-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
Will there ever be an EASY mode for Bloodborne?
- Thread starter The_Dama
- Start date
- Status
finalflame
Banned
Not going to fall into your political correctness trap here, but if you are making them out to be the ones least able to cope with the difficulty of the game (I don't actually believe this to be true, as BB is not about fast-paced twitch reaction, but rather well timed movements), then yes, they are the least common denominator.
It's perfectly ok to have a game where the difficulty does not allow someone, potentially but not exclusively someone with a handicap of some sort, to play. We do not need to make every game accessible to everyone, end of story. This is not a government building, it's a video game.
TatteredHat
Member
Yeah, it's really too bad that you're using handicapped people as a shield.
Psychoward
Banned
Most games aren't even equipped to handle handicapped people anyway, why are you singling out Bloodborne?
Palculator
Unconfirmed Member
Please stop.
finalflame
Banned
Are you serious? You can't be serious. Have you dipped low enough to shaming people because a video game potentially not accessible to someone with a handicap? This isn't exclusive to Bloodborne. Not every game can be accessible to everyone, and not every game needs to make accommodations.
It's a game, not a job. Nobody has the right to be able to play every game in existence.
NoctisVsStar
Member
Embarrassing posts using people with disabilities to make a point
This sense of entitlement is laughable not every game is for you nor it needs to be catered to you, if you can't handle it move on
This sense of entitlement is laughable not every game is for you nor it needs to be catered to you, if you can't handle it move on
JudgmentJay
Member
Yeah, I'd still object. Because they could have used the time that they spent solving problems and balancing to make the core game better.
Silent Chief
Member
Maybe we need a PG version of the movie Saw because someone with a heart condition might want to watch it with his family.
Should we make Mt Everest wheelchair accessible?
Not everything is for everybody.
Should we make Mt Everest wheelchair accessible?
Not everything is for everybody.
MajinSweet4
Member
You're still not getting it, they didn't take away any sort of "freedom". It's their game, they make it how they want to. It's up to you to decide if you want to buy it or not. And the notion that having an easy mode couldn't possibly cause problems is so obviously not true. In this topic tons of people have already explained how in many ways an easy mode can detract from the game. People often don't realize how easy it is for players to unknowingly ruin a game for themselves. Many people would certainly use an easy mode if provided even if they didn't truly need it, and never experience the game the way it was meant to be played. But most importantly, their is nothing wrong with not liking a game and not playing it. It blows my mind how people still somehow seemingly get offended by that. We're talking about video games. Skyrim isn't for me, I'm not the type of person that will enjoy it, I'm not going to berate Skyrim for not tailoring itself to my desires, then call people elitist for not taking me seriously. Games that are targeted at specific groups is a good thing. Watering everything down for the sake of pleasing "everyone" is unhealthy to the industry. Not every game needs to appeal to as many people as possible.
StrongBlackVine
Banned
I won't entertain this any further. A person with some physical disability falls in the category with any other player that can't handle the game for whatever reason. There are no special exemptions for game design.
What??
Im not singling out any game. I have seen many handicapped people ask for alternative ways for games to be played and some studios have accommodated because they realize its the right thing to do. Its not going to ruin your experience to enable a mode that lets someone breeze through the game. I wont affect you at all, or the game design, at all. No one is asking for anyone to change the design or vision of the game. Just a mode that lets people see the content.
DoubleTake
Member
This sounds horrible, but how handicapped are we talking? Like others have said these games arent twitch reaction games. Theyre about understanding enemy attacks patterns and knowing when its safe to go in. If a person is able to do that while also press a few buttons they can get through the game. Now if they cant then im of the opinion they shouldnt attempt to play a game that wasnt originally designed to accommodate them.
That doesnt make from any more "insensitive" to the needs of handicapped players than any other developer.
Do you say this for every other game with great art/world design on the market?
The thing is this theoretical world does not exist. And even then, the bigger problem is splitting the user base even more than it already is. You split it more and people that want to help others or be helped have an even harder time, in both modes. Which hurts the overall product.
Every game isn't meant for every person to play. I find games like Dwarf Fortress or MOBAs exceedingly complex, so I don't play them. I don't beg for them to be made less complex for my enjoyment. I just accept that I'm not the target audience and move on to games that are more suited to my tastes. If I really wanted, I'd invest the time to learn them and get into them.
Not every game is meant to be an accessible power fantasy where you plow through it with ease, and that's ok. This is From's design philosophy for their art, and it's integral, in their opinion, to the message of their art. You're free to disagree, but it's unreasonable to expect them to stray from their core vision.
The game's core design principle is making mistakes and learning from them. If you remove that then there's not much left to the game, it all falls apart.
Not every game is meant to be an accessible power fantasy where you plow through it with ease, and that's ok. This is From's design philosophy for their art, and it's integral, in their opinion, to the message of their art. You're free to disagree, but it's unreasonable to expect them to stray from their core vision.
The game's core design principle is making mistakes and learning from them. If you remove that then there's not much left to the game, it all falls apart.
TatteredHat
Member
Just to humor the people going "But think of the handicapped people!", here's a guy beating Ornstein and Smaug using just his voice.
Now stop hiding behind handicapped people because you need to have your hand held.
Now stop hiding behind handicapped people because you need to have your hand held.
finalflame
Banned
It's called a Let's Play and there are literally hundreds of them on YouTube.
EvilKatarn
Member
Plenty of stories about disabled players finishing these games.
Meanwhile fully able people are complaining on the internet that the games need an easy mode.
Meanwhile fully able people are complaining on the internet that the games need an easy mode.
NoctisVsStar
Member
Palculator
Unconfirmed Member
This. And thanks for posting the video, super cool.
Yes, they'd run out of an INFINTE SUPPLY of resources. You're basically not addressing the question as I'm presenting it. I repeat. "supposing the end product just had an easy mode in addition to being as good as it was always going to be", what is the harm of an easy mode?
Indeed, indeed, it doesn't exist. That's what makes it a hypothetical, whose real purpose is getting at the heart of the argument.
And I find the idea that a split fanbase between 2 pieces would make any noticable difference. Honestly, whats going to happen. "You have to hit the enemy in the knee 5 times to make him stagger" "WHAT I AM NOT PLAYING EASY MODE, YOU HAVE TO HIT HIM 8 TIMES, GOD, HOW DO I COPE WITH THIS MISINFORMATION"
Unless they literally go out of their way to create different moves for easy mode, the same general strategies would apply, man.
EvilKatarn
Member
That's not how game development works. There in fact is only a finite amount of resources to go around.
What's even the point of bringing up this imaginary scenario? It's not a realistic one and you know it.
Do you want a yes? Yes, in Imagination Land I'd be fine with that. In the real world that's not the case.
DoubleTake
Member
Thank you. Really shameful to try and pull handicapped people into this in attempt to prove one's point.
ZoltanXerxes
Member
You miss the point of the Souls games if you want an easy mode. (Bloodborne is technically a souls game, at least to me).
The real reason From won't add easy mode is that adding stuff to games isn't free. Anything you add takes time to design and implement. The most simplistic idea for "easy mode" might be to just divide enemy health and damage by half, but that's not going to satisfy anyone and raises its own set of further design questions. Do easy mode players get separate multiplayer matchmaking? What if good players intentionally set themselves to easy mode just to invade noobs? Do you have to completely strip out punishin mechanics (like invasions) from easy mode? Do certain bosses' or enemies' one-hit kill mechanics need to be disabled? Etc.
Some of the other ideas put forth in this thread have more profound design implications. Think about how different (and worse) the level design was in DS2 with the addition of point-to-point fast travel from the beginning of the game. Now imagine what might happen if From added "optional" pre-boss checkpoints. They'd have even less incentive to craft cleverly looping levels with cool shortcuts and hidden bonfires because hey, players can just turn on easy mode if they want it to be less of a hassle. It would inevitably change the way From designed these games, probably to the detriment of players who like them the way they are.
Some of the other ideas put forth in this thread have more profound design implications. Think about how different (and worse) the level design was in DS2 with the addition of point-to-point fast travel from the beginning of the game. Now imagine what might happen if From added "optional" pre-boss checkpoints. They'd have even less incentive to craft cleverly looping levels with cool shortcuts and hidden bonfires because hey, players can just turn on easy mode if they want it to be less of a hassle. It would inevitably change the way From designed these games, probably to the detriment of players who like them the way they are.
JudgmentJay
Member
Sure, if we lived in a universe where this was possible, then by all means put in an easy mode. Unfortunately we live in this universe where developers don't have an infinite supply of resources and time so the fact remains that the core game would suffer by the addition of modal difficulty.
finalflame
Banned
The harm is that's not the point of the game. The Souls games have, as a defining characteristic, the fact that you need to put time and effort into learning its systems in order to succeed. This is not ancillary to the game, it's a core aspect of it. Adding an easy mode undermines that and fundamentally changes the game.
To help you understand how true that is, just think that this whole discussion isn't going to change a thing and Souls games will continue to never have an easy mode. That's because the creators of the game know what they are making, and by adding an "easy" mode, you are essentially diluting the game from what is intended in order to appease the lowest common denominator.
This isn't like CoD where a toggle between easy and hard means you can take less bullets or enemies take less damage. The difficulty in the Souls games is engrained into the game's design. The Souls series breeds mechanically challenging games. That's it.
Uno Venova
Banned
Because it eliminates the variables he's presenting. If he's actually saying that it's about technical issues rather than the principle, then he should have no issue with an easy mode supposing that weren't the case.
Besides, the way development works, more resources can actually make a game worse, depending on how it's made. Development isn't a linear path, after all. Art is never really done, only abandoned, and so on.
That said, I find it pretty unlikely that an easy mode would take as much time and effort as he's suggesting. The cost would be either neglibible or close to. Honestly, it could be as easy as sliding the damage value up. It wouldn't be a good way to design combat, but the point of the easy mode is to make combat neglibible, so I'd be fine with it in that case.
Fair enough. Atleast then I know you're arguing from your genuine place, instead of just against an easy mode as a concept.
However, as I said above, I highly doubt an easy mode would be as difficult to implement as you make it out to be, especially if it's halfassed like sliding damage values, which I actually wouldn't mind if all I'm going for is a story.
So play that way. Go ahead. That experience is never in any danger of being taken away from you. The question is why do others forcibly have to this as well?
It's wrong to think there is any single point to any game. If that's the reason you play souls, that's fine. But it might not be why I play it. As long as I don't intrude on your experience, why is it that I can't have mine?
DoubleTake
Member
Okay, now you tell me, where is the wrong in a creator adhering to their vision and requiring the player to hit that monster in the knee 8 times instead of 5? If the creator feels that 8 instead of 5 adds more to the experience they wish to create why take that from them?
Because it has to appeal to everyone on this planet! Don't you see?
OmegaTreeFish
Banned
I still don't understand what exactly people want an easy mode to be?
These games are about solving them like a puzzle that's the levels and the enemies movement patterns. Take that away and they would suck.
These games are about solving them like a puzzle that's the levels and the enemies movement patterns. Take that away and they would suck.
Palculator
Unconfirmed Member
We do know NG+ just scales to whatever iteration you're currently on. So they must have some way to easily adjust the damage/health/whatever of every enemy in the game. A very, very lazy easy mode could be done by having the game treat it as "half" a playthrough, basically. Instead of scaling the stats up like they do in NG+++++++++ or whatever, they'd scale them down using the same formula. Doesn't sound like too much work.
Either way, it wouldn't fit the theme and intention of the games at all and lead to a much different experience. People pointing out they should play a different game aren't too far off, because wanting an easy Souls game is basically asking for another game. Of which there are many available to fulfill anyone's handholding needs.
Nothing more than what is wrong with a player wanting 5 hits. A creator's desire is not inherently anymore special or important or correct than a random players. IF the creator feels 8 is the magic number and that's the best way to play the game, fine, but that's free for others to disagree with, especially since the player and creator will want to go for different things. When I do play the souls games eventually, I might not really want to bother with the combat at all, but really want to get into the story. Even if the creator feels that there is some extreme reason why the two simply cannot go without each other then he might make it like that, but he could be wrong.
The whole "play another game" is such a bad argument. First off, it can apply to literally any game for any reason. Second, suppose I want to play a game that is VERY much like Souls, to the point where it has it's entire environment, characters, voice acting, levels, music, graphics, etc, with literally the only difference being that it has weaker enemies. Would it be a different game? Yes, which is the whole point of asking for an easy mode. If people want to play the same dark souls, then there would be no point to the call for an easy mode. So I know I am asking for a 'different' game and experience. That specific different experience I am asking for is still pretty much like Dark Souls, with the only exception being the weaker enemies. Different, sure, but not to the extent of playing Halo instead or anything.
FantasticMrFoxdie
Mumber
Yikes at some of these exchanges.
All in all this is why they need to bring back Gameshark/ActionReplay/cheat codes
All in all this is why they need to bring back Gameshark/ActionReplay/cheat codes
Pellegri Testament
Member
Uhh...you are aware of the story being almost non existent in these games right? Like you literally get nothing other than what a small amount of npcs tell you and even then they don't say much. The combat is the primary focus of the games, there is no "not really bothering with it" when it throws you into it every step of the way.
StrongBlackVine
Banned
If you are interested in Souls games primarily for the stories just watch some lore videos on YouTube. Seriously there is not a lot of dialogue and cutscenes.
Saying you might not want to bother with the combat at all means you don't want to play these games at all. The combat is the game. It is not something to push you towards the next cinematic.
SmoothRunningGun
Member
There basically was one at launch (a bug that allowed you to over level like crazy). It's been patched though. I don't think you're missing much. Witcher 3 is a much better game.
The normal mode of this game is easier than any released Souls game. The visceral attack system, 20 blood vials from the start, blunderbluss parries, summoning, etc makes it as easy as you want it to be. The bosses are somewhat mixed for me as a solo player. There was only one wall boss while the others were all within to 0 to 2 death range. I played a slow turtle in Souls, and to be honest i'm not the best player, but I found this considerably easier. This game is just souls lite.
I will agree though that the Tutorial system in Bloodborne absolutely sucks compared to any other Souls game though. It's so barebones.
I will agree though that the Tutorial system in Bloodborne absolutely sucks compared to any other Souls game though. It's so barebones.
DoubleTake
Member
In my opinion the creator's desire does hold more weight than the random player's. Without the creator's vision there is no basis for the random player's dissension. Thankfully we dont live in a hypothetical world where there is only one creator, or one where the random player isnt able to adhere to the requirements. No there isnt anything wrong with disagreeing with how something works, but that doesnt mean the person who created said thing should remold it to fit your idea of correct.
The thing is you will never get that from FROM SOFTWARE. So better to wait for someone else to do this perfect copy of Souls with lower difficulty than to ask a team that is very steadfast to change their vision of a game, one that has spawned millions of fans for keeping with said vision.
Keep in mind that I am arguing from a principle here. I haven't actually played the Souls games except for a little bit, but I haven't felt they were unfair or anything and will play them when I get the chance. Honestly, the hardest decision right now for me is whether I start with Demons Souls, Dark Souls, or Bloodborne first. And in any case, I'd want to explore the world myself from the perspective of my player character, so I can look at stuff how I want.
I'm just objecting to the idea that an easy mode will in some way inherently change the game for EVERYONE. No, it won't. It will just mean that people who don't want to bother with the combat will not have to bother with the combat as much. There's no real argument to be made for excluding it except elitism that I see, the feeling anyone who plays might get the 'proper' experience.
Sure they should. That's the whole point of game mods and fanfiction and such. It's just not practical, since you can't mod a console to alter it how you like.
Here's the truth I feel people often misconstitute: The creator is nothing more and nothing less than a random player. The act of creating isn't anything more than rearranging what is already there, building it up into something greater. The validity of a design choice isn't dependent on who it comes from, but how well that design choice works. And how it works is dependent as to what the players purpose is. And the players purpose is dependent on the players choice.
A creator makes the game they want based on what he wants to play. Ordinary gamers do the same, they just don't have the luxury of having the resources of game development to make such a design a reality.
Using disabled people as a straw man to argue that a game is too tough for you to beat is pretty gross. There are people who have beaten dark souls with their voice, with a guitar hero controller, without leveling up or using any gear and with a mod to make it extra difficult. Even twitch chat has beaten dark souls.
The core mechanic of the game is making mistakes and learning from them. If you take that away the entire game design will fall apart like a house of cards. There is more or less no other point to these games.
The core mechanic of the game is making mistakes and learning from them. If you take that away the entire game design will fall apart like a house of cards. There is more or less no other point to these games.
Palculator
Unconfirmed Member
I know technically every change to a game would make it a "different game." My point (and most other people who have argued a similar point) is that it's a huge departure from the original game, so much so that it misses the point of the game and acts against both experience and themes. "Weaker enemies" isn't the only exception, it changes the tone and atmosphere.
swazzyswess
Member
pretty sure most Souls fans, regardless of where they post, realize an easy mode is fundamentally at odds with the core philosophy of these games.
John Kowalski
Banned
i wonder if the game recognizes fuck
StrongBlackVine
Banned
I see people that are happy with the game as is and I see people asking for changes that are not needed. It is not elitism to expect people to accept a great product as is. I see entitlement from people expecting to be catered to because they might spend $60. You are being told to take your money elsewhere literally by me and sliently by the developers who have not added an easy mode in 5 games despite the knowledge that the percieved difficulty turns some people away.
Hm...that's a fair counterpoint, though I would still argue that it is a valid choice for anyone who decides that the alteration in tone and atmosphere is a worthwhile sacrifice for the ease of weaker enemies.
That you agree that the product is great as it is is not a valid argument that people who disagree are wrong. I could just as easily say "I see people that are content with rigid structure as is and I see people asking for changes that would improve the experience." Again, the whole "Play a different game" is an awful argument and it is elitism to say "Take it how it is or GTFO"
Pellegri Testament
Member
But the combat and the difficulty are the main focus of the games? If people just don't want to bother with the combat then there's really little reason to play said games. If all you're wanting to do is turn the game into something it's not, why not play another game? A single game is not going to appeal to everyone, nor is it going to feel like every other game out there. I understand the dark fantasy aesthetic is nice and all, but this series really is not the only one that uses it.
The main focus of the game is whatever the player decides to focus on. Neither you nor the devs get to choose what individal goals are. If I were to want to play for the sole purpose of visiting the games environments, then there's nothing wrong with that. And having a mode that allows that more easily would not be a detriment to you or anyone else.
- Status