Next gen should every game have an easy mode?

Next gen should every game have an "easy" mode?

  • Yes

    Votes: 66 27.7%
  • No

    Votes: 165 69.3%
  • I'm undecided

    Votes: 7 2.9%

  • Total voters
    238

Hostile_18

Banned
I'm firmly of the opinion that it should.

Most games difficulty don't give me trouble (apart from Sekiro) but I'm thinking about other users more. I believe if someone buys a game no matter the skill level they should be able to see everything just like any other piece of entertainment.

I honestly dont believe it takes away from my experience in any way if a user plays in say "Adventure mode" where enemy's hardly fight back at all.. or its impossible to die etc. One persons easy mode is another persons hard mode as well, so I don't really buy the "get good or give up philosophy", when everyone has payed the same price to be entertained.

Also I'd argue gate keeping content based on skill checks only works to the detriment of less skilled players. Higher skilled players have no games they cant access. If they want to play "Barbie goes to the Mall"... they can for example.

I'm all for games telling me this is the recommended difficulty by the developers (where the challenge had been fine tuned etc) but ultimately games should be about fun for all. I want to see a renewed focus on accessibility next gen.
 
Some games may not have modes due to game design.

Would it be that much effort to say have infinite lives or tweak enemy's damage/health ratio? I'm not a developer but I dont think it would. I think when a user selects a mode like this they realize there not getting the intended experience but at least there having fun out of a product they otherwise wouldn't be having.

Plus they may finish this baby mode and feel more confident tacking the intended modes after 😊.
 
Honestly, if a game aspires to be a test of one's skill, I don't see why it should bother trying to appeal to those who can't handle the challenge--you know, other than money.
In plenty of games, an easy mode won't go against the spirit of the game. Sometimes it will, but hey, maybe it's no biggie, and they'll offer up that differing experience. But a developer shouldn't have to appeal to those who aren't capable of completing the tasks set before them, especially if the content is the challenge itself.

It honestly doesn't matter if there's a gate keeping some players out. If I make a game designed completely around shooting your gun to the beat of a song, and you're unable to keep a steady pace, well, play someone else's shooter. I designed my game around playing to the beat, and I'm not interested in releasing a "not-to-the-beat" mode.
 
No.

Let developers do what they want.

Buy things that are suited to your tastes/skill levels.

Don't moan.

Finito.

You think developers don't want part of their potential audience to play their game?

Putting yourself in someone else's shoes what if a game looks really appealing to you but you cant play it because it's too difficult? Does that person not deserve to play that game if they have paid money? How can a more casual person know the difficulty of a said product before they buy it? Should every game purchase be researched? What if a game is bought as a gift? 😊
 
Also I'd argue gate keeping content based on skill checks only works to the detriment of less skilled players. Higher skilled players have no games they cant access. If they want to play "Barbie goes to the Mall"... they can for example.

This isn't entirely accurate, i.e. a gamer can be skilled at one game & suck at another. It's about different genres. Someone might be lightning quick in racing sims & yet suck in first person shooters. It's also about practise & becoming good at whichever game you want to play. Games aren't movies, i.e. just as when you play a game of monopoly against friends, you don't get the right to "win" just because you purchased the board game yourself. Unlocking the content hidden behind a challenge is literally the whole point of a video game, as far as I'm concerned.

Now there is a conversation which probably needs to happen on the issue of "normal difficulty", which by & large is far too easy. I don't know where the idea came from that people rage quit when they fail in a game, because I'm the complete opposite: mowing through enemies & levels like cutting through butter = total boredom.
 
Last edited:
Honestly, if a game aspires to be a test of one's skill, I don't see why it should bother trying to appeal to those who can't handle the challenge--you know, other than money.
In plenty of games, an easy mode won't go against the spirit of the game. Sometimes it will, but hey, maybe it's no biggie, and they'll offer up that differing experience. But a developer shouldn't have to appeal to those who aren't capable of completing the tasks set before them, especially if the content is the challenge itself.

It honestly doesn't matter if there's a gate keeping some players out. If I make a game designed completely around shooting your gun to the beat of a song, and you're unable to keep a steady pace, well, play someone else's shooter. I designed my game around playing to the beat, and I'm not interested in releasing a "not-to-the-beat" mode.

But who would it hurt if someone just played not to the beat and had a good time? Wouldn't it be worse someone buying your game, been disappointed they couldnt play it and the money they spent was wasted. At least more players would be able to appreciate all the content you spent time making, if not the finely tuned standard difficulty.
 
You think developers don't want part of their potential audience to play their game?

Yes.

No piece of media can be designed for absolutely everyone. It's impossible. A lot of the best games are made by passionate developers with a clear idea of what it is they want to make along with the ability to follow through rather than checkbox game design led by design by committee.

Sometimes a developer will want struggle, overcoming challenge or difficulty to be integral to the experience the player has in order to correctly portray the world they have built and/or the characters they have created.

As a consumer you are owed nothing, none of us are. You decide where your money goes and you reward the projects that you feel resonate with you based on what you wish to get out of a videogame.

There is no requirement for developers to spend time adding easy mode to their games just like there is no requirement for you to buy a particular game.

If the game is of high quality, regardless of whether its difficult or not, it will find an audience. The cream always rises to the top.
 
Last edited:
But who would it hurt if someone just played not to the beat and had a good time? Wouldn't it be worse someone buying your game, been disappointed they couldnt play it and the money they spent was wasted. At least more players would be able to appreciate all the content you spent time making, if not the finely tuned standard difficulty.
It doesn't matter if it hurts anyone. Why would I make my game something other than what I set out to make?
If they're disappoined they're not up to the task of playing, they can return the game. The content isn't just the maps and enemies, in many cases it's first and foremost the mechanics. If someone can't platform, I ain't turning my platformer into an "okay, but look at everything you COULD'VE played :lollipop_smiling_face_eyes:" showcase.
 
This isn't entirely accurate, i.e. a gamer can be skilled at one game & suck at another. It's about different genres. Someone might be lightning quick in racing sims & yet suck in first person shooters. It's also about practise & becoming good at whichever game you want to play. Games aren't movies, i.e. just as when you play a game of monopoly against friends, you don't get the right to "win" just because you purchased the board game yourself. Unlocking the content hidden behind a challenge is literally the whole point of a video game, as far as I'm concerned.

Now there is a conversation which probably needs to happen on the issue of "normal difficulty", which by & large is far too easy. I don't know where the idea came from that people rage quit when they fail in a game, because I'm the complete opposite: mowing through enemies & levels like cutting through butter = total boredom.

Where all better at some genres than others but that just goes to my point difficulty cant be standardised because every players capacity to meet varying levels of challenge is different.

I don't play racing games but if I wanted to try one out because it sounds fun I wouldn't want to buy a game and hardly get anywhere because of the difficulty. Let the veterans play on "Pro" the newbies play on "Easy" and everyones happy.

Plus what about people who are disabled etc dont they deserve to play any game they want too?

Say someone watches a complicated movie and maybe they wont get all the complex themes and subtext but at least they can see all the content, and on some level get some enjoyment out of it. The people who can enjoy it on a totally different level arnt losing anything by everyone who wants to see it been able to.
 
Sure, why not? You don't have to pick it if you don't want.

You can still play on hard mode so that women will want to have sex with you in your mind.
 
Definitely. It helps younger people get into gaming as well, maybe even older ones too.

Also I believe there should be a way that after so many attempts and failing to something, it should ask if you'd like to bypass that certain area.

Would be great, if it was 20-40 attempts in total. They could introduce a system that can tell when people were intentially dying over and over to get past a certain area. Maybe punishing someone in a funny with witty quotes once the stage was complete . For the people that are genuinly trying, then they are at least bettering themselves by giving their all. That way, if a sequel were released, they'd be less likely to avoid it.
 
It doesn't matter if it hurts anyone. Why would I make my game something other than what I set out to make?
If they're disappoined they're not up to the task of playing, they can return the game. The content isn't just the maps and enemies, in many cases it's first and foremost the mechanics. If someone can't platform, I ain't turning my platformer into an "okay, but look at everything you COULD'VE played :lollipop_smiling_face_eyes:" showcase.

Unfortunately Nintendo and Sony are very backwards with allowing refunds. Would you be prepared to back up that sentiment by stating the high challenge level in the back of game box/store description?

It's interesting to consider, so all sales are made in good faith.
 
Sure, why not?

Lots of people who play casually and just want to enjoy a game without being challenged all the time.

I don't see why people would even vote "no".

Edit:

Although, it depends on the game. It shouldn't be mandatory for all games.
 
Last edited:
I play mosty on Easy, especially games with spawning waves of enemies until you reach certain checkpoint, or most of he NPC actions are scripted, I don't have time for such BS, I just want to rush such games for the story. On a contrary, some games are utterly boring on Easy mode, like Quantum Break for example with all the powers.

But generally, due to lacking CPU power in current generation, and therefore lacking AI, the games IMO aren't worthy spending more time than the plot alone requires. Back in the day we had Crysis, FEAR, Killzone 2 etc., games that already offered great AI on normal difficulty, and turning it up to hard put even more challenge, but in a fun way.

So it all depends on next-gen games, the CPU power is there, now it's all in the devs hands to use it wisely.
 
Sure, why not?

Lots of people who play casually and just want to enjoy a game without being challenged all the time.

I don't see why people would even vote "no"
Because some people would prefer developers are left to make their games in the way that they want, without shoehorning in an 'easy' mode to try and please everyone.
 
Unfortunately Nintendo and Sony are very backwards with allowing refunds. Would you be prepared to back up that sentiment by stating the high challenge level in the back of game box/store description?

It's interesting to consider, so all sales are made in good faith.
Well, if I made a test of skill, I'd market my game for what it is. Buyers beware.
It shouldn't be games without accessibility options that have to offer warnings, it should be those with them that include that info. I'm not gonna include "WARNING. This is a platformer. If you can't platform, I haven't included a no-platforming mode."
Nah. The games with no-platforming modes can include that warning instead. My platformer's meant to be tough, it was marketed on tough, the toughness is the content. If a customer's too irresponsible to make an informed decision, I'm not gonna idiot-proof my game box just for them either.
 
Last edited:
Let me give you guys an example even with a game that is widely seen as more casual and accessible.

I'm "playing" through Her Story with my wife at the moment. It's a game where you basically play as a detective and have to solve a mystery by searching through a database of videos using keywords.


There are no difficulty modes. There is no easy mode. To create "easy mode" in this game would literally rob you of the entire experience which involves using you playing detective and using your head to try and uncover more of the videos stored within the database.

What would people want in this scenario? For all of the videos to be available to you from the start? For the game to solve the mystery for you? What's the point?

It really grates me whenever this conversation comes up because it genuinely makes me wonder about what the fuck is going on with society these days. This is just an extension of the "everyone's a winner" mentality that is pedaled in schools. People need to accept that sometimes you need to overcome a challenge to experience something. There also needs to be acceptance that there will also be times when you simply can't overcome a challenge and you will therefore miss out on experiencing or achieving something. These things are part of life, the world doesn't revolve and adapt around around you.
 
Last edited:
If you buy a game that turns out to be too difficult for you, it's your own fault. Do some research before you buy.

That dosnt take into account gifting? Or what if you really want to play something but it's too difficult for you to access? Should those people lose out because of something out of their control? (Their reflexes/skill level/disability/free time)

You can't expect people to research every game purchase they make, especially outside this enthusiast board/niche.
 
Last edited:
That dosnt take into account gifting? Or what if you really want to play something but it's too difficult for you to access? Should those people lose out because of something our of their control? (Their reflexes/skill level/disability/free time)

You can't expect people to research every game purchase they make, especially outside this enthusiast board/niche.
Yes, I can. It's not even remotely difficult to find out about a game before you buy it.

And you can return a gift.
 
That dosnt take into account gifting? Or what if you really want to play something but it's too difficult for you to access? Should those people lose out because of something out of their control? (Their reflexes/skill level/disability/free time)

You can't expect people to research every game purchase they make, especially outside this enthusiast board/niche.

Do we also need to make a "life easy mode" for people who can't be bothered to research their purchases before they part with their money?
 
Do we also need to make a "life easy mode" for people who can't be bothered to research their purchases before they part with their money?

What would it hurt if every game had it? It would mean theres more happy/entertained people in the world, and they would have a larger selection of games to choose from (like a skilled player). I really cant see why you wouldn't want that.
 
I have no interest in Souls games, but this deal that comes up from time to time to try to get them to abandon their selling point seems foolish. If I buy a Metroid game, I know there's going to be backtacking, if I buy a Mario game, platforming, on and on. If a Souls game is not challenging, then it is no longer a Souls game. It would then be something different.

Nintendo has easy modes on Mario Kart for example because those game appeal to all ages.

Not everything needs to be made for everyone. If everything becomes the same, then all we need is one game, which I guess would be Pong.
 
Last edited:
That dosnt take into account gifting? Or what if you really want to play something but it's too difficult for you to access? Should those people lose out because of something out of their control? (Their reflexes/skill level/disability/free time)

You can't expect people to research every game purchase they make, especially outside this enthusiast board/niche.
Bad gift.
Try to get better. There's a good chance that what you wanna play is defined by its difficulty.
Yes. The best media is never afraid to alienate. Let games find their audience, and disregard those that don't fit within it.
Irresponsible consumers shouldn't expect to be pandered to.

God I hope those colors work as well in light mode as in dark...
Damn I'm gonna do these color-coded responses more often, this is fun
 
Last edited:
No, ridiculous statement. It should be up to the developer to include difficulty settings or not. You don't like the game because of it? Fine, move on.
 
They do, but ordinary players should not suffer from this. You cannot make easy mode in every game.

There are games like Kirby for kids.

What do you mean how would an ordinary player suffer from this?

Hand on heart another person playing an easy mode has never affected me at all in a negative way. If anything it's better because I can talk about story beats with that person.
 
Imagine putting an easy mode into Dark Souls. A first time play through would go from around 40 hours to about 8.

Wouldn't bother me at all I'd never touch that mode, but if another person has an enjoyable 8 hours and perhaps wants to move onto the intended difficulty next I'd be all for it.
 
What do you mean how would an ordinary player suffer from this?

Hand on heart another person playing an easy mode has never affected me at all in a negative way. If anything it's better because I can talk about story beats with that person.
It might not affect you. It would definitely affect games. GHG posted a fine example above of why, which you've completely ignored.
 
People need to take a hint. Its impossible to please everyone.

By putting everything on easy the only thing they gonna archieve is making people lazy to perform better. This option should be up to developers, not a standart.
Not to mention there are already dead easy games naturally, like pokemon dumbfied versions.
 
Last edited:
Let me give you guys an example even with a game that is widely seen as more casual and accessible.

I'm "playing" through Her Story with my wife at the moment. It's a game where you basically play as a detective and have to solve a mystery by searching through a database of videos using keywords.


There are no difficulty modes. There is no easy mode. To create "easy mode" in this game would literally rob you of the entire experience which involves using you playing detective and using your head to try and uncover more of the videos stored within the database.

What would people want in this scenario? For all of the videos to be available to you from the start? For the game to solve the mystery for you? What's the point?

It really grates me whenever this conversation comes up because it genuinely makes me wonder about what the fuck is going on with society these days. This is just an extension of the "everyone's a winner" mentality that is pedaled in schools. People need to accept that sometimes you need to overcome a challenge to experience something. There also needs to be acceptance that there will also be times when you simply can't overcome a challenge and you will therefore miss out on experiencing or achieving something. These things are part of life, the world doesn't revolve and adapt around around you.

I think in that example having an easier mode wouldn't be as simple as few file tweaks, however I'm sure theres ways around it. It's hard to say exactly without playing it but what about a hint system most adventure games use? Even if that's not applicable I'm sure there will be a simple way around it for those that want it.
 
Wouldn't bother me at all I'd never touch that mode, but if another person has an enjoyable 8 hours and perhaps wants to move onto the intended difficulty next I'd be all for it.
An easy mode would completely defeat the purpose of the game. The fundamental tension of "should I push forward and risk losing my souls, or return to the bonfire" would be gone, along with the developer's vision. All to pander to someone too lazy to do even the slightest bit of research before buying.

There are hundreds of easy games out there. Play one of those instead.
 
Last edited:
I wish no games had an easy mode, or any other optional modes. I don't mind hard games, easy games or anything in-between. The difficulty of the game should be part of the experience for each particular game.
 
What would it hurt if every game had it? It would mean theres more happy/entertained people in the world, and they would have a larger selection of games to choose from (like a skilled player). I really cant see why you wouldn't want that.

There does not exist infinite time nor infinite money for things to be designed for absolutely everyone.

It's the same with all consumer products. Something is made with a particular audience in mind and then gets released. Sometimes the desire is to have as broad an audience as possible and other times the product might serve a particular purpose for a niche market.

If you like your games easy and/or are concerned about other people who can only play easy games for whatever reason then I have good news - there are already plenty of games out there that are suitable. There will never be a requirement for this to be the case however.

When everything opens again I'm gonna walk into the Ferrari dealership and complain that their cars are too difficult to obtain (too expensive) and more difficult to drive (too fast, too low, too wide) in comparison to your average car. How dare they not think of everyone when designing their cars.
 
An easy mode would completely defeat the purpose of the game. The fundamental tension of "should I push forward and risk losing my souls, or return to the bonfire" would be gone, along with the developer's vision. All to pander to someone too lazy to do even the slightest bit of research before buying.

There are hundreds of easy games out there. Play one of those instead.

No one is saying it's the optimum way to play the game, just that if someone else gets something out of it they otherwise wouldn't have... then why not.

I'm sure someone who needs an easy mode would still find that mode somewhat challenging to them. It's all relative.
 
There does not exist infinite time nor infinite money for things to be designed for absolutely everyone.

It's the same with all consumer products. Something is made with a particular audience in mind and then gets released. Sometimes the desire is to have as broad an audience as possible and other times the product might serve a particular purpose for a niche market.

If you like your games easy and/or are concerned about other people who can only play easy games for whatever reason then I have good news - there are already plenty of games out there that are suitable. There will never be a requirement for this to be the case however.

When everything opens again I'm gonna walk into the Ferrari dealership and complain that their cars are too difficult to obtain (too expensive) and more difficult to drive (too fast, too low, too wide) in comparison to your average car. How dare they not think of everyone when designing their cars.

Implementing an easy mode dosnt need to require infinite time or money... I suspect deep down you know that and are reaching to justify blocking certain less skilled players playing "your" game.
 
You think developers don't want part of their potential audience to play their game?

Putting yourself in someone else's shoes what if a game looks really appealing to you but you cant play it because it's too difficult? Does that person not deserve to play that game if they have paid money? How can a more casual person know the difficulty of a said product before they buy it? Should every game purchase be researched? What if a game is bought as a gift? 😊
There is no shortage of media articles about every game so anyone can be informed about difficulty.
If you already have the game and it's too hard you can always give up (no shame in that, it's just not for you) or GIT GUD.
Dark Souls kept beating me into a pulp but I didn't give up and eventually learned it and now souls are my favorite genre.
If a game is easy there is no pleasure in beating it (or even playing it), Kingdoms of Amalur is proof of that, even in hard mode you become overpowered in the first half of the game.
 
No one is saying it's the optimum way to play the game, just that if someone else gets something out of it they otherwise wouldn't have... then why not.

I'm sure someone who needs an easy mode would still find that mode somewhat challenging to them. It's all relative.
Because you are never going to please everyone no matter what you do. Where do you draw the line? Game's too hard, make it easier for me. Know what, this game could do with more tanks, put tanks in it. There aren't any eskimos in this game, put some in.

No, you leave the developer alone to make their game in the way that they want. It's their game and you don't have to buy it. This isn't the participation Olympics.

Am I mistaken, or did you start this thread before? I'm getting deja vu.
 
Last edited:
I think in that example having an easier mode wouldn't be as simple as few file tweaks, however I'm sure theres ways around it. It's hard to say exactly without playing it but what about a hint system most adventure games use? Even if that's not applicable I'm sure there will be a simple way around it for those that want it.

It doesn't matter because the developers created the game they wanted in order to drive an experience in the way they intended to. It found it's audience, it sold well and the vast majority of people are happy. I'm sure there will be people who didn't like the game or found the game difficult for whatever reason but that's normal - as already stated so many times throughout the thread, you cannot please everyone.

The people who didn't like it or couldn't play it are not held hostage, they can refund the game, they can play something else.
 
It doesn't matter because the developers created the game they wanted in order to drive an experience in the way they intended to. It found it's audience, it sold well and the vast majority of people are happy. I'm sure there will be people who didn't like the game or found the game difficult for whatever reason but that's normal - as already stated so many times throughout the thread, you cannot please everyone.

The people who didn't like it or couldn't play it are not held hostage, they can refund the game, they can play something else.

Fair enough it's a valid argument against it. I disagree but you made valid points.

I still think that refunds arnt as easy as you suggest.. at least on Sony and Nintendo platforms.
 
Top Bottom