MetaCircular
Member
The idea that games should be enjoyable to everyone seems like a trumped-up strawman to me.
What people in this thread are saying is that they like most of the aesthetic and mechanical choices in Dark Souls, but would prefer if there was, say, a checkpoint right before boss fights to limit repetition (e.g. a screen that asks if you'd like to try the boss again or go back to a bonfire).
Being more inclined to play a future Souls game (or perhaps an aesthetically and mechanically similar game with a different name, so the Souls monicker stays "pure") if it had some optional assist like that doesn't seem at all close to saying every game should be for everyone. It also doesn't read like a demand, or entitlement. It's simply a reasonable statement of preferences, and I don't see why it merits so much derision.
What people in this thread are saying is that they like most of the aesthetic and mechanical choices in Dark Souls, but would prefer if there was, say, a checkpoint right before boss fights to limit repetition (e.g. a screen that asks if you'd like to try the boss again or go back to a bonfire).
Being more inclined to play a future Souls game (or perhaps an aesthetically and mechanically similar game with a different name, so the Souls monicker stays "pure") if it had some optional assist like that doesn't seem at all close to saying every game should be for everyone. It also doesn't read like a demand, or entitlement. It's simply a reasonable statement of preferences, and I don't see why it merits so much derision.