Support NeoGAF

[sibarraz]

I can't believe that cuphead of all games lead us to this discussion..

I'm all for including difficulties on games since I love that games came with lots of options that could broaden the entry of players.

But, at the same time, I believe that developers shouldn't be forced to include them if they don't want to it, making different levels is a lot of extra job if they don't want to go the lazy way of just change the stats of characters that lead us to either a peacewalk or a grindfest.

Also, lots of people are sounding very entitled demanding that games should be for everyone as an universal right, if the game is too hard, you either get good on it or punish the developer by not buying it, there is a plethora of games out there

 

[Hi-Scores_01]

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.

I agree with all of this, The souls games implementation of challenge to me is as much an artistic decision as it is anything else. The game doesn't need cheap jump scares because the tension is built into the games mechanics where the threat of death is constant and the consequences to death/failure are real. The gloomy atmosphere, sparse dialog and music, lack of context/story, methodical combat and difficulty all go hand in hand in creating the experience. An easy mode would betray every other part of it's design.

 

[jahasaja]

... It's not really a neutral look either, it's just passively "anti-difficulty" ...

I would argue that the articles point is not anti - difficulty. Instead the point is rather that creators should be able to do whatever games they want to make. He even goes so far as to criticize low skilled game reviewers which is quite impressive of a game journalist to do in todays climate.

 

[jstripes]

I can't believe that cuphead of all games lead us to this discussion..

I'm all for including difficulties on games since I love that games came with lots of options that could broaden the entry of players.

But, at the same time, I believe that developers shouldn't be forced to include them if they don't want to it, making different levels is a lot of extra job if they don't want to go the lazy way of just change the stats of characters that lead us to either a peacewalk or a grindfest.

Also, lots of people are sounding very entitled demanding that games should be for everyone as an universal right, if the game is too hard, you either get good on it or punish the developer by not buying it, there is a plethora of games out there

Nobody's forcing developers to do shit. People are asking developers to include an easy mode. What's going on is a cultural backlash of people aghast at such a request even being made, like it's an attack on them personally. (Like fucking everything these days.)

 

[Hi-Scores_01]

Low skilled reviewers is a non issue as far as I'm concerned, even if they are not super skilled at the game they know enough about games to realize when something special comes along regardless if they die 1000x playing it . Demon's Souls was a revolutionary game when it released in 09' and its metacritic score sits near 90%..

 

[Boss Doggie]

Nobody's forcing developers to do shit. People are asking developers to include an easy mode. What's going on is a cultural backlash of people aghast at such a request even being made, like it's an attack on them personally. (Like fucking everything these days.)

I mean it's not like when developers don't include easy mode, you get people complaining. That's not just "asking".

 

[sibarraz]

Nobody's forcing developers to do shit. People are asking developers to include an easy mode. What's going on is a cultural backlash of people aghast at such a request even being made, like it's an attack on them personally. (Like fucking everything these days.)

Are you sure that you are not the one who felt attacked with my comment?

 

[More_Badass]

Nobody's forcing developers to do shit. People are asking developers to include an easy mode. What's going on is a cultural backlash of people aghast at such a request even being made, like it's an attack on them personally. (Like fucking everything these days.)

Isn’t that kind of reductive? People ask because they feel like if they can’t progress as they feel they should, then the game is at fault rather than perhaps it’s not a game for them, much like books, movies, and every other medium has works that just don’t click with people.

Difficulty levels have a place in games, but not all games are suited for difficulty levels. I posted this in a similar thread

...I feel like people sometimes talk too narrowly about difficulty. I think there are fundamentally different types of difficulty, not in terms of easy/normal/hard/etc but implementation and integration. There's a fundamental difference between, for example, the nature of difficulty in Dark Souls and playing Uncharted on Crushing.

I'd argue that in the former, as well as other genres/games like precision platfomers (ie Super Meat Boy), certain puzzlers (ie Stephen's Sausage Roll, Snakebird, etc), and so on, that the challenge is as essential and as much a part of the games as being turn-based is for XCOM. This is not a mere adjustments of values like the concept of difficulty levels in games like Uncharted, Halo, and others where a change of difficulty is an adjustment in the rates of health, damage, etc. plastered over the existing design of the games. In these games, the challenge is as inherent to the game design as the aesthetic or control scheme. The challenge is what influences the controls, decides the pacing, establishes atmosphere, dictates level design, enemy placement, weapon types and attacks, and every other aspect of the game. Much like how being turn-based informs everything about XCOM's enemies, skills, moment-to-moment gameplay, arena design, and more

Consider a game like Super Meat Boy. Would it be the same game if there were mid level checkpoints, or rewinding, or slow motion, or being able to take multiple hits, or if the amount of hazards onscreen were reduced? The stage structures, tutorializing, control schemes, presentation, and so on are tied to the challenge at a deep design level.

Now compare this to the nature of difficulty levels in say Uncharted. At least in 3 and 4, you're expected to be mobile, climb and leap, sneak if you can, run from cover to cover, use Drake's agility as an advantage over his enemies. But in Crushing, staying behind cover, shooting, waiting for health to recover is far from more effective than acrobatics and melee and run n gun. Yet that approach seems antithetical to the approach that the core mechanics and level design expects of you. Thus the difficulty is not an essential element of the game where the challenge is deeply rooted in the design and structure, but a variable element where easier and higher difficulties alter the nature of play from the expected.

So rather than think of difficulty and challenge through a broad singular lens of "but how do I want to play", think of it in the context of the individual game, its design, the intent and integration of challenge in the game.

 

[shoryukens]

Not all games should have difficulty options, but all games should have customizable input methods to accommodate for people with disabilities.

It may sound elitist but it's simply true: the effect and impact of Dark Souls would be weakened if there was a difficulty option.

 

[Slayven]

Devs can make a game easy or as difffculty as they want. But where it becomes toxic as it often does is when gamer get involved. "Git Gud" or "Play a single player game" is all stuff that is terrible for the culture and the industsy.

 

[thumb]

Isn’t that kind of reductive? People ask because they feel like if they can’t progress as they feel they should, then the game is at fault rather than perhaps it’s not a game for them, much like books, movies, and every other medium has works that just don’t click with people.

Difficulty levels have a place in games, but not all games are suited for difficulty levels. I posted this in a similar thread

The argument is that developers should strongly consider difficulty settings in one form or another, as this allows more people to enjoy the art on their own terms and allows greater accessibility to people with cognitive disabilities. This will not always be as simple as "Easy, Medium, Hard" because the logical space of game design is so large. But some of your examples are not hard to come up with straightforward difficulty levels.

For platformers, consider a Konami-code mode with more lives, floatier physics (if it makes sense), or even a self-playing mode, as used occasionally in Mario.

But there will still be games where difficulty levels, even of the sort I describe above, are simply infeasible. That's fine. I'm arguing that we can do better in terms of game accessibility, not that all games should be maximally accessible no matter what.

 

[Plum]

First of all, I consider your last line a kind of personal attack, and I have no tolerance for that. You don't even know how I play games, and you know nothing of my motivations. If you go for a personal insult again, I'll just stop responding. I'm not saying this because I think you care, this is just an FYI.

I think games should strive for a broader audience (not "everyone"), and I think difficulty modes do assist with individuals who have lesser hand-eye coordination due to disabilities. And experts on game accessibility agree with me. The AbleGamers foundation lists difficulty levels as one of the best practices for helping people with cognitive impairments. Even if there are individuals who are arguing only for their own interests, and not those of the disabled, those interests happen to overlap in this case. Just as allowing system-level controller configuration on consoles helped both disabled and non-disabled gamers.

Sorry if it seemed like a personal insult but, considering that neither of your posts beforehand had any reference to disability outside of that subtitle comparison, can you not see how I might have come to that conclusion?

As for the second paragraph; I'd agree, games should strive for a broader audience, but that doesn't mean every game has to, and that's especially true for games such as Dark Souls and Cuphead.

Good difficulty options aren't like subtitles or rebindable keys, they require a fundamental change to the game's design that must be accounted for throughout the entire play-through. Even then, those two games still require a high level of dexterity; it's telling that the examples used in your link are either turn based, a shooter with very limited movement options, or a stealth title. To make Dark Souls easy for someone whose cognitive disability makes it so that they simply can't react in time FROM would have to go back and change animations, change how rolls work, etc, and the same goes for Cuphead. Their challenge is so inherently baked in that, in terms of accessibility for the handicapped, a simple "more healing and reduced damage" easy mode might not even help all that much. That and both games do have easy modes; Cuphead has 'Simple' which lets you play everything but the final boss, and Dark Souls has summons, bonfire kindling, and magic. People seem to ignore the latter's difficulty options because they're not presented as a literal "Easy, Medium, Hard" menu at the beginning.

If FROM and MDHR wants to make their next game's more accessible through optional means then I wish them well, I'm not idiotic enough to complain about that kind of thing; but right now, I see the arguments for why these specific games to have an easy mode to be disingenuous at best and patronising towards the handicapped at worst . For subtitles and rebindable keys the desire for accessibility comes first and the desire for convenience/personal preference comes second; with difficulty the desire for accessibility seems to always come in at a far, far, second place. Whilst you might not be doing it, this argument has almost entirely been co-opted into something that doesn't help with accessibility whatsoever.

 

[gabbo]

Low skilled reviewers is a non issue as far as I'm concerned, even if they are not super skilled at the game they know enough about games to realize when something special comes along regardless if they die 1000x playing it . Demon's Souls was a revolutionary game when it released in 09' and its metacritic score sits near 90%..

I feel there is a place for the 'everyman' review of games. Every game is someones first of a particular genre, and being able to get that kind of review can help ease those players in. That being said, the audience for game reviews I feel should be savvy enough to know the kind of review they need or want in any other circumstance than that and shouldnt antogonize an outlet or writer because they didnt get it.

As for difficuly modes, if a game has it, great. If it wasn't designed around that style of play, I'd rather it not be shoehorned in. Approach a game on its terms, not the other way round.

Not every game needs to be accessible (see Ice-Pick Lodge's entire catalogue) to every type of player to be good or fun. I dont play the Dark Soul style games because thats not the kind of gameplay experience I want, but I also dont think those games should be changed to try and give me that experience either.

 

[thumb]

Sorry if it seemed like a personal insult but, considering that neither of your posts beforehand had any reference to disability outside of that subtitle comparison, can you not see how I might have come to that conclusion?

As for the second paragraph; I'd agree, games should strive for a broader audience, but that doesn't mean every game has to, and that's especially true for games such as Dark Souls and Cuphead.

Good difficulty options aren't like subtitles or rebindable keys, they require a fundamental change to the game's design that must be accounted for throughout the entire play-through. Even then, those two games still require a high level of dexterity; it's telling that the examples used in your link are either turn based, a shooter with very limited movement options, or a stealth title. To make Dark Souls easy for someone whose cognitive disability makes it so that they simply can't react in time FROM would have to go back and change animations, change how rolls work, etc, and the same goes for Cuphead. Their challenge is so inherently baked in that, in terms of accessibility for the handicapped, a simple "more healing and reduced damage" easy mode might not even help all that much. That and both games do have easy modes; Cuphead has 'Simple' which lets you play everything but the final boss, and Dark Souls has summons, bonfire kindling, and magic. People seem to ignore the latter's difficulty options because they're not presented as a literal "Easy, Medium, Hard" menu at the beginning.

If FROM and MDHR wants to make their next game's more accessible through optional means then I wish them well, I'm not idiotic enough to complain about that kind of thing; but right now, I see the arguments for why these specific games to have an easy mode to be disingenuous at best and patronising towards the handicapped at worst . For subtitles and rebindable keys the desire for accessibility comes first and the desire for convenience/personal preference comes second; with difficulty the desire for accessibility seems to always come in at a far, far, second place. Whilst you might not be doing it, this argument has almost entirely been co-opted into something that doesn't help with accessibility whatsoever.

Yes, I don't think every game has to be more accessible. I don't think any game has to be more accessible. This entire discussion has been about persuasive arguments, not about establishing a ministry of culture that can demand an Easy mode of every developer.

Anyhow, it seems to me that you are interpreting most of this discussion through the lens of the souls games, which are just a handful of titles among thousands. And if you think they already have easy modes (e.g., summoning, magic) then you apparently have no problem with a Dark Souls easy mode, you just want to see it organic in the design. Which is fine by me. Heck, add a special covenant that slows boss animations by 30%, and quadruples your health and stamina. I guarantee it would help those with slow reaction times due to cognitive disabilities. And before you critique this specific idea, let me say it's just spit-balling. With enough time, more careful adjustments could be made available in-game to disabled players.

Finally, I can understand from a human perspective why people being disingenuous about their intent would be frustrating, but does it actually matter? It seems to me like you are saying, "What if people are trying to help the disabled out of their own selfishness?" to which I would say, "So what if they are? Hopefully we can help them regardless."

 

[jstripes]

Are you sure that you are not the one who felt attacked with my comment?

Not one bit.

Isn’t that kind of reductive? People ask because they feel like if they can’t progress as they feel they should, then the game is at fault rather than perhaps it’s not a game for them, much like books, movies, and every other medium has works that just don’t click with people.

Difficulty levels have a place in games, but not all games are suited for difficulty levels. I posted this in a similar thread

If someone needs subtitles is that video content not for them?

 

[More_Badass]

If someone needs subtitles is that video content not for them?

How are subtitles similar to difficulty levels? Subtitles don’t change the movie nor does it change if the movie’s content itself is for that person. Like if a person doesn’t like bleak, gory, obtuse movies, they’re not going to like Kill List even though it has subtitles so they can understand the dialogue

Subtitles, rebinding keys, color-blind modes, etc are obviously perfectly needed and should be in games.

 

[Valahart]

I'm a big fan of letting the creators develop their game following their vision and their vision only. Just deliver whatever the experience they feel like it's true to their intent.

Be it a hard game, be it an easy game, be it a walking simulator, be it a nonsensical puzzle,be it a party luck based game, be it a technical fighting game.

 

[cm osi]

it's mind blowing to me that in this era of hand-holding games people complain everytime a hard game get released (be it a souls game or cuphead)

i can pretty much list only those 2 games

 

[jstripes]

How are subtitles similar to difficulty levels? Subtitles don’t change the movie nor does it change if the movie itself is for that person. Like if a person doesn’t like bleak, gory, obtuse movies, they’re not going to like Kill List even though it has subtitles so they can understand the dialogue

Well, you could "git gud" and learn the language. If you're not willing to go to the effort, it's obviously not for you.

 

[KLoWn]

If someone needs subtitles is that video content not for them?

What a dumb comparison.

 

[Santar]

it's mind blowing to me that in this era of hand-holding games people complain everytime a hard game get released (be it a souls game or cuphead)

You basically answered your own question.
It's because they've gotten so used to the many hand holdy games of today.
When a game comes along that require the player to actually learn it they often get frustrated

 

[cm osi]

You basically answered your own question.
It's because they've gotten so used to the many hand holdy games of today.
When a game comes along that require the player to actually learn it they often get frustrated.

yes, the point is... i can't nameother games aside souls and cuphead. i think i really need time to find another one.



maybe rabi-ribi

 

[The ๖ۜBronx]

Well, you could "git gud" and learn the language. If you're not willing to go to the effort, it's obviously not for you.

What a ridiculous argument. It would be more akin to expecting Tarantino to reorder his films into chronological scenes because some found it difficult to follow, or expecting an author to only use basic English because others have found it difficult to read.

 

[More_Badass]

Well, you could "git gud" and learn the language. If you're not willing to go to the effort, it's obviously not for you.

The content, pacing, etc of a movie isn’t changed whether you have subtitles or not. You can even enjoy some movies even if you don’t understand the language and watch without subtitles.

Why are we equating accessibility features like subtitles and color-blind options with difficulty levels? You can include the former without altering the game. Case in point, the nice story about Legend of Grimrock from a few years ago

 

[cm osi]

What a ridiculous argument. It would be more akin to expecting Tarantino to reorder his films into chronological scenes because some found it difficult to follow, or expecting an author to only use basic English because others have found it difficult to read.

what about a wall of text at the end of every movie for the people who didn't get the ending

 

[Bill R Boggess]

Apparently chess players agree with that logic, because there are an impressive number of chess variations, some of which are designed to be easier, such as Endgame Chess, which involves only kings and pawns.

That's an interesting counterpoint but not exactly the same thing.

What you're citing here is essentially a variation of an existing game which becomes a game of its own in the same way a genre will inspire different types of games within that subcategory.

The actual game of Chess itself has not been altered or streamlined to make way for casual players uninterested in learning the deeper nuances of the game but instead they are given an alternative game.

Nobody is slapping an "Easy Mode" on real Chess.

 

[BaasRed]

Nobody is slapping an "Easy Mode" on real Chess.

How would one implement easy mode in a 1v1 game?

 

[Santar]

yes, the point is... i can't nameother games aside souls and cuphead. i think i really need time to find another one.



maybe rabi-ribi

Enter the Gungeon is another recent hardish game.
A lot of people found the game very difficult and the devs are making a new update that makes the game a lot easier.
Luckily they're making all the the changes optional for players who enjoyed the original difficulty.
If they didn't I'd be very upset at this change as it's one of my favorite games of all time, but as it's seemingly entirely optional I have no problem with it.

It's pretty easy to see why Cuphead has brought this discussion up again.
It looks very cutsey and colorful, very appealing to a lot of people. When they sit down to play this new cartooney platformer and find it to be pretty challenging they get annoyed.

 

[BaasRed]

It's pretty easy to see why Cuphead has brought this discussion up again.
It looks very cutsey and colorful, very appealing to a lot of people. When they sit down to play this new cartooney platformer and find it to be pretty challenging they get annoyed.

The inherent problem with an easy mode in Cuphead would be the game length. It wouldn't last at all.

 

[KLoWn]

Best thing I've read all day. Really cool.

 

[nded]

yes, the point is... i can't nameother games aside souls and cuphead. i think i really need time to find another one.



maybe rabi-ribi

Basically every fighting game.

 

[Santar]

The inherent problem with an easy mode in Cuphead would be the game length. It wouldn't last at all.

Yeah I'm not saying they should add a easy mode, just my take on why it's started this discussion again. It's entirely up to the devs.
What I would have a problem with, is if a dev would make a game easier without retaining the original difficulty.
If you enjoyed the original game should the devs be able to change a game you've paid for so you no longer enjoy it? I don't think so.

 

[Bill R Boggess]

Well, there is, sorta. It's called checkers.

Also, you guys are acting like requests for easy mode are a new thing.

Checkers is not chess; they are entirely different games.

And people are welcome to request whatever they want but the debate is more about whether or not developers have an obligation to include such modes along with the cultural tension this debate has sparked.

I personally have nothing against Easy modes - I use them myself. But I also do not expect a developer to compromise their vision and the intended experience of a game merely because I'm looking for an easy time.

I basically gave up on Rain World because while I like the game, it's a severe kick in the sack and since the developer doesn't want to include an easier mode of play, I just won't bother finishing the game. I knew it was a hard game going into it and to be honest the difficulty took the enjoyment out of the experience but I respect their artistic vision even if it doesn't jive with my own sensibilities.

 

[Bill R Boggess]

How would one implement easy mode in a 1v1 game?

No idea.

The entire discussion broke off from an analogy I made about chess, which was admittedly throwaway.

Probably not the best analogy to make in retrospect.

 

[More_Badass]

I basically gave up on Rain World because while I like the game, it's a severe kick in the sack and since the developer doesn't want to include an easier mode of play, I just won't bother finishing the game. I knew it was a hard game going into it and to be honest the difficulty took the enjoyment out of the experience but I respect their artistic vision even if it doesn't jive with my own sensibilities.

Rain World devs are actually working on difficulty levels. They change the game though; Easy Mode makes some concessions with the Karma system to ease some of the challenge, while Hard Mode adds new creatures, lets you carry an extra spear, and lets you eat meat to handle the increased challenge

It’s been quite a challenge for them to figure how to lower the difficulty while keeping the core mechanics intact.

 

[Bill R Boggess]

Rain World devs are actually working on difficulty levels. They change the game though; Easy Mode makes some concessions with the Karma system to ease some of the challenge, while Hard Mode adds new creatures, lets you carry an extra spear, and lets you eat meat to handle the increased challenge

It’s been quite a challenge for them to figure how to lower the difficulty while keeping the core mechanics intact.

Which is cool and would most assuredly make me re-visit the game but I would never expect them to do so merely to assuage a sucky player like myself.

 

[Crossing Eden]

Has anyone ever attempted to mod a considerably well thought out easy mode into Dark Souls to see how it affects the game?

 

[AALLx]

Basically every fighting game.

All ArcSys games (BlazBlue, Guilty Gear, P4A) have a "stylish" mode that allows players to perform moves and combos by repeatedly pressing one button. Every single fighting game ever also has difficulty settings for the AI. So... have you rewarded them by buying any of their games?

 

[BaasRed]

Yeah I'm not saying they should add a easy mode, just my take on why it's started this discussion again.

I didn't mean it that way, sorry

 

[thumb]

Which is cool and would most assuredly make me re-visit the game but I would never expect them to do so merely to assuage a sucky player like myself.

Well, I think this points out something important though. Most games are commercial art, that is, art designed explicitly to be sold. Design decisions are almost always made with at least some eye to their impact on audience size and sales. The potential audience for Rain World was partially dismayed by its difficulty, and this has ostensibly motivated the developers to consider alternate modes.

Art isn't always just a statement by the artist, it can also be a conversation between the artist and the audience.

 

[Screaming Meat]

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'.

I’m on the other end of the spectrum. The most disappointing trend in the last few years for me is that ‘everything should be for everyone’.

There is most definitely a place for games that are tailored to appeal to as many people as possible. On that same token, there is enough space to have titles that do not.

 

[jwhit28]

I’m on the other end of the spectrum. The most disappointing trend in the last few years for me is that ‘everything should be for everyone’.

There is most definitely a place for games that are tailored to appeal to as many people as possible. On that same token, there is enough space to have titles that do not.

I agree. Dark Souls became super popular because of the shared experiences of the players and I don't think that happens if you can just turn down the difficulty when you get stuck. At the same time Gone Home shouldn't have to add battles and boss fights to be appease the people who refuse to call it a videogame. Every game doesn't have to be for every type of player.

 

[Rncewind]

I know some people can not wrap their head arround it, but videogames are a unique art form.

So neither does it make sense to compare it to books or movies nor needs to be all inclusive. Thats basiclly shitting on devolepers and not taking them seriously

 

[Bill R Boggess]

Well, I think this points out something important though. Most games are commercial art, that is, art designed explicitly to be sold. Design decisions are almost always made with at least some eye to their impact on audience size and sales. The potential audience for Rain World was partially dismayed by its difficulty, and this has ostensibly motivated the developers to consider alternate modes.

Art isn't always just a statement by the artist, it can also be a conversation between the artist and the audience.

That's an excellent point.

I also think there's a gulf of difference between not expecting an easy mode to be added and actually getting offended when such a mode is added because you feel that particular addition is somehow affecting the "purity" of the experience.

It's entirely up to the developer and if they want to add an easy mode, that's their decision and I respect that in the same way I would respect their decision not to.

 

[Bill R Boggess]

I know some people can not wrap their head arround it, but videogames are a unique art form.

So neither does it make sense to compare it to books or movies nor needs to be all inclusive. Thats basiclly shitting on devolepers and not taking them seriously

Well, at the risk of sounding pedantic, all art forms are unique.

But there is copious overlap and all mediums are inevitably compared to what came before - for better and for worse.

 

[Stinkles]

I had lunch the other day with a video game legend and we were laughing about the fact that compared to Defender, Dark Souls is for babies. There were some games in that era that we’re mind bogglingly hard, like Defender, Tempest and so on, but also stuff I remember being waaaaaay harder than it is now. I recently completed Moon Patrol with two lives, yet in its heyday I found it stupefyingly hard. Same with Black Tiger. Some of them had difficulty settings on dip switches but not all.

 

[Kneefoil]

I don't mind difficulty options, and having more options is always a good thing. I sometimes play games on easy, especially RPGs where the difficulty basically comes up to grinding enough levels. That being said, I think we shouldn't demand that all games have difficulty options to suit every kind of player. If the devs think that their time is better spent on other areas of the game's development, or just want to offer a certain kind of gaming experience, I think that's fine, too.

 

[-tetsuo-]

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.

Nah

 

[Bill R Boggess]

I had lunch the other day with a video game legend and we were laughing about the fact that compared to Defender, Dark Souls is for babies. There were some games in that era that we’re mind bogglingly hard, like Defender, Tempest and so on, but also stuff I remember being waaaaaay harder than it is now. I recently completed Moon Patrol with two lives, yet in its heyday I found it stupefyingly hard. Same with Black Tiger. Some of them had difficulty settings on dip switches but not all.

Either you or this "legend" have any videos demonstrating your mastery of DS?

Because some of the speed runs and minimalist gear runs on those games requires some serious fucking talent.

 

[Syril]

Either you or this "legend" have any videos demonstrating your mastery of DS?

Because some of the speed runs and minimalist gear runs on those games requires some serious fucking talent.

Um have you played Defender?