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

[Kerg3927]

Or they did what what the Git Gud folks told them to do and looked up videos and guides, ironically spoiling themselves on the experience of the game far more than an easy mode would've. It's a fundamental blind spot in the argument.

I don't get the logic here. Because it's possible for people to spoil their own experience in other ways, then they should add another way for people to do that???

Unless they fail out completely, thus giving up on a game they used to be excited about and possibly bitter about wasting money.

Hi, I'm altnamejag and that's for DS3 worked out for me until a British madman helped me understand how Soul's games worked

That would be unfortunate.

Women can have balls Kerg, just like men don't have to. If devs have different difficulty modes or accessibility options, then using said options is "legitimate". Just like how adding an easy mode to Mega Man 2 put it on top of damn near everybody's "Best Mega Man game" list.

You apparently missed my point entirely. I wasn't trying to get into a debate about genitalia. It was about the "if" not the balls. I could have just as easily said, "If this Coke had Jack Daniels in it, then it would be a Jack & Coke." And then you go right ahead and give another example where "if" something was this way it would be legitimate. My point was the game is currently not that way, and so it is currently not legitimate.

I've got a different idea: it's because the Git Gud types will downplay literally every other reason a person might be interested an a Souls game to play up difficulty as it's sole selling point, and they get so damn loud about it they drown out other conversations.

Ah yes, those evil "Git Gud types." Maybe they get so loud because they are passionate fans of the game in its current form, and don't want to see it changed. And maybe From Software listens to them because they are the target market, and the revenue from them pays the bills.

The Souls aesthetic is being sloppily copied similarly to Modern Military Shooters. If they bothered adding their own twist, they could be the next Mega Man 2 or Fortnight.

Maybe you should become a developer then.

 

[Kerg3927]

I call them twats (just for conciseness), I never said he did. Did you not pay attention to how he described them? He said many Souls players have the attitude that Souls is "the real hard stuff" and that other games' super hard difficulties should be easy because they played Souls with Rurikhan saying you need to get "your heads out your asses". By claiming something to be more than it is, is literally the definition of pretentious. How is Souls special or different from other games when learning the mechanics and patterns is common to every action combat game? Many other action games have far harder enemy patterns to learn like say Sekiro. And Souls doesn't even make you learn enemy patterns because you can shield or use magic to bypass that anyway. Souls player talk up the game like its some massive challenge to beat when it's just not true.

I didn't try strafe backstab on everything because that's boring but it worked on almost all the enemies I tried it on. There wouldn't be a comic on this very site about it if it wasn't true. Ranged weapons work in like every situation outside of boss battles because enemies don't stray out of their zones to come get you. The games are really just getting through trash mobs to get to a potentially challenging boss fight. The bosses' AI is not meant to fight against multiple players. Some people may want to just experience the boss fights and bypass the trash mobs because it's not engaging content to them so why not have the option to make that easier? And there is a Boss Rush mod on PC for Dark Souls for those that want to do that.

I don't know, all of that sounds more pretentious than anything I've heard other Souls fans say. If Souls fans are pretentious twats, then what does that make you?

And again, if the Souls games are so incredibly easy already, as you insist, then why the need for an easy mode?

 

[Kerg3927]

No person can give balls to the queen; a developer can give an easy mode to their games. Now try a real argument or go home.

Actually, I think they have surgery for that nowadays.

 

[Kerg3927]

You compared people who wanted an easy mode to murderers, you have no right to complain about name-calling. Also. Did I say that you were a twat? Please, go through my post and point out where I said that you were, or linked your actions to the twats. I didn't do it. You keep doing this. You keep making up things about what I said. And I find it very odd that you keep criticizing me for the way I'm talking to you when you keep pulling that stunt. But please, continue to construct baseless strawmen of me.

You said something about self-righteous twats in this garden. I thought you were including me in that group. If not, then I misinterpreted your metaphor, and I apologize.

I was implying that you don't care about others? Uh. I don't have to imply it. You said it yourself.

There are different ways of caring, and there are limits to caring. You can't please everyone, and it's silly to try. For someone to admit that fact doesn't mean that they don't care about others in general. It just means they're not batshit crazy.

And once a-fucking-gain, you make shit up about me. You say that I think people should just have everything they want handed to them. Ok. You're either not actually reading what I write, or you're doing this on purpose. I have said multiple times that I think an easy mode should still be challenging to some degree. Can I ask you something? Did you honestly not see all the times I said that? Or are you just chosing to ignore me? Kindly answer this question.

I saw it. And as I said, we disagree on how best to help a player. You want to give them an easy mode. I don't.

Uh-huh. No offense, that isn't exactly a watertight argument. In fact, it's borderline a Chewbaca Defense. Because as it turns out, simply copying a game doesn't make a good game. Look at Lords of the Fallen.

The point was there are actual developers out there trying to copy it, and apparently none of them agree with you that these types of games would be better with an easy mode. As I told altnameJag, why don't you become a developer, since you obviously know how to do things better than they do?

First of all, Caesar was the title to the heir of the Roman Emperor. The Emperor was called Augustus. Secondly, he greatly preferred to be called Agusta. And as ruler of the Roman Empire, he could do whatever the heck he wanted. And often did. He wasn't well liked.

Cool.

 

[Phoenixmgs_v1legacy]

I don't know, all of that sounds more pretentious than anything I've heard other Souls fans say. If Souls fans are pretentious twats, then what does that make you?

And again, if the Souls games are so incredibly easy already, as you insist, then why the need for an easy mode?

You're the one claiming Souls is standing its ground on some island being invaded by the entitled. I'm saying Souls is just another game like any other game.

 

[TheMysteriousGX]

I don't get the logic here. Because it's possible for people to spoil their own experience in other ways, then they should add another way for people to do that???

If they're being spoiled anyway, why not at least have it i they get their first impressions in the game come from the game? It's a simple question. Why is the game being spoiled by the game being easier bad, but being spoiled by tutorials and video guides good?

Ah yes, those evil "Git Gud types." Maybe they get so loud because they are passionate fans of the game in its current form, and don't want to see it changed. And maybe From Software listens to them because they are the target market, and the revenue from them pays the bills.
...
Maybe you should become a developer then.

What, and get flack from true gamers because I put in a mode they don't use and ruined their single player experience?

If I'm gonna put up with random bullshit like that, I'd become a YouTube gaming pundit. Wouldn't have to put up with 100 hour work weeks and being laughed at if I complain about it.

 

[Strategos]

Lot of hot takes. I've not played Sekiro yet because money, but I will say this: Anyone who thinks From games are hard is wrong and fell for a marketing tactic.

"Oh yeah but people are struggling with Sekiro"

Yeah, yeah. As a series veteran I saw the same thing when there was this buzz about this hot new weirdo game called Demon's Souls. I saw the same thing when Dark Souls 1 came out, then Dark Souls 2, then Bloodborne, not so much with Dark Souls 3, mainly because (I suspect at least) people had wisened up to the fact that nobody cares if you can beat dark souls because it's not as hard as it's made out to be. Did we all forget the rest of the series?

When I first played Demon's Souls it took me around 20 or 30 tries to even get close to beating the Manflayers. But now that I know the game to a decent extent I can hammer it in one, maybe two. When you learn the game it gets easier. When I played Dark Souls for the first time I was getting butchered by Queelag for a couple days, today it's rare for me to even get my heart rate up for the Queelag fight, nail it first time every time.

Give it a month or two, people will figure out what makes Sekiro tick (as in, the reason it's not Dark Souls 4 or Bloodborne 2) and it won't seem as hard. Trust me, I've seen this happen with this exact same dev enough times to know.

It's not that the game is hard, it's that it's not for everyone. I don't mean "not for everyone" as in it's just too hard for some people, I mean it's not for everyone in the same way black coffee is not for everyone. If you don't enjoy feeling like a game is putting you under pressure and making demands of you, then you're not going to have fun. It's hard to say this without sounding like an elitist, but there's a pretty good reason why people still want Bloodborne 2, because you don't feel as under pressure and the game is more forgiving of mistakes. It's a different game that appeals to a different audience.

Really that's it, I can't remember who said it, but I do remember them being wrong about a lot of things in From games but there's one thing they were dead on correct about "Dark Souls kills you and then gives you a shield, Bloodborne kills you and then gives you a sword and a gun." Different mode of play, different tools, different audience. Get me?

Maybe the problem is that a lot of people just don't enjoy the game as it is? I mean, say you want an easy mode. All your damage output is doubled, all enemy damage is halved. Would you really, truly enjoy the game more? Would that really help people with disabilities that interrupt their enjoyment of the game? (I know there's more to difficulty than that, but it's damn rare for devs to do any more than that.) You'd still die for trying to play outside the "rules" of the game, just maybe not as frequently still a significant amount.

And I've been saying this since 2011, "If you die in Dark Souls, it's 90% of the time because you weren't paying attention. 10% of the time because the game threw actual unfair bullshit at you." I count Giantdads as unfair bullshit by the way. Still, THE LEGEND NEVER DIES.

While I'm not quite against entirely an easy mode in Souls, I simply don't think it's the solution to accessibility. If you want accessibility you're much better served asking for colorblind modes, remapping controls as an industry standard, minimum 60fps (yes a higher framerate can be a real help to people with certain disabilities in games) UI size configuration, hold options for repeated button presses. Eliminate the actual barriers to entry.

Sadly there are some aspects of some disabilities that will completely eradicate the ability to play most games and you can't always design to compensate for those, however the features I listed above are a big step toward helping most people who need it.

 

[sXeth]

I've seen enough gifs and vids of Sekiro's ofttimes dodgy hitboxes. and pretty thorough critiques of it just having pointlessly obfuscated mechanical solutions to pretty much stay away from it. The time investment of unraveling yet another obtusely designed FROM game format isn't really on my schedule for the overall appeal.


That said, a traditional "Easy mode" really won't change that. You might brute force through some of it, but its not going to uplift the experience. A sword will still happily clip through the ground and damage you despite missing by an obvious margin. I suppose they could pop up a hint to say "Parry that charging bull twelve times your size somehow", but it wouldn't alter the conceptual failure in that logic.

Souls of course had an obvious bandaid for these sort of things, where you could just roll outside of space and time with an invincibility window a mile wide. Assumming you can manage a stamina bar, a mechanic dating at least back to Morrowind, if not earlier.


That's not to say that some(most) other action games don't suffer from the same rough edges. But From tries to stay grounded, slowed down, and the lack of flash and dazzle kind of leaves it exposed.

 

[CritialGaming]

The irony that's left is the people asking for an easy mode are typically the least likely to care in the end, since they'd naturally have the least amount of virtual skin invested in these kinds of games.

That baseless accusation contradicts the fact that most of the people who ask for easy mode have played all the From Software games since Dark Souls. Try with facts next time.

Where are you getting that fact?

The gaming background experience from the OP's article writer for starters. With every writer I check, 9/10 they have expressed positive and memorable experiences from previous From Software games.

Yet they find the need for them to change...why? So they can be less positive and memorable experiences? If they played them all it must not have been that bad; otherwise why would they unless they

A. Enjoy suffering.

B. Suffer from the demands of their career which require completing games in a timely manner for review, hence the lure of easy modes to help assuage their personal situations.

Speaking as someone who loves From's games[footnote]disclaimer: I haven't gotten a chance to take a spin at Sekiro yet due to $$$ reasons[/footnote], you're response here is batshit insanity.

1. An optional easy mode HAS NO IMPACT ON ANYONE NOT PLAYING IT. So my experience would literally not change a single bit. It would be identically "positive and memorable." However those, like my younger brother, who found the lore and even gameplay itself interesting but were turned away because of the "git gud" mentality would be able to use an easy mode to turn their negative experiences into their own positive and memorable ones. Fuck me for being crazy, but video games for me are about as many people as possible having enjoyable experiences...

2. This may come as a shock to you, but Fromsoft games are enjoyable for a vast multitude of reasons beyond their difficulty. Honestly if difficulty is the thing about the soulsborne games that defines your enjoyment of them, I'd posit you're not a real fan.

3. The idea that a game being "positive and memorable" means it shouldn't be criticized or have improvement suggested (which your post implicitly argues) is laughably ridiculous.

That?s all been waxed and buffed to death well past a shine over the last 11 pages, and there are clearly two different camps of thought here. I don?t care that an easy mode doesn?t change anything for me. The issue is it changes the game. People asking for easy modes seem unable or unwilling to simply respect the game for what it is [https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=YD7CAL7f60c].

I?ve been a fan of these games since Demon?s Souls, and the first reason for that was the feel of the combat, and its game design. ?Difficulty? to me is essentially an abstract concept, and while the games are uniquely challenging (not to be confused with the ?most difficult? games by any means), if it really affected my enjoyment I?d probably be one of the people complaining about it. The atmosphere and lore are icing on the cake for me, offering intrigue as well as respite and solace to contrast the more immediate nature of the games.

Criticism is great, but but when it involves wanting a successful formula that?s gradually attracted millions - initially through word of mouth more than gimmicky advertising - to change because certain entitlement-minded people have a problem with it, that?s ultimately not helping anything and is only acting as a disservice to people who care and respect the game enough to accept it for what it is.

*edit* I have no idea why this footnote is showing up for me; can mod please delete? Thanks!

 

[Kerg3927]

You're the one claiming Souls is standing its ground on some island being invaded by the entitled. I'm saying Souls is just another game like any other game.

Okay, opinions differ.

 

[CaitSeith]

Criticism is great, but but when it involves wanting a successful formula

Adding an easy mode doesn't change the formula, and criticism doesn't affect the formula.

EDIT:

The issue is it changes the game. People asking for easy modes seem unable or unwilling to simply respect the game for what it is.

Jeez! Talk about fanboyism. You can't make a counterargument without making unfounded accusations, can you?

[tweet t="https://twitter.com/halfcoordinated/status/1113696637061402625"]

 

[Kerg3927]

If they're being spoiled anyway, why not at least have it i they get their first impressions in the game come from the game? It's a simple question. Why is the game being spoiled by the game being easier bad, but being spoiled by tutorials and video guides good?

I would say they can both be bad if exploits exist that someone can learn on the internet. But otherwise they are different.

Say someone is fighting a boss and struggling. A guide advises one to wear some fire resist gear, equip a shield with fire resist, and use a weapon that does strike damage because the boss is weak to that damage type, and watch out for certain moves by the boss and know when to dodge this and block that. But then he still has to go out and execute that strategy to beat the boss, and it will likely take some deaths to get the timing right. It's like cooking a meal while following a recipe vs. trying to figure it out without a recipe.

To me that's different than moving a slider and cutting the damage of the boss and his hp in half, and so now it doesn't matter what armor one uses, and it doesn't really matter if one misses some blocks or dodges because the boss doesn't do that much damage anymore, and it doesn't matter what weapon one uses because the boss doesn't have that many hp anymore. So then that person just charges forward and spams some buttons until the boss is dead. And then he probably turns around and COMPLAINS to everyone about how BORING the game is, and how it is WAY overrated. Well, duh, he just ruined it for himself. He took a shit in his own sandbox. The absence of an easy mode toggle helps prevent this from happening.

What, and get flack from true gamers because I put in a mode they don't use and ruined their single player experience?

If I'm gonna put up with random bullshit like that, I'd become a YouTube gaming pundit. Wouldn't have to put up with 100 hour work weeks and being laughed at if I complain about it.

Yeah, that's probably a wiser choice.

 

[Xprimentyl]

Criticism is great, but but when it involves wanting a successful formula that?s gradually attracted millions - initially through word of mouth more than gimmicky advertising - to change because certain entitlement-minded people have a problem with it, that?s ultimately not helping anything and is only acting as a disservice to people who care and respect the game enough to accept it for what it is.

And therein lies the reason for the ?heat? in this discussion: I don?t think anyone asserting an easy mode wouldn?t be a problem ?has a problem? with these games. My car would be GREAT if it was Lamborghini, but that doesn?t mean I ?have a problem? with it being a Lancer. Obviously, many of us already love these games as they are just as much as anyone; we?re simply suggesting an addition to games that make them more accessible isn?t a bad thing, and can?t wrap our heads around the idea anyone might feel such would somehow be an offensive, de facto subtraction by addition, more so the ardent fervor with which such people feel that way. I said it in the other thread: the idea that video games, retail entertainment products, TOYS, might be held to such an inordinately high, arbitrary and austere standard that anyone might advocate their exclusion to only the best (and ?best? at what of any import is anyone?s guess) is just? I just? I don?t get it. This is the part in the debate where I just toss my hands up and tell my girlfriend ?whatever, ok, you?re right, fine,? and pour a stiff drink while imagining a world where reason, rationality and common sense run rampant?

 

[Silvanus]

To me that's different than moving a slider and cutting the damage of the boss and his hp in half, and so now it doesn't matter what armor one uses, and it doesn't really matter if one misses some blocks or dodges because the boss doesn't do that much damage anymore, and it doesn't matter what weapon one uses because the boss doesn't have that many hp anymore. So then that person just charges forward and spams some buttons until the boss is dead. And then he probably turns around and COMPLAINS to everyone about how BORING the game is, and how it is WAY overrated. Well, duh, he just ruined it for himself. He took a shit in his own sandbox. The absence of an easy mode toggle helps prevent this from happening.

Why are you assuming people want an easy mode that reduces the difficulty to "braindead"? That's not the logical first step down.

The point is that different people find things difficult to different degrees. Turn it down a little, and my shite-at-games friend would still find it bloody difficult. Would still find it harder than I find the standard game. Just not insurmountable anymore.

 

[Kerg3927]

Why are you assuming people want an easy mode that reduces the difficulty to "braindead"? That's not the logical first step down.

The point is that different people find things difficult to different degrees. Turn it down a little, and my shite-at-games friend would still find it bloody difficult. Would still find it harder than I find the standard game. Just not insurmountable anymore.

I understand that point. Some unusually low-skilled players would no doubt still find it challenging. But I don't think most low-skilled players are forever statically handicapped because they were unlucky enough to get the short end of the gene pool. I don't think that they are drooling idiots. Rather, I think most low-skilled players are low-skilled simply because they have not yet learned competence, and some have never learned competence precisely because they have never had to, because in most games they can just turn the difficulty down.

Having one appropriate and fair difficulty mode for everyone forces those players to develop competence if they want to play the game, which I think in turn increases their enjoyment of the game through the development of the self-confidence and self-pride that comes with the knowledge that they were able to complete the game on the same difficulty as everyone else, without the need for a handicapped mode.

My argument is that an easy mode does not come without a significant cost. Others believe that there is no downside, and apparently that there are large numbers of people who were just not born equipped with the tools to play games at a competent level, or they simply believe that it is wrong for a developer to ask that people put forth the effort to develop basic competence. And thus the disagreement.

My view is an optimistic one, that says that most people have what it takes if they only put forth the effort. The other view is a pessimistic one, that says that many people are inferior and will always be inferior, and thus they need a handicapped mode. Or they simply believe that it is wrong to ask people to put forth effort.

 

[Phoenixmgs_v1legacy]

My argument is that an easy mode does not come without a significant cost. Others believe that there is no downside, and apparently that there are large numbers of people who were just not born equipped with the tools to play games at a competent level, or they simply believe that it is wrong for a developer to ask that people put forth the effort to develop basic competence. And thus the disagreement.

The sole purpose of a game isn't just to beat it as demonstrated by Souls itself with people speed-running, doing no hit runs, or just playing through NG+ several times (in all the cases the player already beat the game so they ain't playing it for that anymore yet they're still playing it). Easy difficulty can be a tool to help people get better faster. Sekiro is really tough to learn early on because of how fast you can die; if you could stay in fights longer and/or have less penalty for death, you can learn the enemies and systems faster. And something optional is not a significant cost.

 

[Dansen]

NG+ paradoxically is this game's easy mode. I was able to get to the final boss in a quarter of the time it took me to beat it the first time. It really drove home how crucial the difficulty of this game is to its pacing, because Sekiro is actually really short when you know what you are doing. Easy mode would essentially dump players into this mode without going on the journey to get to that point. They would be missing out on the game just as much as not playing it. Its not about gate-keeping, its about keeping the experience intact and respecting this game as art rather than disposable entertainment. It would be like somebody saying they deserve to watch Citizen Kane colorized because black and white films look boring and make them fall asleep. Maybe the game just isn't for you if you have to change fundamental aspects of it to enjoy it. There is no harm in watching a playthrough or lore video either if you really want to see the story.

 

[Kerg3927]

Easy difficulty can be a tool to help people get better faster. Sekiro is really tough to learn early on because of how fast you can die; if you could stay in fights longer and/or have less penalty for death, you can learn the enemies and systems faster. And something optional is not a significant cost.

That's one school of thought. Another is that an easy mode can be something that discourages people from ever learning to play the game competently, before they ditch it for something else and decry how boring and overrated the game is, and every casualty that results from that bears a cost.

As I said before, a crackhead who is trying to quit does not benefit from walking around carrying a little crack in his pocket, just to keep his options open.

 

[Dalisclock]

Easy difficulty can be a tool to help people get better faster. Sekiro is really tough to learn early on because of how fast you can die; if you could stay in fights longer and/or have less penalty for death, you can learn the enemies and systems faster. And something optional is not a significant cost.

That's one school of thought. Another is that an easy mode can be something that discourages people from ever learning to play the game competently, before they ditch it for something else and decry how boring and overrated the game is, and every casualty that results from that bears a cost.

OTOH, you could just as easily argue that people learn better when they're not getting repeatedly ground into the dirt. The idea of a difficulty curve exists for a reason and if you're able to pick up concepts/skills as you go along, you're more likely to stick with it and train then if you just get thrown in the deep end face first with a shark and told to swim.

Probably a wierd example, but I'm reminded of the Disney film Mulan during the Boot Camp sequence(it's also the most famous song from the movie) where they're shown teaching the recruits how to shoot arrows through apples thrown into the air(and of course they're failing at it). I can't help but think "Shouldn't you teach them how to hit the broad side of a barn first and then work up to flying apples?"

Actually, I'm just gonna throw this out here because he hits a lot of good points https://www.shamusyoung.com/twentysidedtale/?p=46431

Most people who don't feel challenged enough will find ways to make something fit their preferred level of challenge. Hell, that's the reason "No Death/No Bonfire runs" exist. It's harder to scale down the other way, baring certain exploits you can cheese(the summon system is a real double edged sword because it also enables invasions).

 

[Drathnoxis]

Personally, I like to have some games that don't compromise with me. That don't give me the option to take the easy way out. That say "either overcome this challenge or quit." It changes the game for me when the challenge is optional. It's not the game imposing the challenge on me, it's me imposing the challenge on me. It's just not the same. It just doesn't feel as worthwhile slamming my head against that brick wall when there's a door a couple feet away. Maybe some people can't understand the difference, but there is one.

There's enough games out there that give you options and let you play your way, I want a couple games that make me eat dirt and struggle through.