Support NeoGAF

[Hostile_18]

A little research or even simple google or youtube will tell you what type of game this is. Not every game is made to appeal to everybody and its ultimately its developers choice how they want to designs their games, and its people choice if the game is for them or not.

I'm all for having an intended experience difficulty. Just options either side of that that may be suboptimal but everyone can enjoy to some extent no matter skill level. No wasted money, more sales for the dev. It wouldn't take away from anyone else.

 

[YeulEmeralda]

Been playing games for over 20 years but I don't even remotely give a shit. Never once felt a sense of accomplishment or achievement.

Game is too hard or tedious? Cheatengine, a trainer or an imported (hacked) save game will deal will do.
There are many tools available to make this a non issue.

 

[polybius80]

the names are wrong they should be "expert player" "new player" and "game journalist"

 

[Arun1910]

Disagree. Good devs can scale the experience accordingly. Not everyone wants to sweat.

 

[Danjin44]

I'm all for having an intended experience difficulty. Just options either side of that that may be suboptimal but everyone can enjoy to some extent no matter skill level. No wasted money, more sales for the dev. It wouldn't take away from anyone else.

I also want to play REVII and upcoming VIII in third person, but accepted the fact thats not what developers wanted to do and I just play something else.


Respect developers choice and you are free to like or not like what they made.....its that simple.

 

[recursive]

Op your wrong.

Without difficulty levels and assists my daughter who is 7 would be unable to play games with me.

While I like a challenge it's no harm having difficulty choices.

Just because there is an easy doesnt mean you need to play it.


However I hate it when harder difficulty levels are locked until you complete the game.

I played many Atari and NES games when I was 7 without difficulty options. I turned out ok.

 

[Hostile_18]

I also want to play REVII and upcoming VIII in third person, but accepted the fact thats not what developers wanted to do and I just play something else.


Respect developers choice and you are free to like or not like what they made.....its that simple.

No one is talking about changing the camera angle (which would require loads of work and content creation).

Were talking about modifying a few values. The fact you have to stretch to that argument to prove your point is telling of the validity of it. Yes if you want essentially a different game then buy a different one, but if you have a desire to play based on what you've seen why shouldn't you get to enjoy it like everyone else.

But as for what your saying yes as a second best option (to allowing everyone to play it) is if the marketing is fully in sync with the product then at least people know what there getting into. Dark Souls "Prepare to die" did this well, Sekiro did this poorly.

 

[Danjin44]

No one is talking about changing the camera angle (which would require loads of work and content creation).

Were talking about modifying a few values. The fact you have to stretch to that argument to prove your point is telling of the validity of it.

But as for what your saying yes as a second best option (to allowing everyone to play it) is if the marketing is fully in sync with the product then at least people know what there getting into. Dark Souls "Prepare to die" did this well, Sekiro did this poorly.

These games combat system the encounter are tired to that difficulty and FROM don't like to put intentionally half-ass difficulty just for sake of it

I'm sorry you might not like to hear this but not all games meant appeal to everybody....thats life. FROM become well known exactly because they don't follow "industry standards" what can't you guys respect that?

 

[ReBurn]

I mean, if developers don't want my money they're free to do something like this. There's a reason why I don't buy Souls games. Since they're not smart enough to implement AI that can predict how I want to play it's probably better that they just let me choose the difficulty I want.

 

[Airola]

Can you name some of these design choices.

I am not familiar with RE6.

With RE6 it was changing the gameplay to full-blown action, with a lot of focus in bombastic cutscenes too.

Sometimes they make a game to fit both the pc/console and the mobile audience and that creates all kinds of mess.
Sometimes it's about adding stealth to a game that doesn't get better because of it.
Sometimes it's about adding crafting to a game that didn't really need it.

With multiple difficulty options some games would be more lovable if the game presents no way for anyone ever to click and change the threat lower. With the difficulty options that type of presentation stops existing. Just as some games don't need at any point to be extremely hard for anyone, some games don't need at any point to be extremely easy for anyone. For example while it's good that some flight simulators might have the possibility to start the game straight from flying the plane, it's better that some flight simulators don't allow you fly the plane unless you can make it fly by the rules set in the game. I think some racing games have also suffered from ditching the focus on having a realistic simulation to have more arcade style design and options in order to aim for a bigger audience. They might get more sales but the end result is that the original fans who loved the first experience are gone while more new players who didn't like the initial experience have appeared, and the game has become more like every other game out there instead of being a more unique thing.

 

[Stuart360]

Bit surprised by the poll results. So most of you would rather have zero choice?.

 

[DavidGzz]

Nintendo games were harder and in turn better back in the day. Contra, TMNT, Punchout, etc. They were standouts and memorable because they were tough. I know we'll never all agree but those are my thoughts.

 

[Hostile_18]

These games combat system the encounter are tired to that difficulty and FROM don't like to put intentionally half-ass difficulty just for sake of it

I'm sorry you might not like to hear this but not all games meant appeal to everybody....thats life. FROM become well known exactly because they don't follow "industry standards" what can't you guys respect that?

I've played and beaten all the souls games but having an easy mode so that everyone who wants to can play affects me 0% and supports a franchise I love.

Like I said maybe it's a less optimal way to play for those less skilled gamers but at least they can. Maybe souls wouldn't disappear on death on an easy setting. Would that effect you on the normal difficulty in any way shape or form? Even if it did I feel you should ask yourself why and if that's a good enough reason to keep someone else from enjoying what your enjoying.

Sorry if this comes across harsh. Although it's not something I'd ever use it is something I feel passionately about. With gamers getting older and older I don't want people feeling left behind from something they previously loved or like wise can't get into something they other wise would love.

 

[Danjin44]

Buit surprised by the poll results. So most of you would rather have zero choice?.

No I want developers have freedom to make the games however they want. Its their game and its their choice if they want difficulty option in their game or not.

Like I said maybe it's a less optimal way to play for those less skilled gamers but at least they can. Maybe souls wouldn't disappear on death on an easy setting. Would that effect you on the normal difficulty in any way shape or form? Even if it did I feel you should ask yourself why and if that's a good enough reason to keep someone else from enjoying what your enjoying.

And will say this again it all up to FROM themselves how they want to design their games. Games are at their best when developers are free to make what they wan to make.

There always risk of not appealing to everybody but thats how we unforgettable games.

 

[Hostile_18]

No I want developers have freedom to make the games however they want. Its their game and its their choice if they want difficulty option in their game or not.


And will say this again it all up to FROM themselves how they want to design their games. Games are at their best when developers are free to make what they wan to make.

There always risk of not appealing to everybody but how we unforgettable games.

But how would the addition of said easy mode negatively affect your unforgettable game?

It wasnt until recently games had more accessibility options, did the developers not want this before? It's not always as easy as saying it's what the developers do or don't want. An extensive list of variables decide whether a feature is in a game or not. Ultimately my take away is a game is sold to everyone so everyone should be able to experience it (even if it's in a lesser form for that user). That's the beauty of games unlike movies they can be tailored to the individual playing it. As our medium grows so to should our responsibility to all the people buying our products.

Perhaps this is a bit too warm and fuzzy for this forum BUT it's just the nice, inclusive thing to do ultimately.

 

[OutRun88]

With RE6 it was changing the gameplay to full-blown action, with a lot of focus in bombastic cutscenes too.

Sometimes they make a game to fit both the pc/console and the mobile audience and that creates all kinds of mess.
Sometimes it's about adding stealth to a game that doesn't get better because of it.
Sometimes it's about adding crafting to a game that didn't really need it.

With multiple difficulty options some games would be more lovable if the game presents no way for anyone ever to click and change the threat lower. With the difficulty options that type of presentation stops existing. Just as some games don't need at any point to be extremely hard for anyone, some games don't need at any point to be extremely easy for anyone. For example while it's good that some flight simulators might have the possibility to start the game straight from flying the plane, it's better that some flight simulators don't allow you fly the plane unless you can make it fly by the rules set in the game. I think some racing games have also suffered from ditching the focus on having a realistic simulation to have more arcade style design and options in order to aim for a bigger audience. They might get more sales but the end result is that the original fans who loved the first experience are gone while more new players who didn't like the initial experience have appeared, and the game has become more like every other game out there instead of being a more unique thing.

Ah I see what you mean. There is definitely a trend of game design in which decisions are made simply to be more inclusive

I think it's important not to conflate that with the concept of a difficulty setting though.

A good analogy I can think of is Ski resorts and trail ratings. Having options for people of all skill levels allows them to all enjoy the resort.

Then you factor in that each resort themselves have their own baseline difficulty. This would be analogous to some games simply just being more difficult by design.

 

[CitizenX]

Well, i am always up for one thing player choice. let the player choose how they want to play. 2 examples of games that are moving it in the right direction

1 LoU Part 2- The menu options for how you want to play should be the standard for basically every game going forward.

2 the Forest- The forest has options in the menu to again let the player decide how difficult the game can be, allow mods, use cheats, etc. It even has an option to play the entire story campaign WITHOUT any enemies. That should be an option for a lot of genres.

So for easy/medium/ hard is really not the only factor anymore.

 

[Danjin44]

It's not always as easy as saying it's what the developers do or don't want.

So far FROM didn't add any difficulty option to their games including Sekiro, it very clear thats how they want to design their games. Some of you refuse accept the fact that not all games meant appeal to everybody. AGAIN, FROM got their fame exactly because they don't fallow "industry standard".

There are people who have bad internet connection but still want to play FF14, why cant they include completely offline mode for those players?


You keep talking about no one should be left behind but I feel like I'm getting left behind with RE series because they decided to go first person with main games and I keep hearing how good the story is in FF14 but I'm not in to online play......so where are my options?

 

[Airola]

But how would the addition of said easy mode negatively affect your unforgettable game?

It wasnt until recently games had more accessibility options, did the developers not want this before? It's not always as easy as saying it's what the developers do or don't want. An extensive list of variables decide whether a feature is in a game or not. Ultimately my take away is a game is sold to everyone so everyone should be able to experience it (even if it's in a lesser form for that user). That's the beauty of games unlike movies they can be tailored to the individual playing it. As our medium grows so to should our responsibility to all the people buying our products.

Perhaps this is a bit too warm and fuzzy for this forum BUT it's just the nice, inclusive thing to do ultimately.

Some games are about not giving any player an option to change the difficulty be easier. Part of the game experience is to die and then end up facing the menu and options screens with no possibility to change things easier and then make the choice to either try again or accept defeat. That's the presentation of those games. It makes playing the game feel certain way.
That presentation either exists or it doesn't exist. For a few games it exists.

That's the experience.

I guess what you mean by experiencing a game is that the experience spans through the whole game from beginning to end.
For me, the game experience always includes the possibility of not being able to see the game to the end. Some experiences end up in a "game over" forever, and I think that's a good thing.

Is it unfair that people who don't accept the "game over ending" pay for the game and let them be not able to see the end? Not in my opinion, but I get that some would think it is.
I think people should just get a refund or trade the game to something else, but I understand some might not want that either.
So what should be done to resolve the problem?
Maybe games should have some sort of rating that tells about the game's difficulty, like how it is with cast iron puzzles and box puzzles etc. The boxes of them usually have a 1-5 difficulty rating on them. Maybe something like that could be shown in both video game boxes and their online pages too. But that wouldn't be good for games that have difficulties from very easy to very hard. Should the rating show what the average difficulty is or should they show what the easiest difficulty is? And how the difficulty rating should be chosen? Should the devs do it, should some committee do it, should the testers do it?

Personally I wouldn't really want that either as I'd like the game itself to show me how hard it is. And then I either fail in it or I don't. But if I should suggest a compromise it would be something like having a difficulty rating info in the game's box and online store info.

 

[Lethal01]

Devs get too good at their games. They are not good judges of optimum difficulty.

I understand the sentiment. They should fine tune diffficulty to perfection.

But a deep yet accessible combat system cannot be designed in this way.

Games should be built around bringing the player up to the level of the devs using challenges that force them to learn.
Hardest difficulty options should be there from the start along with modifiers to make it harder if you want.

 

[CitizenX]

Games should be built around bringing the player up to the level of the devs using challenges that force them to learn.
Hardest difficulty options should be there from the start along with modifiers to make it harder if you want.

The biggest problem is a large majority of devs keep adding numerous modifers that the games are basically broken. I cant tell you how many games i have played where there are features I never even use because they are never needed or didnt do anything.

 

[JimmyRustler]

One more thing RE4 did right. No difficulty slider at the first run ensuring the game is played as intended and the finishing it unlocks a harder difficulty. This is how it should always be.

 

[Lethal01]

The biggest problem is a large majority of devs keep adding numerous modifers that the games are basically broken. I cant tell you how many games i have played where there are features I never even use because they are never needed or didnt do anything.

Modifiers should be for when you are done, some basic little extras like making enemies do more damage not something to build the game around.

 

[zcaa0g]

I've heard of people not buying a game because it's going to be too hard i.e. too much trial and error that wastes more time than they want to spend, but I have never heard of a person not buying a game because it's going to be too easy.

 

[Lethal01]

One more thing RE4 did right. No difficulty slider at the first run ensuring the game is played as intended and the finishing it unlocks a harder difficulty. This is how it should always be.

Nah, I hate games that force me to play on normal before I get a challenge, it's the absolute worst.

I've heard of people not buying a game because it's going to be too hard i.e. too much trial and error that wastes more time than they want to spend, but I have never heard of a person not buying a game because it's going to be too easy.

Far less people would by games if you could pretty much beat them with your eyes closed.

 

[Allnamestakenlol]

Not every game has to cater to everyone. Edit: But, depends on the game, and the developer and their intent. Accessibility options are different, of course.

 

[Airola]

I've heard of people not buying a game because it's going to be too hard i.e. too much trial and error that wastes more time than they want to spend, but I have never heard of a person not buying a game because it's going to be too easy.

I haven't bought some point'n click adventures after I've read there's no challenge and it's more about just going through the story.

 

[carsar]

I like the choice, but I don't like how devs interpret "difficulty" in their games: "More hp, more enemies, more challenges, faster timings" and other bullshit i always hate. I want more extensive usage of difficulty. One gamer want to play your game with no ui mess on screen, so make your game completely playble without hud. Another gamer want more info, so give him all info about mechanics he want to know. I want to fight against smart enemies and encounter them rarely, so give me that choice. Another gamer want to play rembo style, so give him the choice.
Someone can say "devs shouldn't care about that, they are focused on their gameplay vision" and I can parry that "modern games are far more then just gameplay. They are not just games anymore. It has visual, art, setting, story, narrative, lore and more". So, gamer can love 90% of the "game"m but 10%(gameplay) could ruin the whole impression. And if we could to chice between playing styles(more immersive, more challenging, more infirmative, more realistic e t.c.) it would be better for all of us.

 

[Sentenza]

I mean, if developers don't want my money they're free to do something like this. There's a reason why I don't buy Souls games.

Sure, it's because you're a tosser.

 

[Edgelord79]

 

[zcaa0g]

I haven't bought some point'n click adventures after I've read there's no challenge and it's more about just going through the story.

And that would make sense for that type of genre because the purpose of those is to challenge the mind, not your patience and reflexes. For genres that fall into the latter, difficulty settings for those can be simply handled via levels of damage applied and damage received among other things.

 

[AetherMage]

Games should have whatever modes or lack of modes their developers decide to put in.

 

[Explosive Zombie]

Crushing or bust. People saying developers should decide everything are ignoring the reality of publishers forcing easy modes, tacked on MP, mtx, etc. on them. I do like games to be more free form, bigger open worlds, levelling systems, and then just have areas that are higher level but not IMPOSSIBLE to do under-leveled, if you want a challenge head right there, if you want things easier just go to the easy areas and level up.

 

[T8SC]

Urgh this just reminds me of that Demon's Souls topic. Games have had difficulty levels for years.

Wanna git gud? Go play Shadow Of The Beast 2 on the Amiga & report back. (Or TMNT on a NES without an emulator).