-
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.
Should there be a "tourist-mode"/totally easy option for all games?
- Thread starter Chairmanchuck
- Start date
Do you understand what a simile is? Do you grasp that two things can share properties without being the exact same?
Does it matter if one person wants to explore a game and its systems "for the sake of being able to" and another does it out of a desire to plow through the content? I can't see a difference. People do things because they want to do them.
Maxey
Member
I was simply trying to pin down what your exact point of view was here.
What if I want Stardew Valley to have a 3D racing option? Should I demand the game's author to add that?
Let's be realistic here...
What if I designed Dark Souls and I wanted people to experience overcoming difficulty? See, I think asking for an easy mode when the difficulty is a significant part of the game is worse than being unrealistic, it's ignoring the point of the game. It's not difficult for the sake of being difficult, contrary to what some of the marketing suggests.
This is why I'm saying the "options" argument is vacuous - it suggests nothing on its own. You need to talk about why an option is worth having in relation to the game it should be in. In which case it's pointless to bring up "options being good" in the first place, it just wastes time.
Let's play don't let you make choices and see what the responses are. Sure maybe for linear games that you don't get choices in dialogue or picking how the story goes this works. But this doesn't work for games where you at least have some choice in dialogue or how the story goes.
I mean, honestly why are you people so against it? Just don't play that mode.
And this is the worst answer on this thread. Some people enjoy having some influence in the game and it makes it more immersive. Hell most games the story works to get you in it by playing the story so you really don't get the same experience watching. And just cause some one wants it super easy does not mean they don't want a game to play. They just don't want to have to put much effort into it. But there is something to be said about he experience of playing a game being a different level of immersion than watching a movie, even a super easy game.
And, once again, just don't play the mode. Them making a mode that just makes it a walk through to play does not affect you.
And all that being said, in the end I think it is up to the developer. But I don't think it's a bad idea. And this is from some one who has been loving survival mode in fallout and thinking next time she plays horizon she's putting it on the hardest difficulty rather than second hardest. I just don't see a problem with having options and making games more accessible to everyone.
Grim Patron
Member
🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
Maxey
Member
Oh, you know what, I completely misunderstood your post, lol.
I thought you were saying that all games should offer all kinds of options to allow people to do whatever they want with it regardless of its genre or style.
Now it makes more sense.
Maxey
Member
Didn't Nintendo basically implement this mode in a few games? I believe so.
ViolentP
Member
You know what game was easy? Abzu. And it was absolutely brilliant.
You know what game is hard as nails? Dark Souls. It too is absolutely brilliant.
What each offers would be hurt by adjusting their respective difficulties so its best not to look at these options in a broad sense. If a particular game can build on it, sure. But it should never be wedged in for the sake of a particular usergroup.
You know what game is hard as nails? Dark Souls. It too is absolutely brilliant.
What each offers would be hurt by adjusting their respective difficulties so its best not to look at these options in a broad sense. If a particular game can build on it, sure. But it should never be wedged in for the sake of a particular usergroup.
Lionel Richie
Member
Wow, lots of discussions going on about difficulty right now lol. My opinion is that if a game is somehow adaptable to feature a control scheme that would allow disabled people to play it, than I'm 100% there and I think it should be a thing on every game that could feature it. If not, if by easy mode you mean a mode that would allow people who don't have disability issues but can't be arsed to fully grasp the mechanics of a game and overcome its challenge using what's being given to you, then no, I don't think there should be.
Crayon
Member
I don't know recent nintendo games very well. I know mk8d has some dramatic helpers that will more or less drive the kart for you, but not win.
NoctisVsStar
Member
oneils
Member
I bought Skyrim SE for a friend as a birthday present. She isn't very good at video games, but she always loved watching me play Skyrim. She installed a god-mode ring mod, and now she gets to do whatever she wants in the game.
She can rob any npc that walks by, or she can decide to go to a random dungeon, or do a random quest. She is not bound by someone else's lets play.
The "watch a playthrough" option isn't much an option for big open world games. Anyway, we figured out a way for her to enjoy the game. And bethesda sold one more copy.
Win-win, if you ask me.
She can rob any npc that walks by, or she can decide to go to a random dungeon, or do a random quest. She is not bound by someone else's lets play.
The "watch a playthrough" option isn't much an option for big open world games. Anyway, we figured out a way for her to enjoy the game. And bethesda sold one more copy.
Win-win, if you ask me.
Pinko Marx
Banned
Some games could definitely benefit from it.
Combat in Killer 7 was a total buzzkill. The game would have done better by removing combat altogether.
SOMA too, would be 10x better if I didn't have to deal with those weak ass hide n seek sections.
Combat in Killer 7 was a total buzzkill. The game would have done better by removing combat altogether.
SOMA too, would be 10x better if I didn't have to deal with those weak ass hide n seek sections.
Maxey
Member
I think all types of accessibility are good thing in principle but it can be really difficult to implement depending on how the rest of the game is designed and what kind of resources the developers are able to devote to it. The Souls series, for example, still stumps me as far as how you'd do it without compromising the games' core tenets.
In a similar vein, microtransaction DLC is often a form of easy mode. I.e. Dead Space 3.
ProgenitorCastle
Banned
This.
I love options but I think the answer is still no.
Should most games have it? Maybe. All games? Definitely not. I don't believe that a game should aim to cater for all. There is enjoyment from overcoming challenges and anticipating hard times so tourist mode simply clashes too hard with these types of games.
I see merits in both arguments but forcing it to the extremes benefits no one.
Gamer: I want to play the game my way such that I can enjoy it.
Developer: This is the game I made. Conquer it.
Should most games have it? Maybe. All games? Definitely not. I don't believe that a game should aim to cater for all. There is enjoyment from overcoming challenges and anticipating hard times so tourist mode simply clashes too hard with these types of games.
I see merits in both arguments but forcing it to the extremes benefits no one.
Gamer: I want to play the game my way such that I can enjoy it.
Developer: This is the game I made. Conquer it.
When it destroys the art. Would it make sense to have a Happy Option to turn all books and movies into happy stories if someone feels they're too sad? No, that would be stupid.
Some games are designed for the purposes of giving a challenging experience. It would be equally stupid to want them to change it to giving a different experience.
Hero Prinny
Member
theres a mod out there for the PC version that removes the enemies from the game if you're ever interested in replaying it.
Mr_Antimatter
Member
I actually don't see a major issue with very easy/kids modes. Some folks may just want to play for the story, or may be interested in the game, but well, not very skilled as a gamer yet.
It doesn't ruin the experience for serious players, who can always just play on normal/hard/etc.
I don't think every game should have it, but it wouldn't really effect most games too much I don't think.
It doesn't ruin the experience for serious players, who can always just play on normal/hard/etc.
I don't think every game should have it, but it wouldn't really effect most games too much I don't think.
J_ToSaveTheDay
Member
I'll commit to the notion that not every game needs to have an easy mode, and that some should be designed with challenging the player's skill.
Games like Mario Kart 8 Deluxe handle it extremely well, though, and I kind of find it frustrating -- even as a fan of the series -- that Souls is being brought up as the ultimate example of why this sort of practice shouldn't come up.
Mario Kart 8 Deluxe is a game that literally suffers nothing for its inclusion of smart steering. The smart steering excludes several elements that require skill and track knowledge to perform (like the new 3-charge hyper boost on drifts and shortcut access), and it is literally impossible for a smart steering user to beat a well-versed player as a result. All the while, it prevents the smart steer user from feeling completely unable to play or compete and keeps them engaged with the game longer. The well-versed player literally faces such an extremely limited threat of being beaten by a smart steering user and the smart steering user might just have enough of a good time to keep with the game.
Souls series is obviously designed with its challenge in mind, but even there, I feel there's enough value in those games outside of the surmounting the challenges itself that they could potentially implement an easy "tourist mode" to a similar degree of effectiveness as Mario Kart. I'm not asking Souls game creators to allow people to beat me in PVP with minimal effort or to be granted access to some "Golden Leaf" (Super Mario 3D Land/World) after multiple deaths that will make them roll a boss if I summon them into my world and make my own experience lighter... But maybe just have an easier mode where damage isn't as severe, trophies/achievements don't unlock, and summoning is limited to just NPC/AI companions so that that compromises made to its experience don't necessarily bring the rest of us down. Then people that don't want to face the challenges can still get through and read vague item descriptions, admire the art, etc... y'know, a "tourist mode," and have literally no bearing on traditional Souls players experiences, other than to show up in an OT somewhere and appreciate how stunningly frightening a boss looked and to help the rest of us piece together some of the lore we love to examine or pull out of our collective asses.
As an example, in Devil May Cry 1, I actually did eventually beat Dante Must Die mode, which at the time was absolutely brutal compared to the skill I had put forth to beat the sub-modes leading up to it. I started my Devil May Cry 1 play experience, as a teenager that couldn't give less a fuck about difficulty in games at the time, on Easy-Automatic mode, but I appreciated the style, tone, art, lore of that game enough that I wanted to "accomplish" the game as a whole... And slowly but surely, I got good enough to handle Dante Must Die. I still feel like that ramp in difficulty surpasses anything I've ever gone through today in a Souls game. Souls games have presented challenges, sure, but going from carefree "this game is badass look how much I'm wrecking everything <playing Easy-Automatic>" to "this game is possibly one of my favorites ever, I must get through even Dante Must Die to express my adoration of this" started in scrubville.
I never beat Devil May Cry 3 or DMC3: Special Edition on Dante Must Die, but I did beat the game on Normal and Hard, and then I went over to YouTube some years later after the platform took off and adored combo videos that I will never ever have enough dedication to try and replicate. Point is, I'm a scrubby player compared to combo-vid-making pros and I still think DMC3 is one of my favorite character action games of all time... And it didn't take becoming one of the absolute best tier players to come to that conclusion. Someone might very well come to appreciate Bloodborne for its insanely twisted atmosphere, aesthetics, and lore, but can't quite hack the game on its regular presented difficulty. I say let them have their plain-ass cheese pizza at the same table as us crazy motherfuckers ordering anchovies. This phenomenon also explains why I can appreciate DMC4 for being the deepest combat in the series but still come away feeling like it's one of the worst entries in the series because the tone and vibe felt real off to me compared to what I loved about DMC1 and DMC3. I was able to get through the game on Normal and Hard once again, but backtracking through the stages as the back half of the game while leading up to that point with wet-noodle-whiny-Nero (who has cool mechanics but just no cool personality to back it up) just killed that game for me.
So yea, thanks for your dedication and inspiration, y'all <starts on Hard or Higher> types, but I really don't buy that you're gonna lose out on anything if people can take a breezy tour through the other elements that make up that super challenging game you love. There's a big difference going hands-on and living through those other elements of the game versus just watching it on YouTube.
Games like Mario Kart 8 Deluxe handle it extremely well, though, and I kind of find it frustrating -- even as a fan of the series -- that Souls is being brought up as the ultimate example of why this sort of practice shouldn't come up.
Mario Kart 8 Deluxe is a game that literally suffers nothing for its inclusion of smart steering. The smart steering excludes several elements that require skill and track knowledge to perform (like the new 3-charge hyper boost on drifts and shortcut access), and it is literally impossible for a smart steering user to beat a well-versed player as a result. All the while, it prevents the smart steer user from feeling completely unable to play or compete and keeps them engaged with the game longer. The well-versed player literally faces such an extremely limited threat of being beaten by a smart steering user and the smart steering user might just have enough of a good time to keep with the game.
Souls series is obviously designed with its challenge in mind, but even there, I feel there's enough value in those games outside of the surmounting the challenges itself that they could potentially implement an easy "tourist mode" to a similar degree of effectiveness as Mario Kart. I'm not asking Souls game creators to allow people to beat me in PVP with minimal effort or to be granted access to some "Golden Leaf" (Super Mario 3D Land/World) after multiple deaths that will make them roll a boss if I summon them into my world and make my own experience lighter... But maybe just have an easier mode where damage isn't as severe, trophies/achievements don't unlock, and summoning is limited to just NPC/AI companions so that that compromises made to its experience don't necessarily bring the rest of us down. Then people that don't want to face the challenges can still get through and read vague item descriptions, admire the art, etc... y'know, a "tourist mode," and have literally no bearing on traditional Souls players experiences, other than to show up in an OT somewhere and appreciate how stunningly frightening a boss looked and to help the rest of us piece together some of the lore we love to examine or pull out of our collective asses.
As an example, in Devil May Cry 1, I actually did eventually beat Dante Must Die mode, which at the time was absolutely brutal compared to the skill I had put forth to beat the sub-modes leading up to it. I started my Devil May Cry 1 play experience, as a teenager that couldn't give less a fuck about difficulty in games at the time, on Easy-Automatic mode, but I appreciated the style, tone, art, lore of that game enough that I wanted to "accomplish" the game as a whole... And slowly but surely, I got good enough to handle Dante Must Die. I still feel like that ramp in difficulty surpasses anything I've ever gone through today in a Souls game. Souls games have presented challenges, sure, but going from carefree "this game is badass look how much I'm wrecking everything <playing Easy-Automatic>" to "this game is possibly one of my favorites ever, I must get through even Dante Must Die to express my adoration of this" started in scrubville.
I never beat Devil May Cry 3 or DMC3: Special Edition on Dante Must Die, but I did beat the game on Normal and Hard, and then I went over to YouTube some years later after the platform took off and adored combo videos that I will never ever have enough dedication to try and replicate. Point is, I'm a scrubby player compared to combo-vid-making pros and I still think DMC3 is one of my favorite character action games of all time... And it didn't take becoming one of the absolute best tier players to come to that conclusion. Someone might very well come to appreciate Bloodborne for its insanely twisted atmosphere, aesthetics, and lore, but can't quite hack the game on its regular presented difficulty. I say let them have their plain-ass cheese pizza at the same table as us crazy motherfuckers ordering anchovies. This phenomenon also explains why I can appreciate DMC4 for being the deepest combat in the series but still come away feeling like it's one of the worst entries in the series because the tone and vibe felt real off to me compared to what I loved about DMC1 and DMC3. I was able to get through the game on Normal and Hard once again, but backtracking through the stages as the back half of the game while leading up to that point with wet-noodle-whiny-Nero (who has cool mechanics but just no cool personality to back it up) just killed that game for me.
So yea, thanks for your dedication and inspiration, y'all <starts on Hard or Higher> types, but I really don't buy that you're gonna lose out on anything if people can take a breezy tour through the other elements that make up that super challenging game you love. There's a big difference going hands-on and living through those other elements of the game versus just watching it on YouTube.
As someone with a full time job and getting older, I keep playing my games on Easy when the option is available and I'm glad several games offer that.
But a cake walk is not much fun, Original Doom on God mode was fun for 5 mins and then you kinda got bored. So an Easy mode that is moderately challenging (you still need to learn the game mechanics) but maybe hard (but not impossible) to die would be my preference.
I also would like to add: a few games might lose what makes them special if an Easy mode was offered. Like the Souls or Monster Hunter games. So I'm OK not being good enough to play them
But a cake walk is not much fun, Original Doom on God mode was fun for 5 mins and then you kinda got bored. So an Easy mode that is moderately challenging (you still need to learn the game mechanics) but maybe hard (but not impossible) to die would be my preference.
I also would like to add: a few games might lose what makes them special if an Easy mode was offered. Like the Souls or Monster Hunter games. So I'm OK not being good enough to play them
For all games? No.
Sure, I think most games should have difficulty options, but games that are designed around a particular gameplay style or challenge should stick to what they are.
I play quite a few games on Easy just to get through the story. But I do fine in games that don't have difficulty options, and I'll even take a whack at the Souls games every now and then.
Sure, I think most games should have difficulty options, but games that are designed around a particular gameplay style or challenge should stick to what they are.
I play quite a few games on Easy just to get through the story. But I do fine in games that don't have difficulty options, and I'll even take a whack at the Souls games every now and then.
Mr_Appleby
Member
Thanks for putting words in my mouth and then calling me mad, good times.
But it's a good question, should there be an audio version of all books? Sure. Not something I myself will use but a boon for the vision impaired, and those who prefer to just listen in general, have lengthy commutes and so on.
So good question. However is it the question I asked? No. Did you answer the question I asked? No.
So what's "fucking dumb" as you put it, is responding to my post by first changing the question to something else and then answering that in a sarcastic manner to ridicule an argument you assumed I was going to make, which I did in fact not make.
I will tackle my own question, "Should all novels have a 3rd grade reading level edition" - and my answer is no, I don't think so. I don't care about "author's intent", I do however think that it is in many cases a waste of time and resources for an audience that may not even exist. Who wants to read the grade 3 version of James Joyce's Ulysses? But there are also cases where it does make sense, like the original Ulysseys/Illiad where the prose is less integral than the events and a reduced reading level can still be an exciting adventure. My first exposure to the Greek classics was in adaptations for children and I can be thankful for that while simultaneously believing that it would not benefit all works.
I do want to point out also that while I am not "mad about" people having options, I don't believe that more options is always a good thing. For one it can discourage the reader/player etc. from moving outside their comfort zone. And I'm personally all in favour of moving out of comfort zones. And it can put a strain on resources for processes that are, particularly with games, often already pushed for time and money.
What is happening is that developers are recognising this audience exists and crafting experiences specifically for them, and this is a good thing. Not everything needs to be for everybody, just like not all music is for everybody and not all books are for everybody and not all art is for everybody.
outunderthestars
Banned
+1 for the "not every game, but for most of them sure" camp.
Yes. Think of all the use this mode has for, say, speedrunners who would like to occasionally lobotomize a game's AI so they can brush up against every wall looking for sequence breaks in peace, or for modders who want to study a location's geometry without having to get into a firefight every few seconds.
I think i am getting old.
There is a massive disconnect between me and a lot of people on the internet. The sense of entitlement and expecting everything to cater to every single whim has become super prevalent in the last few years...and now I think I can chalk it up to younger folks becoming more active in communities I am apart of. I am now that old man who used to walk uphill both ways in the snow to get to school.....wow.
Options are great but sometimes in life you need to just accept that not everything is going to be for you. It seems to be a concept many here struggle to grasp. "B-but adding it in won't effect your gameplay"...sure I guess but whats to say it won't? whats to say, they won't have to dumb down everything to accommodate it? This idea that there is just this "press the easy mode" button and there ya go needs to die. That requires more testing, more bug fixes and more time and money...for a mode for someone to blow through the game in a weekend and to trade it back in asap instead of actually enjoying the shit they put time in to make.
and what's to stop it from there. To be even more fair, us folks who can't aim for shit should get aimbots in multiplayer games...because don't we totally deserve to experience that content too right? It won't effect the other players at all. thats a massive exaggeration of course but still....what does this push for this all pleasing game actually lead to? Sometimes its just not for you.....I wish teh Witcher 3 was more up my alley....but its not and it never will be. I wish I could be super good at fighting games...but the things that would even potentially allow that to happen would ruin it for many more beyond myself. I don't even like hard games. I used to (probably still do...been a while) rage hard at games...I bounced off of many Dark Souls games before 3. Bounced off of Ninja Gaiden. Only beat DMC3 when SE came out with babby mode. So I get it...but then I don't. The difficulty and barrier is a crucial part of the game's design and while yeah in theory adding an easy mode for you won't necessarily change that...but its much more than jus ta flip of the switch and few values here and there.
bottom line...sometimes its not for you...no matter if you want to experience the story or if you like the art. Sometimes you don't get what you want and you gotta accept that.
but whatever...I'm just an old man of 28 years old yelling at the clouds it appears.
There is a massive disconnect between me and a lot of people on the internet. The sense of entitlement and expecting everything to cater to every single whim has become super prevalent in the last few years...and now I think I can chalk it up to younger folks becoming more active in communities I am apart of. I am now that old man who used to walk uphill both ways in the snow to get to school.....wow.
Options are great but sometimes in life you need to just accept that not everything is going to be for you. It seems to be a concept many here struggle to grasp. "B-but adding it in won't effect your gameplay"...sure I guess but whats to say it won't? whats to say, they won't have to dumb down everything to accommodate it? This idea that there is just this "press the easy mode" button and there ya go needs to die. That requires more testing, more bug fixes and more time and money...for a mode for someone to blow through the game in a weekend and to trade it back in asap instead of actually enjoying the shit they put time in to make.
and what's to stop it from there. To be even more fair, us folks who can't aim for shit should get aimbots in multiplayer games...because don't we totally deserve to experience that content too right? It won't effect the other players at all. thats a massive exaggeration of course but still....what does this push for this all pleasing game actually lead to? Sometimes its just not for you.....I wish teh Witcher 3 was more up my alley....but its not and it never will be. I wish I could be super good at fighting games...but the things that would even potentially allow that to happen would ruin it for many more beyond myself. I don't even like hard games. I used to (probably still do...been a while) rage hard at games...I bounced off of many Dark Souls games before 3. Bounced off of Ninja Gaiden. Only beat DMC3 when SE came out with babby mode. So I get it...but then I don't. The difficulty and barrier is a crucial part of the game's design and while yeah in theory adding an easy mode for you won't necessarily change that...but its much more than jus ta flip of the switch and few values here and there.
bottom line...sometimes its not for you...no matter if you want to experience the story or if you like the art. Sometimes you don't get what you want and you gotta accept that.
but whatever...I'm just an old man of 28 years old yelling at the clouds it appears.
whalleywhat
Member
Also, they shouldn't. I mean, within the scope of all games, people should find all of their desires satisfied, but every single game shouldn't be responsible to every possible type of gamer.
always crazy bacon
Banned
Sounds like a lot of people are against this because someone else will get the "reward" of seeing the ending to a game without "earning" it.
There's enough data out these to suggest most people don't even finish a lot of their games anyway.
There's enough data out these to suggest most people don't even finish a lot of their games anyway.
NoctisVsStar
Member
Hush I'm 28 I ain't no old man... hell I remember when altered beast was dark souls before dark souls ;P I do feel the upcoming generation of gamers lack patience not to mention the tablet gamers which are the kiddos who instead of grabbing a control their first experience is a tablet. The times.. *smokes a cig like old snake.
stuminus3
Member
But imagine how awesome Dark Souls would be if you could kill everything in one hit and you didn't even need to press the button.
Morrigan Stark
Arrogant Smirk
Shit no.
Good post.
pixelation
Member
Yes, i hate feeling frustrated and it wouldn't hurt anyone (if available as an option) so i don't see why it can't be done.
Absolutely. I think accessibility options across all games should be standard. Everything from the ability to skip levels/missions after a certain amount of failures to god-mode like cheats being available in all single player games.
The idea of a significant amount of content being locked behind a skill wall is, I think, a silly notion still left over from arcades where the entire point was to make you keep putting in coins.
No one argues that you shouldn't be allowed to skip to the final chapter of a book unless you read all the other chapters first. Or that the scene selection in a DVD is cheating.
The idea of a significant amount of content being locked behind a skill wall is, I think, a silly notion still left over from arcades where the entire point was to make you keep putting in coins.
No one argues that you shouldn't be allowed to skip to the final chapter of a book unless you read all the other chapters first. Or that the scene selection in a DVD is cheating.
GHG
Gold Member
What is this generation of people?
The future is grim...
Ok seriously... Who does this? You're just robbing yourself of the experience. Why bother? Go do something meaningful for goodness sake if all you're going to do is put in a DVD or start reading a book and then say "LOL TL;DR". Waste of time ffs, you're doing yourself a disservice.
I shouldn't be surprised though when most posts on this very forum are from people who don't even bother to read OP's, threads, or even titles properly in some cases.
Instant gratification scrubs. Then you go to OT and everyone is complaining about how hard life is. Cry me a river. Sorry you can't just skip to the final chapter of life where you're rich and successful without having to get through the beginning and middle bits of the journey.
Double Donut
Member
Jeez, people get mighty defensive over difficulty huh.
I imagine these are the types of people who get angry over the existence of the white tanooki suit in Mario.
Honestly, "easy" difficulty in games nowadays is already so easy that who really cares if they make an even easier option.
I don't get the whole "play how the developers intended" thing. Persona 5 clearly has the intent of keeping you on your toes and constantly playing a complex game of rock-paper-scissors in battle, yet the game offers "safe" difficulty regardless. Never saw anyone complaining about that, so why complain if other games do it too?
Gotta say though, the "damn millennials" comments in this thread sure are classy.
I imagine these are the types of people who get angry over the existence of the white tanooki suit in Mario.
Honestly, "easy" difficulty in games nowadays is already so easy that who really cares if they make an even easier option.
I don't get the whole "play how the developers intended" thing. Persona 5 clearly has the intent of keeping you on your toes and constantly playing a complex game of rock-paper-scissors in battle, yet the game offers "safe" difficulty regardless. Never saw anyone complaining about that, so why complain if other games do it too?
Gotta say though, the "damn millennials" comments in this thread sure are classy.
NoctisVsStar
Member
You make it sound like a bad thing, that skill is required. A game ceases to be fun when the scales tip in your favor, sometimes you just gotta push thru.
Chilled_Eskim01
Member
I believe that this question subverts OP's expectations in what it's asking for from games and developers alike. OP is asking if games should cater to gamers, specifically asking if all games should "have a mode where they can't really die".
Why? Why ask that of people within the industry? Why would you want to make future games so constrained and formulaic?
Specific to the Dark Souls question (never played Odallus so I couldn't say), but the game is built around the difficulty in such a way that changing it would fundamentally alter the identity, purpose and appeal of the game. Hidetaka Miyazaki, the director of Demons' Souls, Dark Souls, Bloodborne and Darks Souls 3 has specifically expressed that the reason that the games are difficult/hard is because he thought it was fun. The Developer enjoyed the challenge, and so made a game based on the appeal that they personally had. It wasn't (originally) meant to be hard to be a contest to see who could finish it, it wasn't meant to be some sort of pillar of the industry to reach for, it wasn't (again originally) meant to be a marketing ploy... the games were difficult because the mind behind them enjoyed the difficulty.
Now let's say that we impose our own desires on the game and warp what it is that the director and development team were crafting. Is that really the game that they wanted to make? Is that fair to discredit their own ideas and desires simply to allow certain people to enjoy it? Of course not! The (pardon the pun) souls of the games would have been changed simply because they wouldn't have been made in the original vision of their creators.
"But adding an easy mode doesn't change the game for other people if they don't play that mode!" Ahh, well hello there Mr. Strawman! Long-time-no-see. I greatly disagree with this "philosophy" of allowing options for the games to have different difficulty options. Again, thinking of Dark Souls, with an online aspect integral to the gameplay, you'd probably have to separate the communities between "easy mode" players and "normal mode players", so that's additional upkeep for online services, let's assume about double from what From Software and Bandai Namco put up for DS1. Then you have the development time and resources needed for the team to come up with balance changes and encounter alterations to accommodate the different difficulties. Question would need to be asked about certain weapon combos and stat builds... Seriously, if you're worried about PvE balancing for an easy mode, how simple would it be for a Giant Dad to invade and throw that comfort out the window? You can still build the stats up, you can still get the armor and weapons (unless you're suggesting that those be removed... and then I'd tell you to tread lightly...), and you'll still have nasty assholes coming into games and disrupting gameplay no matter the difficulty chosen.
Let's face it... Dark Souls is an awful candidate for the "easy mode" argument, as so much of what makes the franchise what it is is the carefully crafted worlds (for the most part... looking at you DS2) and how the balance of most every encounter can be handled by the player. Yes, summons make game easier. Yes, usually ranged and/or magic attacks make the game easier. But there's also the intangible of the player learning and adapting to their situation, gaining the knowledge to progress, and finally persevering through the hardships that make those games worthwhile. It's the accomplishment of overcoming adversity that makes the Souls games worth it... not the settings or gameplay itself.
So no, not all games need to have the "easy mode" or "tourist mode" or whatever you want to call it. Games like Dark Souls are great because of their difficult and the potential that that difficulty can provide in the sense of the industry as a whole. Not everything can or should appeal or be accessible for everyone. Niche hobbies and interests are everywhere, and if we tried to make it so that everyone could enjoy everything... well then nothing would be special... at least that's what I think.
Why? Why ask that of people within the industry? Why would you want to make future games so constrained and formulaic?
Specific to the Dark Souls question (never played Odallus so I couldn't say), but the game is built around the difficulty in such a way that changing it would fundamentally alter the identity, purpose and appeal of the game. Hidetaka Miyazaki, the director of Demons' Souls, Dark Souls, Bloodborne and Darks Souls 3 has specifically expressed that the reason that the games are difficult/hard is because he thought it was fun. The Developer enjoyed the challenge, and so made a game based on the appeal that they personally had. It wasn't (originally) meant to be hard to be a contest to see who could finish it, it wasn't meant to be some sort of pillar of the industry to reach for, it wasn't (again originally) meant to be a marketing ploy... the games were difficult because the mind behind them enjoyed the difficulty.
Now let's say that we impose our own desires on the game and warp what it is that the director and development team were crafting. Is that really the game that they wanted to make? Is that fair to discredit their own ideas and desires simply to allow certain people to enjoy it? Of course not! The (pardon the pun) souls of the games would have been changed simply because they wouldn't have been made in the original vision of their creators.
"But adding an easy mode doesn't change the game for other people if they don't play that mode!" Ahh, well hello there Mr. Strawman! Long-time-no-see. I greatly disagree with this "philosophy" of allowing options for the games to have different difficulty options. Again, thinking of Dark Souls, with an online aspect integral to the gameplay, you'd probably have to separate the communities between "easy mode" players and "normal mode players", so that's additional upkeep for online services, let's assume about double from what From Software and Bandai Namco put up for DS1. Then you have the development time and resources needed for the team to come up with balance changes and encounter alterations to accommodate the different difficulties. Question would need to be asked about certain weapon combos and stat builds... Seriously, if you're worried about PvE balancing for an easy mode, how simple would it be for a Giant Dad to invade and throw that comfort out the window? You can still build the stats up, you can still get the armor and weapons (unless you're suggesting that those be removed... and then I'd tell you to tread lightly...), and you'll still have nasty assholes coming into games and disrupting gameplay no matter the difficulty chosen.
Let's face it... Dark Souls is an awful candidate for the "easy mode" argument, as so much of what makes the franchise what it is is the carefully crafted worlds (for the most part... looking at you DS2) and how the balance of most every encounter can be handled by the player. Yes, summons make game easier. Yes, usually ranged and/or magic attacks make the game easier. But there's also the intangible of the player learning and adapting to their situation, gaining the knowledge to progress, and finally persevering through the hardships that make those games worthwhile. It's the accomplishment of overcoming adversity that makes the Souls games worth it... not the settings or gameplay itself.
So no, not all games need to have the "easy mode" or "tourist mode" or whatever you want to call it. Games like Dark Souls are great because of their difficult and the potential that that difficulty can provide in the sense of the industry as a whole. Not everything can or should appeal or be accessible for everyone. Niche hobbies and interests are everywhere, and if we tried to make it so that everyone could enjoy everything... well then nothing would be special... at least that's what I think.
GHG
Gold Member
Some games are designed around it, some games aren't, it's the developers right. That is what makes a creative and artistic industry what it is, it's up to the developers to decide how you get to experience a game, not you.
Just like if you want to sit down to read a book then you can choose to read this:
Or this:
You want to say options are good? Well good, you are correct. You have the option to play thousands of different types of games, pick one accordingly.