• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Next gen should every game have an easy mode?

Next gen should every game have an "easy" mode?

  • Yes

    Votes: 66 27.7%
  • No

    Votes: 165 69.3%
  • I'm undecided

    Votes: 7 2.9%

  • Total voters
    238

Bartski

Gold Member
It actually is a backward, insane concept, made clear yet again by all the arguments for and against it in this thread so far. And a number of times before ever since this "problem" was invented around the end of March last year. Not all games must be made for everyone to enjoy, what's so difficult to understand there?
 

Hostile_18

Banned
If the logic here is every game should be for everyone then let me ask you guys why FFXIV doesn't have offline SP mode for someone like me who doesn't like to play online and doesn't want to pay subscription? It should have the option play the game completely offline to carter to my taste....right?

No because that would require significant work. Were not talking about changing content just skill barrier stopping people playing games they otherwise would have enjoyed.
 

Hostile_18

Banned
It actually is a backward, insane concept, made clear yet again by all the arguments for and against it in this thread so far. And a number of times before ever since this "problem" was invented around the end of March last year. Not all games must be made for everyone to enjoy, what's so difficult to understand there?

Not all games should be enjoyed by everyone? Sure. But that should be based on content not an artificial skill block that could be easily amended.

A well skilled played can play any game he or she wants. Why shouldn't an unskilled player?
 

Clarissa

Banned
One of my friend not only plays on very easy mode, he uses trainers/cheats in addition. Like what the heck do you even play the game for.
 

Danjin44

The nicest person on this forum
No because that would require significant work. Were not talking about changing content just skill barrier stopping people playing games they otherwise would have enjoyed.
So does balancing difficulty, unless you want half-ass difficulty option just like any other games out here.
 
Last edited:

Bartski

Gold Member
Not all games should be enjoyed by everyone? Sure. But that should be based on content not an artificial skill block that could be easily amended.

A well skilled played can play any game he or she wants. Why shouldn't an unskilled player?

there is no "artificial skill block", just the content and the way it's designed to work to deliver the intended experience of overcoming a challenge. This is exactly what makes some games great.
An unskilled player is not entitled to enjoy a game that is designed to require skill, just as I was never entitled to have a basketball league for inepts I could join even though I always loved pro basketball. And ITS OK
 

Hostile_18

Banned
there is no "artificial skill block", just the content and the way it's designed to work to deliver the intended experience of overcoming a challenge. This is exactly what makes some games great.
An unskilled player is not entitled to enjoy a game that is designed to require skill, just as I was never entitled to have a basketball league for inepts I could join even though I always loved pro basketball. And ITS OK

Each to their own but a game I've had a lot of enjoyment out of I would be more than happy for a player to play an easier version. Dosnt effect me in any way other than been able to talk to the player about it and also know the franchise is been supported financially by more players.
 

Hostile_18

Banned
At this point I think guy is trolling lmao

Not at all just trying to point out how letting other people play a game you like wouldn't effect your enjoyment at all.

The reasons I've stated are why most games do have a difficulty modes after all. However I think I've argued my side as passionately as I can without going over the same points so I'll let the thread play out for more takes that arnt my own 😊

Its about one third yes, to thirds no at the moment. I suppose that isnt too bad for a more enthusiast forum where the skill level will be alot higher than your average Joe.
 
Last edited:

Shrap

Member
Much like with films and music I think the creators should be as free as possible to fulfill their vision. I understand it frustrates some people and it will limit their audience, but that is the dev's choice to make.

Classic example - the punishing nature of From Software's games is integral to their core gameplay. That is exactly how they want you to experience the game. Because of this they have gained a strong dedicated following and on the other hand a lot of people won't go near their games. They have known this for a long time now and they will not change that formula (unless a publisher grabs them by the balls).
 

Airola

Member
What about internal focus testing before a games launch is that not compromising a games vision? What if not everyone on the team feels a certain way is that not affecting the games vision?

Depends on the vision. And depends on what they do to the vision.

Too many cooks might ruin the soup too. There is a reason games have directors and not everyone gets to decide what the game will be in the end. And often the director has to be able to filter a huge amount of ideas so that the game wouldn't end up being an unfocused mishmash of different ideas.

Sometimes focus testing can also make a game very bland. Based on focus testing and sales Resident Evil should currently be like what it was in Resident Evil 6. That game catered to a lot of new players and was a huge success. But how many Resident Evil fans can really say it's among the best of the series instead of one of the worst?

For those saying compromise with a game you can't play because of lack of skill. Paying full price just to put the game down early and put on youtube instead is hardly a good compromise for the player, it's more likely to put them off buying games.

It's their decision what to do. Maybe they sell their game. Maybe they'll try again tomorrow or a year after. Or maybe they don't ever play any games again. Why should someone's personal decisions decide what features all games should have?

I guess we fundamentally disagree that letting a small percentage of people play on easy allegedly compromises a games vision for everyone. Even if that was true we also disagree that that compromise would actually be worse than letting some users give up and waste their hard earned money.

Maybe small percentage would play on easy. Maybe a huge percentage would play on easy. You don't know that. I don't know that.
But it is a fact that the game wouldn't have the idea of certain difficulty at its minimum to bring certain type of sense of dread and relief to the player anymore. It would be gone.

And it's not me who is saying that not being able to get far in the game is waste of money.
To me it's not necessarily a waste at all. I don't pay to get to see every graphic and design and sound in the game. I pay to get an interactive experience that gives the possibility to see them all but doesn't guarantee I'm going to see them all. Sometimes I don't even care to see them all. I don't have to see every single ending the game has to offer. I _can_ try to see them all if I want. Sometimes I don't want to see them all, and sometimes I can't see them all because I'm not good at the game or I can't find some secret that would allow to see them all.

Games are a bit of a gamble. You wouldn't expect to see every pay line on a slot machine using only one coin. You wouldn't expect to see them all using 1000 coins either. You pay for a chance to see them. Some games give you things based on luck, some give you things based on skill, some based on both.

Sometimes the idea of the game is to struggle your way to learn the lore and story. Those games have been designed to _not_ give you more lore and story if you can't go through the struggle. It is the point of some of the games. It is how it's designed to bring satisfaction to players. Why would the developers have to be forced to make the game have another way to give the lore and story to the players? With the option to change that the sense and aura of the game becomes different. Everything that is in the menu and settings screens are part of the game. If you as a player can do a thing the creators deliberately put there for you to choose, and it will make an enemy less strong, it's kinda like having a button in game right there in the room of a boss that debuffs the boss. Sure you can choose to not press the button but the enemy is not anymore relentlessly hard at easiest but it's very easy at easiest and that changes the feel of that boss. Knowing the option changes the idea of the enemy.
 

Hostile_18

Banned
What? So......You basically rather play poorly designed difficulty mode as long as you beat the game?

No you misunderstand I would rather play the mode the developers recommend, nine times out of ten.

But for a player that struggles or has limited free time I'd rather they play an easier version if its better for their needs. Just the same as I'd be happy for a hardcore player to play the hardest difficulty if they would get more enjoyment out of that.

I'm all for options and accessibility in games.
 

Airola

Member
Not all games should be enjoyed by everyone? Sure. But that should be based on content not an artificial skill block that could be easily amended.

A well skilled played can play any game he or she wants. Why shouldn't an unskilled player?

Sometimes the content _is_ all about skill blocks.
It doesn't become artificial just because someone feels not skillful enough.

Some people are better at sports than others. There's no easy mode for getting black belt on karate.
 

Hostile_18

Banned
Depends on the vision. And depends on what they do to the vision.

Too many cooks might ruin the soup too. There is a reason games have directors and not everyone gets to decide what the game will be in the end. And often the director has to be able to filter a huge amount of ideas so that the game wouldn't end up being an unfocused mishmash of different ideas.

Sometimes focus testing can also make a game very bland. Based on focus testing and sales Resident Evil should currently be like what it was in Resident Evil 6. That game catered to a lot of new players and was a huge success. But how many Resident Evil fans can really say it's among the best of the series instead of one of the worst?



It's their decision what to do. Maybe they sell their game. Maybe they'll try again tomorrow or a year after. Or maybe they don't ever play any games again. Why should someone's personal decisions decide what features all games should have?



Maybe small percentage would play on easy. Maybe a huge percentage would play on easy. You don't know that. I don't know that.
But it is a fact that the game wouldn't have the idea of certain difficulty at its minimum to bring certain type of sense of dread and relief to the player anymore. It would be gone.

And it's not me who is saying that not being able to get far in the game is waste of money.
To me it's not necessarily a waste at all. I don't pay to get to see every graphic and design and sound in the game. I pay to get an interactive experience that gives the possibility to see them all but doesn't guarantee I'm going to see them all. Sometimes I don't even care to see them all. I don't have to see every single ending the game has to offer. I _can_ try to see them all if I want. Sometimes I don't want to see them all, and sometimes I can't see them all because I'm not good at the game or I can't find some secret that would allow to see them all.

Games are a bit of a gamble. You wouldn't expect to see every pay line on a slot machine using only one coin. You wouldn't expect to see them all using 1000 coins either. You pay for a chance to see them. Some games give you things based on luck, some give you things based on skill, some based on both.

Sometimes the idea of the game is to struggle your way to learn the lore and story. Those games have been designed to _not_ give you more lore and story if you can't go through the struggle. It is the point of some of the games. It is how it's designed to bring satisfaction to players. Why would the developers have to be forced to make the game have another way to give the lore and story to the players? With the option to change that the sense and aura of the game becomes different. Everything that is in the menu and settings screens are part of the game. If you as a player can do a thing the creators deliberately put there for you to choose, and it will make an enemy less strong, it's kinda like having a button in game right there in the room of a boss that debuffs the boss. Sure you can choose to not press the button but the enemy is not anymore relentlessly hard at easiest but it's very easy at easiest and that changes the feel of that boss. Knowing the option changes the idea of the enemy.

Ironically I am actually a person who's favorite Resident Evil game is Resident Evil 6 lol.

But yeah if cheats or easy mode is on hand during normal gameplay I dont like that as the temptation is always there (for example the cheats in Final Fantasy 7 PS4). But for selectable difficulties at the beginning of the game I dont really have that temptation. Finding the right difficulty level for me is the most fun mode, and I'm sure that's true of most of us. That been said someone who hits a brick wall in a game after an hour or so I wouldn't begrudge them if they lowered the difficulty and enjoyed the rest of the game going forward (rather than giving up). I can think of alot worse things in gaming.
 

Hostile_18

Banned
Sometimes the content _is_ all about skill blocks.
It doesn't become artificial just because someone feels not skillful enough.

Some people are better at sports than others. There's no easy mode for getting black belt on karate.

Would you not argue a physical sport is a bit different to a piece of software designed with the sole purpose of entertaining you?
 

Danjin44

The nicest person on this forum
No you misunderstand I would rather play the mode the developers recommend, nine times out of ten.

But for a player that struggles or has limited free time I'd rather they play an easier version if its better for their needs. Just the same as I'd be happy for a hardcore player to play the hardest difficulty if they would get more enjoyment out of that.

I'm all for options and accessibility in games.
And people who have limited free time can't play games that are long, so should they cut their games for more accessibility!? I'm sorry you cant expect one game to be design around each individual life style. There are 1000 different games for every type of gamer, we have options. If one game is not made for your taste and style then you can go with another game that it is.
 
Last edited:

Hostile_18

Banned
And people who have limited free time can't play games that are long, so should they cut their games for more accessibility!? I'm sorry you cant expect one game to be design around each individual life style. There are 1000 different games for every type of gamer, we have options. If one game is not made for your taste and style then you can go with another game that it is.

What? I've said numerous times its skill based difficulty I have a problem with if there are no options for lesser skilled players

I didnt mean game length as in time to beat. Say someone comes up to a boss and it takes them 10 hours to beat, do you think that comes with a sense of pride and accomplishment or do you think the player is frustrated the majority of that time?

Not every gamer is equal. What is a learning curve for some that can be over come quickly for others is a brick wall.
 

Airola

Member
Ironically I am actually a person who's favorite Resident Evil game is Resident Evil 6 lol.

I almost made a snarky remark on how you probably like that the most based on what you expect from games :D

But yeah if cheats or easy mode is on hand during normal gameplay I dont like that as the temptation is always there (for example the cheats in Final Fantasy 7 PS4). But for selectable difficulties at the beginning of the game I dont really have that temptation. Finding the right difficulty level for me is the most fun mode, and I'm sure that's true of most of us. That been said someone who hits a brick wall in a game after an hour or so I wouldn't begrudge them if they lowered the difficulty and enjoyed the rest of the game going forward (rather than giving up). I can think of alot worse things in gaming.

Oh yeah I really REALLY dislike the options in some of the ports of classic FF games. The phone versions of the earlier games have all kinds of cheats and to me it's just stupid.
I also dislike the existence of rewinding time in Disney Afternoon Collection. Get hit on Tale Spin, just press a button and you can rewind back to the moment you weren't hit. Knowing the existence of that almost ruins the experience for me. Even if I wouldn't have much of a temptation to use it, the existence of it comes to my mind almost every single time I fail. And sometimes I press the damn button by accident!

You are right that it's not as bad when it's just an option in the main menu. Some games allow you to change it from in game menu though, which kinda works if you feel easy mode is too easy and would want to make the game harder. But in any case having the easy option even in the beginning makes the step in entering the adventure less dreadful.
 
Yes, but give me an incentive to play them on the intended difficulty. I love "beating" game and not just finishing it but I will switch to an easier difficulty when frustrated.
Maybe just a simple "finished the first campaign run on difficulty ***" 0 Score Achievement or something.

I'm all for people being able to enjoy gaming they way they choose to. A friend of mine hacked his Dark Souls to be able to finish it. He loved it and we both could still talk about the lore/gameplay/level design afterwards as he didn't have to shelf it when at capra demon.
 

Bartski

Gold Member
also, the reason I called it backward is because I think it promotes regress in game design, all the hand-holding for mass appeal in AAA that only some devs now go against. Nothing personal man I understand where you're coming from, still totally disagree. And hope Elden Ring will be just as HARD ;)
 
Last edited:
No, people are soft enough as it is. Struggle makes us better. People need to understand this. Keep removing all the barriers of difficulty and handing out participation trophies and this is what you'll end up with.

giphy.gif


In essence, whatever you think is easy enough, won't be enough for some others. People will reee and since the precedent was set the bar will keep getting lower and lower till games basically play themselves. This will also start effect how games are designed. Especially rogue-likes and such.

Lots of people argue that we're already dangerously close with how everyone constantly wants things to just be fed to them. Especially things that promise to make life easier. But make things easier and people get lazier and lazier leading to loss of critical thought and health.

When I was younger, I wanted to be on the Basketball team. There where only so many spots. Knowing that made me work even harder to earn one. No one set the court to easy mode. I had to practice, practice, practice. And even with a heart condition that made my heart beat 2 times faster than everyone else's that I had no idea I had at the time. We still made it to internationals and placed 3rd. I'll never forget that struggle. It absolutely without a doubt made me a better man and equipped me for life later on. Whats better, is that I know I earned it by competing against the best. No one gave me any handouts. That's something I can be proud of for the rest of my life.

I use this analogy a lot when encouraging people to change their lifestyle. I call it the hamburger analogy.

You have two paths, A nad B, that lead to a hamburger. Now, a hamburger isn't the healthiest thing you could eat. Bear that in mind.

Path A is basically a straight and wide path that leads right to the hamburger.

Path B is curvy and full of obstacles that you have to overcome in order to get to the hamburger.

Which path do you think most people would choose to take? I guarantee most today would take the easier path.

However, taking the harder path actually has benefits. You would get a workout by overcoming the obstacles on this path so there are physical benefits. Overcoming odds also gives people mental benefits as well. Feelings of self worth and confidence. All in all, it would be better for you overall to take this path, especially when the reward isn't too healthy, the workout you got would counterbalance this.

But people just don't think about this. Everything today is about instant gratification. This has got to be the most Veruca Salt era there's ever been.

tumblr_or3yqyrush1r1ult6o1_400.gif


If I'm making a game, the difficulty is absolutely part of the whole experience just as much as any other aspect of the game. Let game makers decide how they want you to experience their game.
 

Hostile_18

Banned
I almost made a snarky remark on how you probably like that the most based on what you expect from games :D



Oh yeah I really REALLY dislike the options in some of the ports of classic FF games. The phone versions of the earlier games have all kinds of cheats and to me it's just stupid.
I also dislike the existence of rewinding time in Disney Afternoon Collection. Get hit on Tale Spin, just press a button and you can rewind back to the moment you weren't hit. Knowing the existence of that almost ruins the experience for me. Even if I wouldn't have much of a temptation to use it, the existence of it comes to my mind almost every single time I fail. And sometimes I press the damn button by accident!

You are right that it's not as bad when it's just an option in the main menu. Some games allow you to change it from in game menu though, which kinda works if you feel easy mode is too easy and would want to make the game harder. But in any case having the easy option even in the beginning makes the step in entering the adventure less dreadful.

Well I personally beat resident evil 6 on the hardest difficulty if that counts, like I say most of the time I'm not really arguing for me. 😇

Yeah absolutely with you on rewind time and cheat buttons tied to button prompts, to easy to press by accident.

I wouldn't be tempted to lower the difficulty myself as part of the fun is the challenge. My only point really is that challenge curve is different for ever gamer. We may be challenged on Hard but for others they may have that same challenge on easy. Hell I know some people that get scared even looking at a controller never mind having to press two buttons at once or something 😂
 

Danjin44

The nicest person on this forum
What? I've said numerous times its skill based difficulty I have a problem with if there are no options for lesser skilled players

I didnt mean game length as in time to beat. Say someone comes up to a boss and it takes them 10 hours to beat, do you think that comes with a sense of pride and accomplishment or do you think the player is frustrated the majority of that time?

Not every gamer is equal. What is a learning curve for some that can be over come quickly for others is a brick wall.
but you are talking about "accessibility" for everyone, this would also applies games some can't finish because it too long or cant play them because it has too much violence and gore. Also tell me, what about people who can't play VR because they get sick when they try to play them?

The fact is not everything is made for everyone, that just life and Games are at their best when don't try to please everybody.
 

Hostile_18

Banned
No, people are soft enough as it is. Struggle makes us better. People need to understand this. Keep removing all the barriers of difficulty and handing out participation trophies and this is what you'll end up with.

giphy.gif


In essence, whatever you think is easy enough, won't be enough for some others. People will reee and since the precedent was set the bar will keep getting lower and lower till games basically play themselves. This will also start effect how games are designed. Especially rogue-likes and such.

Lots of people argue that we're already dangerously close with how everyone constantly wants things to just be fed to them. Especially things that promise to make life easier. But make things easier and people get lazier and lazier leading to loss of critical thought and health.

When I was younger, I wanted to be on the Basketball team. There where only so many spots. Knowing that made me work even harder to earn one. No one set the court to easy mode. I had to practice, practice, practice. And even with a heart condition that made my heart beat 2 times faster than everyone else's that I had no idea I had at the time. We still made it to internationals and placed 3rd. I'll never forget that struggle. It absolutely without a doubt made me a better man and equipped me for life later on. Whats better, is that I know I earned it by competing against the best. No one gave me any handouts. That's something I can be proud of for the rest of my life.

I use this analogy a lot when encouraging people to change their lifestyle. I call it the hamburger analogy.

You have two paths, A nad B, that lead to a hamburger. Now, a hamburger isn't the healthiest thing you could eat. Bear that in mind.

Path A is basically a straight and wide path that leads right to the hamburger.

Path B is curvy and full of obstacles that you have to overcome in order to get to the hamburger.

Which path do you think most people would choose to take? I guarantee most today would take the easier path.

However, taking the harder path actually has benefits. You would get a workout by overcoming the obstacles on this path so there are physical benefits. Overcoming odds also gives people mental benefits as well. Feelings of self worth and confidence. All in all, it would be better for you overall to take this path, especially when the reward isn't too healthy, the workout you got would counterbalance this.

But people just don't think about this. Everything today is about instant gratification. This has got to be the most Veruca Salt era there's ever been.

tumblr_or3yqyrush1r1ult6o1_400.gif


If I'm making a game, the difficulty is absolutely part of the whole experience just as much as any other aspect of the game. Let game makers decide how they want you to experience their game.

Most people play games to relax and take their mind off their troubles they dont necessarily want to be broken down and rebuilt in the forge of hell. They just want an easy afternoon before they let the kids out of the cupboard.
 
Most people play games to relax and take their mind off their troubles they dont necessarily want to be broken down and rebuilt in the forge of hell. They just want an easy afternoon before they let the kids out of the cupboard.
Then there would be a market for games to be made specifically for those people. And there are tons of those time wasters. But obviously, difficulty is a part of the experience that is important for tons of people. No need to try to retrofit the devs vision by mandate. That will end up ruining things for everyone.

When I chose to pursue basketball as a "hobby," I had to make cuts elsewhere in life. We do this with everything we pursue as a goal. We decide if the time sink is worth it and other things get cut. That's just life. If people can't afford the mental and time cost then just don't pursue it. Don't lobby for changing something that others truly enjoy just because you can't make the bar.
 

Mexen

Member
Like a hard/fast general rule? No.

As a consideration, maybe. That is, every dev should consider what an easy mode would mean for a game.
 

Airola

Member
Would you not argue a physical sport is a bit different to a piece of software designed with the sole purpose of entertaining you?

People play sports to compete and to entertain themselves. Sure it's different in that sports require good physical health, pain tolerance and good stamina. Some sports are more like video games though. Like maybe golf. It's not as involving as, say, long distance running or judo and it's a lot about precision like many video games are.

And I would disagree that the sole purpose of video games is to entertain you. Sure, that's the force behind almost all of it, but it's more about the ways it entertains you - as it is with sports too. A lot of times games entertain by a struggle. Back in the day the sports games were very physical. You had to waggle the joystick or press the buttons as fast as possible. Sometimes games require a lot of logical skills. Some games entertain you by having you only press a button here and there and make a few choices along the way (visual novels), some games entertain you by letting you walk a bit around with a character to go to the next place where you get the next piece of lore ("walking simulators"). Some games entertain you by making you go through short bursts of reaction tests (Super Meat Boy - VVVVVV). Some games entertain you by having you talk to people and make decisions based on what you've heard them say (point n click adventures). Some games entertain you by having you think a little bit more carefully on how to proceed and some entertain you by having you think A LOT on how you proceed.

Entertainment in video games isn't all about the visuals and how they sound like. It isn't about how exciting you can make killing something look. It's about all kinds of things. You seem to expect audiovisual stimulation at least a bit more than controlling something on screen with a careful strategy in mind. But there are many developers and many players who enjoy gameplay with a lot of risktaking and they like to have their story and audiovisual stimulation come from overcoming those risks. The bigger the punishment, the better the relief when the punishment doesn't come. That to many is essential in certain games. And that's a lot closer to the entertainment that athletes get than what you would probably believe.
 

Airola

Member
Well I personally beat resident evil 6 on the hardest difficulty if that counts, like I say most of the time I'm not really arguing for me. 😇

That game is terrible for all other reasons than difficulty :D

My only point really is that challenge curve is different for ever gamer. We may be challenged on Hard but for others they may have that same challenge on easy. Hell I know some people that get scared even looking at a controller never mind having to press two buttons at once or something 😂

I can beat Battletoads on NES but I can't beat some other supposedly much easier games (I wouldn't probably manage to beat you in Excitebike as I'm surprisingly terrible at that). My point is that some games you beat, some games you don't. Some of them are hard, some of them aren't. Beating a game shouldn't always be inevitable thing. The atmosphere of some games are better when there is no easy way out whatsoever.

I used to play this C64 game called Knightmare a lot and I was only able to get to the second room. I still loved the feeling the game had. I couldn't do it because I was stupid and didn't get how to solve a simple puzzle of giving a fellow prisoner some food. Never thought the game was bad because of that.

What comes to controllers, I can surely relate to those who get scared of the controllers. I hate it how controllers have too many buttons (even the damn sticks are buttons like what the hell!). I hate that games use those buttons for stupid combos and, worst of all, for dodging! Dodging has its own button! As if just moving your character away and maybe jumping a bit wouldn't be enough. That's one of the reasons I don't like Dark Souls games or many modern games in general. Too many buttons. Too many game mechanics. So I guess just as you aren't arguing for you, I'm not necessarily arguing for me either as I wouldn't even play the games I defend because I just don't like playing them, but I will defend the ideas behind many of those games to death :D

Most people play games to relax and take their mind off their troubles they dont necessarily want to be broken down and rebuilt in the forge of hell. They just want an easy afternoon before they let the kids out of the cupboard.

You don't think some people might get their mind off their troubles by playing something difficult and involving?
Some people relax by solving easy crossword puzzles. Some people relax by solving very hard crossword puzzles. Some people enjoy the difficulty. It's not as if you can only relax if the game entertainment is as easy going as possible.


EDIT:
But hey! I totally get the will to play games without much struggle. Do you think I play Deep Space Waifu in the hardest mode? No! It's easy mode all around and by 1,5 hours I've seen every tiddy there is to be seen in the game :D
(I would still think I would probably appreciate them tiddies more if I was forced to play it on harder setting though)
 
Last edited:

Bogey

Banned
Absolutely not.

Some games benefit dramatically from being challenging. So a gamer designer might want things to be challenging - yet people, in general, hate failing. Combine that with many people underestimating themselves, and the end result IMHO is the majority of players will pick a difficulty setting which is actually too low for them.

Speaking from my own experience:

how often did I pick a difficulty that turned out to be too hard for me?
Never.

How often did I pick a setting that ended up not being super challenging?
Almost always.

How often have I subsequently upped the level?
Never.

You may call me an idiot, but I belive a whole lot of players will behave similarly
 

Grinchy

Banned
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.
 

MastAndo

Member
It shouldn't be mandatory, but I'm not sure how it hurts to include it. Not everyone looks for games as a means of testing their intestinal fortitude, and I'm not sure how it hurts to make your game more accessible. I understand that an easy mode changes your intended experience, but surely your product has more to offer than its difficulty. Throw in a disclaimer about it not being the recommended mode, and call it a day.
 

ph33rknot

Banned
There are disabled people who play games and want to play how would easy mode hurt your enjoyment of a game
 
Last edited:

Vawn

Banned
Dark Souls kept beating me into a pulp but I didn't give up and eventually learned it and now souls are my favorite genre.

Dark Souls is the series that made me realize why games SHOULDN'T have a difficulty option.

I'm guessing if Dark Souls had had an Easy Mode, you would have used it when you were initially struggling and wondering if the game was for you. And I'm willing to bet if you had used the Easy Mode, you may have finished the game, and never thought much of it again.

Instead you dealt with it and overcame that initial obstacle and found one of your favorite game franchises ever. I know all this because I was the exact same way with Demon's Souls and have heard the same story 1000 times.

There is nothing wrong with easy games, hard games, etc. But games should embrace what they are. And not every game has to be everything to everyone. If Sekiro is too difficult, play something else. Or try anyway and ultimately realize you're capable of a lot more than you thought and enjoy the satisfaction that comes with it. That's one key strength gaming has over other more passive entertainment mediums.
 

RedVIper

Banned
Because the good would still get out weigh the "bad?" And more players that bought and enjoyed the game the better.

Why would I, as a developer, want to release a worse version of my game?

How about all the people who would enjoy the game less due to the presence of difficulty options, someone who'd have enjoyed the game more on hard, but chose normal instead which lead to a worse experience.
 

Spaceman292

Banned
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.
I just came into this thread to laugh at you. Ahahahahhahahahaaa
 

Whitesnake

Banned
The new pokemon games are too easy, but I do not demand that the devs make an entire difficulty system just to appease me.

I believe when I described the new pokemon games on this very forum, I used the words “these games aren’t for me anymore”.

Do I wish the games were a bit more difficult? Yes. But I am not so arrogant and selfish as to demand that the devs adhere to my desires, instead the more reasonable option is for me to just play other games. Problem solved.

In short, no. Easy modes are not a requirement, and to demand them is arrogant.
 

Sign

Member
A reader can read everything written so what they take away from it is up to them.

A viewer can view the whole of an artists work. What they take away from it is up to them.

Surely you can see a difference between that and a person who buys a game and cant get past the first chapter or whatever.

Playing a game is not the same as reading a book or watching a movie.
 

Iorv3th

Member
If you want an easy game, play an easy game. Not all games have to cater to all skill levels.

You have choice, use it.

If someone buys a game that's too hard for someone else, so what. I probably had more fun as a kid replaying hard games on NES and trying to get further every time. Shit there where some games that where pretty much impossible to beat no matter how skilled you were, but they were still fun.
 
Top Bottom