
I honestly dont believe it takes away from my experience in any way if a user plays in say "Adventure mode" where enemy's hardly fight back at all.. or its impossible to die etc. One persons easy mode is another persons hard mode as well, so I don't really buy the "get good or give up philosophy", when everyone has payed the same price to be entertained.
Also I'd argue gate keeping content based on skill checks only works to the detriment of less skilled players. Higher skilled players have no games they cant access. If they want to play "Barbie goes to the Mall"... they can for example.
I'm all for games telling me this is the recommended difficulty by the developers (where the challenge had been fine tuned etc) but ultimately games should be about fun for all. I want to see a renewed focus on accessibility next gen.