New hard game comes out. Idiot press wants easy mode.

[Squilookle]

Arguing against easy mode is entiteled nonsense. How does it detract from your experience if someone less good at the game than yourself has a chance to finish it? Do they break into your house, steal your copy of the game and permanently rewrite the code to lock it in easy mode? No? Then maybe stop complaining and enjoy the game. Is the enjoyment of FromSoftware games finite or something? If you have to resort to this kind of petty and aggressive gatekeeping to enjoy a game, maybe take a step back and re-evaluate your actions

I think arguing for easy mode is equally entitled.

The people arguing against easy modes are using all kinds of whacky pseudo-religious soapboxing to justify their arguments. You have one side asking for a mechanically easier experience to allow them to experience the world and story of the game, something which could easily be accomplished without any major investment of resources. Case in Point, the ATLUS game Catherine is a puzzle game with three difficulty settings, normal, extra hard for people interested in puzzle mechanics and a story-centric easy mode. The Easy mode simply gives the player infinite lives and turn-reversing. If someone just wanted to be able to actually get through Dark souls in a reasonable ammount of time, would say, an infinite estus mode not solve most of that? The people who are against Easy modes are arguing that there is a wrong way to enjoy the game and people who aren't willing to conform to their 'right' way they don't deserve to play it. Difficulty isn't comparable to the text in a book or the actors in a movie, arguing against an easy-mode is more like arguing that it should be illegal to publish translated versions of the Oddysey and that anyone who wants to read it should learn ancient greek fluently. It also makes the assumption that people with disabilities are not 'true fans', that there are no natural impediments to motor functions or reaction time the player simply cannot help. I never heard an alpinist say they should cancel the paralympix because disabled atheltes are just lazy or that it dilutes the value of the sport

I'm not against a game coming out and solely being hard by design- but people arguing against easy modes existing in general is as stupid as saying games all ought to be multiplayer-only.

 

[CritialGaming]

The point was why does everything have to cater to the lowest common denominator or have options to do so with, when in some cases it only dilutes the intended purpose of the creative work?

And what is the intended purpose? To have the fact that you CAN'T change the difficulty constantly hang over your head? Because I never got that from these games. I got that they were hard. I also got that God of War on Challenging was hard, or that Horizon: Zero Dawn on Ultra-Hard was hard. And on those games I never felt enticed to lower the difficulty even when dying 10 times in a row to the same enemy.

Is Sekiro having an English dub catering to the lowest common denominator as well? It's not the way the game was intended (the Japanese language option is literally the default), does this option delute the experience? How about the fact that you can tweek and change the controls to suit your needs, or turn off the music all together? These people aren't getting the true, undiluted experience.

And here's the thing, people are going to find a way to make a game easier no matter what. All this talk of 'path of least resistence' is total BS. Whether it's Dark Souls, Bloodborne, or Sekiro, people will try to exploit the game's mechnics to cheat and make things easier on themselves. Eveyone who has played these games has done this; running past enemies to get back to a Boss, throwing rocks to kite enemies and deal with them one by one, or ofcourse staying in an area with easier enemies to grind for EXP. This is not the path of least resistence, it's expoitation. And there's nothing wrong with that, but don't try to make it out to be like these games are some kind of pure construction and that adding one measily little lower difficulty would tarnish it.

It?s seems like this is just an argument for argument?s sake. It is clearly a conscious design choice for FROM to put in an ?option? for English subs, which is of course practical. It is also a conscious design choice to forego a difficulty select from their games. They must have done it for a reason. Are they sadistic or elitist for doing so? Or are they simply trying to invoke a certain response from the gamer? Judging by the remarkable following the series has gained, which in no small part is due to the unique challenge involved, it would seem they know what they?re doing.

If they ever change their design philosophy, then so be it. But they don?t seem to have any plans to, so I never really understood why this argument persists, at least in their case.

 

[Casual Shinji]

It?s seems like this is just an argument for argument?s sake. It is clearly a conscious design choice for FROM to put in an ?option? for English subs, which is of course practical. It is also a conscious design choice to forego a difficulty select from their games. They must have done it for a reason. Are they sadistic or elitist for doing so? Or are they simply trying to invoke a certain response from the gamer? Judging by the remarkable following the series has gained, which in no small part is due to the unique challenge involved, it would seem they know what they?re doing.

If they ever change their design philosophy, then so be it. But they don?t seem to have any plans to, so I never really understood why this argument persists, at least in their case.

No, I'm arguing that an Easy mode would be an option just like putting in an English dub was an option. And that neither is catering to the lowest common denominator. Or at least, if one is than so is the other. The recent Yakuza games don't have an English dub, and playing it in Japanese is in my opinion the best way to experience it, but I wouldn't be against an optional dub should Sega want to include it. They're including one with Judge Eyes (if that game ever sees release), and just because I would never touch it doesn't mean I think the inclusion of one would dilute the experience for me.

If they ever change their design philosophy, then so be it. But they don?t seem to have any plans to, so I never really understood why this argument persists, at least in their case.

Then we agree, because again I'm not calling for Fromsoft to include one, I'm just saying fans shouldn't be so insulted by the idea of these games having one. They're great games, but they're not anymore special mechanically or aesthetically than other hard games that do have a difficulty slider. Not to the point that they would somehow lose their value or pupose should they have one.

 

[Silvanus]

If they ever change their design philosophy, then so be it. But they don?t seem to have any plans to, so I never really understood why this argument persists, at least in their case.

Couldn't this apply to anything at all, though? Any suggestion, or any critique that isn't just unqualified praise, at least. That's the nature of feedback.

 

[votemarvel]

I don't understand why people enjoy the frustration genre. Souls-like games aren't made to entertain, they are designed to frustrate. They aren't there to challenge, there are there to annoy. And I confess I don't understand how after a day at work people can want to come home and play something like that.

Also I don't understand why you would create so detailed a world, rich with lore and history, and then want to limit it to people who can 'git gud'.

If video games are meant to be art then they are meant to expand people's understanding and appreciation, not lock themselves off because they are on;y for an elite.

 

[Dirty Hipsters]

I don't understand why people enjoy the frustration genre. Souls-like games aren't made to entertain, they are designed to frustrate. They aren't there to challenge, there are there to annoy. And I confess I don't understand how after a day at work people can want to come home and play something like that.

Also I don't understand why you would create so detailed a world, rich with lore and history, and then want to limit it to people who can 'git gud'.

If video games are meant to be art then they are meant to expand people's understanding and appreciation, not lock themselves off because they are on;y for an elite.

I'm pretty sure that anyone who feels annoyed playing a Souls ends up not playing them, and anyone who does play them and likes them does feel challenged rather than annoyed.

 

[EvilRoy]

I suppose I'm arguing from the standpoint that I expect you want an easy mode to be essentially the same game as the normal mode except easier to play. If you're alright with pulling core gameplay mechanics out then yes, it would be fairly easy to do.

That's because its part of the budget - I'm talking relative terms not order of magnitude. Adding a difficulty mode costs money that otherwise goes to something else, since it all takes from the same pot. When you ask for an easy mode, you're asking for money that would otherwise go to something I like to go to something you like. We can argue about amounts or reasonableness or such, but fundamentally that is the discussion that is happening.

Why would you have to take core mechanics out of Souls or Sekiro to make an Easy mode? Making an Easy mode is just giving the player more margin for error, which can be accomplished in many different ways. Simply starting a player out with 4 estus flasks instead of 2 and giving them 2 more vitality for a bigger health bar accomplishes that. Adjusting the damage/posture given/taken modifiers changes that.

I was responding to CS's suggestion to pull certain things like player poise and such - since although yes that would reduce difficulty, just pulling it out would fundamentally change the way the game is played.

I didn't see your previous post until just now, but if changing this stuff really is as easy and moving sliders and they won't actually need to do much in the way of extra testing or this or that to do it then most of my complaints are addressed.

I just don't like the argument of "doing this would be so easy and take no time" because a lot of the time, and most of the projects I'm involved in, not only is that not true, but it is way not true. If you ever drive by a construction project and wonder "oh man I wonder why they don't just...", the answer is almost universally "because it costs minimum 50K, plus the cost of time to actually organize it all". I have multiple projects where PMs bill out at more than 400 $/hr. Having a 1 hour meeting with them and everyone else just to make a decision costs in the order of 5K. If you want to tell me they overbill, I agree, but that's industry standard for us. All money is always spoken for at the start of a project, there is never ever spare, and if you want to do something then you gotta pony up or you gotta find someone else willing to give up their share. Even when things fuck up, its actually usually cheaper to stay the course with stupid then try to change tacts to fix it.

 

[Phoenixmgs_v1legacy]

I didn't see your previous post until just now, but if changing this stuff really is as easy and moving sliders and they won't actually need to do much in the way of extra testing or this or that to do it then most of my complaints are addressed.

Just think of how much longer balancing the game to any difficulty (including default) would take if devs didn't have toolkits to change things on the fly. Here's a video [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4lzyjeXRwhg&feature=youtu.be&t=3626] of the MLB The Show devs with their toolkit on screen changing things on the fly during a livestream. I used to link to another video (that is now deleted) where they set up the game to have the batter hit every ball to 1st base to test first baseman animations and they changed it via their toolkit in seconds. Proof of that stuff exists in finished games like how taunting in many action games changing AI aggressiveness on the fly or items/gear that change modifiers for all kinds of stuff from crit % and damage to even increasing i-frames. Hell, I remember playing High Heat baseball on PC way back and changing the modifier for grass friction in the config file.

 

[Dalisclock]

I know this is probably missing the point of this vigurous back and forth, but rather then include an easy mode, I'd much prefer FROM have cleaned up some of the difficultly spikes/frutrations due to design or just lack of playtesting.

Off the top of my head:
-Bloodborne: The Micolash boss battle to not be a giant exercise in frustration where you literally have to chase the fucker around before he decides to run to his damn boss room, twice, before you can fight him. EVERY. SINGLE. TIME.
-Bloodborne: I love the Lady Maria fight, but she's OP as all hell and she's NOT optional if you want to finish the DLC(unlike Lawrence, whose just a giant damage sponge). Phase 3 is particularly painful when she can smack you from halfway across the damn room with her flaming blood.
-Dark Souls: The Capra Demon is hard mostly because he lives in a fucking closet, has dogs and can oneshot you half the time you walk through the damn fog gate.
-Dark Souls: Bed of Chaos. No Explanation needed.
-Dark Souls: Crystal Cave. Invisible fucking bridges that change direction mid span. No fucking Bueno.
-Dark Souls: Returning to the Asylum very likely gets you dropped into another boss fight because you dared to walk confidently across a floor that didn't collapse last time you were there only to have to have it collapse this time.
-Dark Souls 2: The opening areas either throw you into small mobs or up against huge fuckers with very little room to evade, few estus charges and very little equipment to work with(most of the classes don't get a shield upon start). This feels like an unreasonable difficulty spike very early. DS1 had an early choice between skeletons, ghosts and zombies, with the skeletons and ghosts supposed to be a clear hint to "turn around and go back. You're not ready yet". Except DS2, both intially available routes are tough as nails.
-Dark Souls 2: The whole "You can hollow all the way down to 50% health and your restorative items are finite" is a major kick in the pants if you take a long time to figure it out or don't know about the one ring that limits the health cap drop to 75%. The fact an early method to avoid this problem was removed in an early patch(A ring that mitigated this and was fairly cheap to repair) makes it even worse, since FROM initially was fine with people not having to deal with it.
-Dark Souls 2: The aggressive hostile spirits who spawn at certain points and the ease in which you can be invaded feels like a bit much, especially since DS1 wasn't nearly as bad in either respect.
-Dark Souls 2: First half of Iron keep feels like the worst part of Anor Londo(you know the part I'm talking about) except you have dudes charging you while asshole archers are sniping you. Yep.
-Dark Souls 2(Noticing a Pattern here?):Most people agree Shrine of Amana can go to hell.
I'm not even gonna bother talking about the DLC and optional content for DS2 because I'll be here all day.

Honestly, some of it is less hard and more just frustrating and obtuse, that doesn't even require an easy mode. It just needs to be properly balanced to it actually lives up to the "tough but fair".

 

[CritialGaming]

If they ever change their design philosophy, then so be it. But they don?t seem to have any plans to, so I never really understood why this argument persists, at least in their case.

Couldn't this apply to anything at all, though? Any suggestion, or any critique that isn't just unqualified praise, at least. That's the nature of feedback.

True, but to me difficultly selection is a bit outdated in general, or at the very least only beneficial for certain genres like sports, fighting, or racing games. It makes sense there moreso than action adventure or RPG where the game?s design itself should be malleable enough to allow flexibility for the player to make things easier or tougher. I also like the idea of difficulty and challenge being built into the game objectives themselves. Like having easy or moderately difficult tasks but also have exceptional tasks of say, climbing the highest most treturous peak to test one?s skill for a platformer, or killing the most legendary sword fighter for combat. The SoulsBorne games and Sekiro as well as others have demonstrated that difficulty can be malleable without a menu option, and that?s a part of their appeal and why they?ve attained such a high following and distinction as being uniquely challenging.

I don't understand why people enjoy the frustration genre. Souls-like games aren't made to entertain, they are designed to frustrate. They aren't there to challenge, there are there to annoy. And I confess I don't understand how after a day at work people can want to come home and play something like that.

Also I don't understand why you would create so detailed a world, rich with lore and history, and then want to limit it to people who can 'git gud'.

If video games are meant to be art then they are meant to expand people's understanding and appreciation, not lock themselves off because they are on;y for an elite.

The difficulty is a part of the appeal, but yeah it?s not for ?everyone?. The idea is to create a sense of satisfaction from the player for meeting and surpassing the challenges on a level playing field.. Everyone goes into these games at the same level of challenge, and the satisfaction of triumphing over the obstacles is therefore unilaterally felt. As has been said many times already, they aren?t even the most difficult games out there, but they also don?t really have to be. It makes the whole argument over the need for difficulty select in these few games like all others already have feel trivial and unwarranted.

 

[EvilRoy]

I didn't see your previous post until just now, but if changing this stuff really is as easy and moving sliders and they won't actually need to do much in the way of extra testing or this or that to do it then most of my complaints are addressed.

Just think of how much longer balancing the game to any difficulty (including default) would take if devs didn't have toolkits to change things on the fly. Here's a video [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4lzyjeXRwhg&feature=youtu.be&t=3626] of the MLB The Show devs with their toolkit on screen changing things on the fly during a livestream. I used to link to another video (that is now deleted) where they set up the game to have the batter hit every ball to 1st base to test first baseman animations and they changed it via their toolkit in seconds. Proof of that stuff exists in finished games like how taunting in many action games changing AI aggressiveness on the fly or items/gear that change modifiers for all kinds of stuff from crit % and damage to even increasing i-frames. Hell, I remember playing High Heat baseball on PC way back and changing the modifier for grass friction in the config file.

Well that's kinda why I figured things like balance patches take so long (MP games like OW notwithstanding). I understand you don't go right from releasing a game to changing everything, but even with a generous wait between release and the start of change consideration, I assumed that there was a substantial chunk of time that went into the hardcoded changes to the game itself, followed by testing, changing, testing, changing. I'm sure that still happens, but I never considered that the changing aspect would be so immediately achievable.

 

[Phoenixmgs_v1legacy]

I don't understand why people enjoy the frustration genre. Souls-like games aren't made to entertain, they are designed to frustrate. They aren't there to challenge, there are there to annoy. And I confess I don't understand how after a day at work people can want to come home and play something like that.

Souls games aren't hard, there's so much pretension with regards to these games' difficulty. I feel like much of the hardcore fanbase makes these games into something they're not because reasons... Something as popular as COD multiplayer requires far more skill (in reaction, hand-eye coordination, reading/anticipating opponents, etc.) than any Souls game. There's only a small handful of legit difficult sections/bosses in each of these games with some of them being cheaply/poorly designed (as Dalisclock listed a couple posts above this). You've most likely played a harder action game sometime in your gaming history.

 

[I can't enter my old name]

All of this stems from the fact that game reviewers can't beat the game in time for their review. They're asking for their job to be easier. This isn't some noble cause, but they sure can make it look like one. It always goes like "I don't like X, something something wider audience."

All this complaining is before the exploits and guides come out that make the game beatable to the general audience. This is also before the trainers and mods come out.

Can't play the last stage in easy mode? Then easy mode is practice for normal mode. The entire point of Cuphead is to turn a 2 hour game into a 20 hour game. The reason why the last stage is locked is because you're not ready for it. The last stage is supposed to be a test of mastery, a culmination of everything you learned, a climax of skillful execution, flair, and spectacle that colors your final impression of the game.

This thing is nothing new if you played a single Touhou game before, which game journalists will never do. It's simply a game attracting the wrong audience with it's media coverage due to it's unique artstyle.

All that being said, every game needs cheat codes. It takes absolutely no effort and you can turn it on and off whenever you hit a roadblock. They were the standard for PC games before the dark age of console ports. It's the perfect solution.

 

[Casual Shinji]

I'm pretty sure that anyone who feels annoyed playing a Souls ends up not playing them, and anyone who does play them and likes them does feel challenged rather than annoyed.

I don't know, I like these games and the challenge undoubtedly adds to that enjoyment, but I feel a lot of the challenge stems from wrestling with the game's clunkiness. It's this part of the challenge that annoys me, and I don't understand why six games in Fromsoft can't invest in a decent camera and lock-on.

A game like Hollow Knight is equally tough, yet I never felt that same strain as I do with Fromsoft games, because Hollow Knight's controls are super solid. I don't feel like I need to split my attention between focussing on the actual fight and focussing on managing the camera and lock-on.

 

[TheMysteriousGX]

All of this stems from the fact that game reviewers can't beat the game in time for their review. They're asking for their job to be easier. This isn't some noble cause, but they sure can make it look like one. It always goes like "I don't like X, something something wider audience."

Which game reviewer? Find literally any example.

Because, as I continue to point out, Games Journalists love games like Cuphead and Sekiro. On Metacritic, right now, the Critic score for Sekiro is one or two whole points higher than the User score, on a scale of ten. Don't fall for the outrage merchant's manufactured controversies ala Cuphead and Doom. They're playing the victim.

This thing is nothing new if you played a single Touhou game before, which game journalists will never do. It's simply a game attracting the wrong audience with it's media coverage due to it's unique artstyle.

Yep, just hitting the wrong games journalist audience who're giving it solid 8-9.5/10 scores and will likely put it on every "Best of 2019" list in the industry.

Seriously, the only person I've seen talk about accessability options for Sekiro in any more detail than "difficulty options would be nice" has been halfoordinated, and he's A) not a games journalist, and B) a one handed speed runner who'd absolutely love more options so he can play more games. Heck, with the lack of button remapping and mandatory motion controls, he's been basically cut out of Nintendo games these days. So, if he's talking about ways to get players up to a baseline of "can play the game", I'm gonna damn well listen.

 

[Trunkage]

I'm pretty sure that anyone who feels annoyed playing a Souls ends up not playing them, and anyone who does play them and likes them does feel challenged rather than annoyed.

I don't know, I like these games and the challenge undoubtedly adds to that enjoyment, but I feel a lot of the challenge stems from wrestling with the game's clunkiness. It's this part of the challenge that annoys me, and I don't understand why six games in Fromsoft can't invest in a decent camera and lock-on.

A game like Hollow Knight is equally tough, yet I never felt that same strain as I do with Fromsoft games, because Hollow Knight's controls are super solid. I don't feel like I need to split my attention between focussing on the actual fight and focussing on managing the camera and lock-on.

Except hitting downwards while jumping. I found that awkward. But I was competent enough to get through the White Palace

 

[CritialGaming]

snip

I agree with you. I don't believe that this completely stems from reviewers not being able to beat the games. If you notice these "too hard" article never seem to come directly from reviewers, but instead come from side journalists for any given outlet. I find it funny that Forbes has two articles saying Sekiro should have an easy mode, and another article saying that it doesn't. It's like the same outlet can't come up with a single voice regarding the same game.

Frankly I don't feel like the people who actually REVIEW the games, have any problems with the difficulty.

To be it stems from these "Journalists" having to write shit articles in order to generate clicks. They always have to find something to ***** about with whatever big game is the flavor of the month. With Division 2 it was articles about what political statement the game was making. With Sekiro it is the difficulty. It just seems like there is always something, and what kills me is that the people I think would see past the nonsense (you guys, gamers on a gaming website dedicated enough to want to have conversations to keep this place afloat) defend articles filled with nonsense.

FromSoft creates games with a specific feel in mind. Difficulty is such a deep part of the game that it is fundamental to the actual story of the games! Sekiro is about trying to sever the ties of immortality that brings the player back to life over and over again and spreads a terrible disease over the people caught in a war. If the game was easy and the player could beat it without too much trouble, then the story of the game itself loses all impact. Dark Souls also had it's world and story tied to the player's constant death and persistence through the misery. Death and difficulty is core to these games.

So yes, imo adding an easy mode would serve to defeat the whole point of what FromSoft designs. And that's okay. I'll never be a Starcraft pro, does that mean Starcraft should change so I can play it? I'll never understand attack frames in fighting games, should they have a mode that ignores frames so that I can play them?

Obviously the answer is no. I don't want those games to change to appeal to me. Because I understand that those games don't appeal to my tastes or interests as a gamer. But I understand that there are people who love them and that's fine too.

DarkSouls fandom is blamed for gatekeeping and there are surely some trolly people that do that. But most of the Darksouls players are often encouraging, giving tips and advice to players who are struggling because they know that feeling of overcoming a difficult boss. Look on reddit, when people ask for help, people are always there to give tips and tricks to help people through. We don't want the difficulty to change because we want those players to feel that rush of success, and we'll do everything we can to help people through short of doing it for them (and in Souls games people will join you to help you directly as well).

 

[Rangaman]

I don't understand why people enjoy the frustration genre. Souls-like games aren't made to entertain, they are designed to frustrate. They aren't there to challenge, there are there to annoy. And I confess I don't understand how after a day at work people can want to come home and play something like that.

Also I don't understand why you would create so detailed a world, rich with lore and history, and then want to limit it to people who can 'git gud'.

If video games are meant to be art then they are meant to expand people's understanding and appreciation, not lock themselves off because they are on;y for an elite.

Under the assumption that games are art then not only are you are grossly distorting the truth, you're confusing "art" and "entertainment". Art is meant to challenge your perceptions and beliefs, not pander to people who want everything to be easy and accessible. Call me elitist if you want, but the fact remains that the primary distinction between art and entertainment is that one is made by the artist to share, the other is made for the people to consume.

The alternative is that videogames are meant to be entertainment. In which case, an easy difficulty mode is perfectly acceptable. That does, rather unfortunately, undermine the argument about Souls lore having artistic value since, you know, games aren't art anymore. Also it prevents you from calling games "art".

And to end your confusion: we play it because we enjoy it.

 

[Kerg3927]

You're giving me enough straw to build an army here man. Didn't like it? Isn't the concept clearly that they like the idea but struggle to get into it? Hence my suggestion, easy mode that is still challenging?

Yeah I know you used it as a metaphor for jealousy. It's just that using a metaphor on how someone was so jealous that he killed his brother when talking about the possibility of an easy mode in a video game is overdramatic, to say the least. Also it requires jealously to be present. It isn't. That's you imagining things and taking a video game way too seriously. And I'm gonna let you in on something. The games are special to me too. But I don't lose my shit over a suggested addition that I would never touch anyway. It's not hard.

"Test of gamer mantle." Oh please. I think Dark Souls is hard, but test of gamer mantle hard? Not even close.

My problem was not making biblical references. It was you thinking that comparing people who criticized an aspect of your game to the first murderer was somehow appropriate.

Fair enough. I disagree, but I think I understand your side. Luckily, From Software also disagrees with you.

I think you underestimate the the impact of adding an easy mode. I think it would diminish the feeling of accomplishment for those who climbed the mountain to beat the games by making them feel less special. And I think it would ruin the gaming experience for those who would give in to the temptation to take the easy path. It would also destroy the entire Souls-like sub-genre and make those games just like everything else out there, and I think that would be a real shame. Variety in gaming is a good thing. I don't understand why some people want everything to be the same. How boring.

You obviously disagree, and that's fine. Hopefully From Software holds strong and never listens to people with your view.

BTW, if you don't take video games seriously, then why do you care so much either way? Why not just let it be?

 

[Phoenixmgs_v1legacy]

Death and difficulty is core to these games.

So yes, imo adding an easy mode would serve to defeat the whole point of what FromSoft designs. And that's okay. I'll never be a Starcraft pro, does that mean Starcraft should change so I can play it? I'll never understand attack frames in fighting games, should they have a mode that ignores frames so that I can play them?

Obviously the answer is no. I don't want those games to change to appeal to me. Because I understand that those games don't appeal to my tastes or interests as a gamer. But I understand that there are people who love them and that's fine too.

Everyone's skill level is different, thus a perfectly balanced difficulty for you will be too easy for some and too hard for others. There's is no "right" difficulty for everyone, it's just plain impossible. An Easy mode in a FromSoft game can still give many others the same exact experience as you get (difficutly-wise) on default so it wouldn't defeat the whole point of the games' designs. StarCraft has difficulty levels, you don't need to be a pro to play the games. If you did have to be a pro to play StarCraft or any game, then the game would be far too niche to make any money. Any decent competitive online game will match you against others of your skill level so you don't need to be a pro to play online either. All that stuff exists in real life sports too whether golfers shotting from different tees based on their skill, poor bowlers getting a higher handicap, and there being local leagues for baseball so you don't have to be a pro to play (and there's softball too). Same thing with fighting games, which have different difficulty levels, the vast majority of people buying fighting games don't care about frames. Plus, you couldn't have a mode that ignores frames unless you want to remove animations from the game. You can analyze Sekiro based on frames as well so I guess it's not for you then...