I really hope you?re being facetious. I personally wouldn?t use a skip feature because I do take personal pride in overcoming a challenge, but I certainly wouldn?t look down my nose at someone who chooses/has to ingest their entertainment differently. You play for the challenge, some people just want to have casual fun, others just want to follow the story, etc.; if we all paid the same for the game, what?s the problem in us all getting everything out of it?
If you've ever played an MMO, you know the type. The one who is always begging for gold, because he doesn't want to go grind it or figure out how to earn it within the game. The one who is always begging a higher level or better geared player to take time to "run him through" something so he can get easy phat loots, and whining when people brush him off.
Back when there were cheat codes, the first thing some people would do when they got a new game is look up the cheat codes and play the game in god mode without ever even attempting it normally first.
Yes, those type of gamers make my skin crawl, and I can't help but look down my nose at them. Always looking for a free ride and the easy way. Probably how they are in real life, too.
I think you?re thinking in terms of extremes; most people who?d use this feature would likely be casual gamers, people who legitimately might not have the skills, time or patience to struggle, who made a legitimate purchase and just want to get to the end and see what happens or at least be able to progress when they hit a wall; I don?t think anyone is spending +$60 solely to be a lazy moocher, and if they are, that?s fine too; doesn?t affect me. MMOs (or any multiplayer for that matter,) should of course be protected from ?easy? mode features. I?m not suggesting games that exist solely to test/be a measure of the specific skills of the individual as they pertain to the games? parameters should have a buffer for weaker players; that?s simply not fair. In the ?arena,? all players are equal until their specific skills determine otherwise. I?m saying solely single-player experiences, games wherein an easy mode/boss skip affects no one?s experience save the person who opts to use it.
Honestly, one could see this feature as an evolution of the Achievement/Trophy system. A lot of people have played and beaten Dark Souls; far fewer can say they?ve played it to completion and gotten 100% of achievements/trophies to prove so to whomever (if anyone) cares. With an easy mode/boss skip, simply lock achievements and any other features that assign credit or merit specifically tied to performance, i.e.: prevents NG+ from unlocking in Dark Souls. Doesn?t change the way the game is played and neither does it restrict a valid $60 purchaser from the core content of their purchase, ?core? being the operative word there.
Hell, it?s up to the individual; if skipping all the bosses or god-moding it through the entire game is worth the price, so be it, have at, have fun; just don?t expect there to be any record of your ?easy like Sunday morning? playthrough save for your own fond memories. Personally, for my
$60, I?m gonna grind for 200 hours or let Ornstein have his way with me for 25 deaths until I overcome; that?s fun for me
; an option
to skip the tough bits takes nothing away from my fun. If nothing else, it?s an added challenge! I can think of many of rough time where it was a test of my character to persist; with the ?easy? button right there, I wonder if I?d have pressed it?
TL;DR: I don?t? like ketchup, but I don?t think it?s very existence to be stain on the culinary world and neither do I look at people who slather that shit on their French fries with disdain (disgust, yes, but not disdain.) The option can be there for those who want it
without affecting the game or the industry as a whole; why withhold it?