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
Reading and comprehending are very different things.

Again, no one is forced to purchase a game, and in the age of the internet, finding out if something is likely for you or not is not a difficult task. And if you're wrong, so what? We all make regrettable purchases. What does a person do when they're dissatisfied with something. They avoid that thing in the future. Don't buy the works of these developers if you find that they're not for you. And if you're unsure in the first place, wait for a sale, borrow from a friend, etc.

For me, it's a very simple issue. I'll ask it again. Why does the consumer/audience have any right or voice in censoring/altering the work of a creator? Where does the idea behind this desired privilege originate?

Because they are paying for content and they have to right to enjoy it and it not be locked out by a lack of skill.

A developer worth his or her salt can tune the difficulty very easily to cater for a wide and varied audience. Ultimately people who play on a higher difficulty are getting more out of the game as all the mechanics are getting used but at least this way everyone can enjoy it.

What do you get out of everyone been able to play who wants to? Some fear mongering about artistic vision been compromised?
 
No, the developer makes their game, their way. If you like what you see, do some research, read some reviews, and buy it. Or don't. Don't blindly buy it and then whine that it's too hard and they should make it easier so you can play, too.

And you didn't answer me. Not everyone will be able to beat a game on easy. Then where do you go in your admirable desire to have everyone be able to complete every game ever made?
Where did anyone say that having an easy mode would mean everyone could beat it? It gives them a better chance.
 
Last edited:
This is an excellent post. Well thought out without resorting to the "git gud" bs a lot of the Souls fans post about. For me, it all boils down to time management. If an easier mode means I'll see the end of the game I'm all for it. I perfectly understand the reward of playing a challenging game. It's not the same for me or everyone else, however. It's the same as filler sidequests in any game. I largely don't do them. Not because of any challenge problems but of time. A game must respect my time for me to get enjoyment out of it.

Yeah I can definitely agree with that. When I played Witcher 3 I only did like 75% of the side quests and extra content, just stuck with the main story + DLC. Amazing game, and kind of difficult when you play it on hard, but that's not the point. It's a huge world that you can get lost in that makes it appealing, but it's oh so time consuming.

I also have a time management interest in gaming, and it's definitely hard for me to pick up an open world game, like RDR2, because I know I'll spend like 2 hours just riding my horse, maybe accomplishing like 1 main mission, 2 side missions, but I'm still like 100 hours away from endgame LOL. It's easier just to pop in Ratchet and Clank or some other mindless shooter instead, better way to spend a couple hours IMO.
 
Last edited:
Sekiro sold great despite not having "easy mode", so......just let developers make game they want to make. Just like everything in life, not everything meant for everybody. It up to you and you alone to do your research to see if the game is for you or not.
 
Last edited:
Where did anyone say that having an easy mode would mean everyone could beat it? It gives them a better chance. Many games put in hard modes that you can unlock. Do you see anyone complaining about those?
OP wants everyone to be able to get the full experience. He has mentioned baby mode, infinite lives, etc. It certainly sounds like he wants everyone to be able to beat them.
 
Sekiro sold great despite not having "easy mode", so......just let developers make game they want to make. Just like everything in life, not everything meant for everybody. It up to you and you alone to do your research if the game is for you or not.
From my perspective it's not about making the game for everybody but more accessible to those of us who would like to experience the world and characters without getting murdered constantly.
 
OP wants everyone to be able to get the full experience. He has mentioned baby mode, infinite lives, etc. It certainly sounds like he wants everyone to be able to beat them.
Define "everyone" Do you think he means Helen Keller? No. He wants the people who want to be able to experience these worlds with less difficulty.
 
Sekiro sold great despite not having "easy mode", so......just let developers make game they want to make. Just like everything in life, not everything meant for everybody. It up to you and you alone to do your research to see if the game is for you or not.

How many of those purchasers never made it out of the first few areas? Is this not a waste of money? Is it the users fault for not doing research as others have suggested or should the publisher hold some blame by not making it more obvious in the marketing description? I'f they released a patch now that included an easy mode so hundreds of people could go back and enjoy the game, would it lessen everyone else's experience at all?

Or would it give the game a new lease of life and secure even more sales for its inevitable sequel and make alot of people happy.
 
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.

No they shouldn't.

Video games aren't about being able to see everything there is to see.

Video games are about obstacles. Sometimes the obstacle is to jump over several pits. Sometimes it's about being fast enough to do whatever. Sometimes it's about finding the next place to walk to.
What you get to see depends on what you do in the game. A lot of what you are able to see in a game are rewards of clearing the obstacles. If a point of some game is to give player a special sense of accomplishment by giving a certain reward from a certain type of struggle, then the value of that point is immediately diminished if the developers give the option to access the reward in some other way. Sure, it's an option, but even options can make the overall sense of struggle feel less than they are even for the players who will never use the other option.

Forcing easy modes to games will remove games of certain feel from the market. Just accept it that there will be games you or many other people will never beat. Accept you will never be able to see everything there is to see in every game you play. When you can accept that, I would argue playing games will become even more fun to you. Playing games is more fun if you are able to enjoy both games that you can finish and games that you can't finish.
 
Define "everyone" Do you think he means Helen Keller? No. He wants the people who want to be able to experience these worlds with less difficulty.
'Anyone who buys a game no matter the skill level they should be able to see everything just like any other piece of entertainment.'

There you are. 'Anyone'. I believe that includes Helen Keller.
 
What are my needs?That everyone who pays money for a game should be able to enjoy it? Sure. If a developer cant do that, they have failed IMO.

You already answer your question. Your need is that "everyone should be able to play the game in any difficulty".

I find kind shocking that someones who literally said in the OP that played the game didn't even crossed the mind this is not about the difficulty itself, since all Soul games follow the same patern.

And sorry but "everyone who pays" is a very dumb take. Do you go to the cinema expecting a horror film to be a comedy just because you paid?
 
No they shouldn't.

Video games aren't about being able to see everything there is to see.

Video games are about obstacles. Sometimes the obstacle is to jump over several pits. Sometimes it's about being fast enough to do whatever. Sometimes it's about finding the next place to walk to.
What you get to see depends on what you do in the game. A lot of what you are able to see in a game are rewards of clearing the obstacles. If a point of some game is to give player a special sense of accomplishment by giving a certain reward from a certain type of struggle, then the value of that point is immediately diminished if the developers give the option to access the reward in some other way. Sure, it's an option, but even options can make the overall sense of struggle feel less than they are even for the players who will never use the other option.

Forcing easy modes to games will remove games of certain feel from the market. Just accept it that there will be games you or many other people will never beat. Accept you will never be able to see everything there is to see in every game you play. When you can accept that, I would argue playing games will become even more fun to you. Playing games is more fun if you are able to enjoy both games that you can finish and games that you can't finish.

When I play a game on hard I have no insecurities that another player might have beaten the game easier on a lesser difficulty. If I needed a sense of gratification the difficulty trophy or "bragging rights" would be enough. I feel the mentality that it lessens the experience for someone else who beat it on a higher difficulty to be a bit immature tbh.
 
'Anyone who buys a game no matter the skill level they should be able to see everything just like any other piece of entertainment.'

There you are. 'Anyone'. I believe that includes Helen Keller.

I was just talking in general terms. A large percentage of the game they bought if that sits better with you.
 
From my perspective it's not about making the game for everybody but more accessible to those of us who would like to experience the world and characters without getting murdered constantly.
Again....there are 1000 up on 1000 games out there with easy difficulty, if FROM didn't feel like need "easy mode" for their game then they shouldn't force to put it.


How many of those purchasers never made it out of the first few areas? Is this not a waste of money? Is it the users fault for not doing research as others have suggested or should the publisher hold some blame by not making it more obvious in the marketing description? I'f they released a patch now that included an easy mode so hundreds of people could go back and enjoy the game, would it lessen everyone else's experience at all?

Or would it give the game a new lease of life and secure even more sales for its inevitable sequel and make alot of people happy.
And there are people who can't finish the game even tho it has easy difficulty because it's "too long". Sorry you can't make everyone happy no matter what devs do, instead they should make what they want to make.
 
Last edited:
'Anyone who buys a game no matter the skill level they should be able to see everything just like any other piece of entertainment.'

There you are. 'Anyone'. I believe that includes Helen Keller.
I see. You're being an ass on purpose then. Cool. Here's a lovely video for you all which might help articulate on some of the points trying to be made here.
 
I see. You're being an ass on purpose then. Cool. Here's a lovely video for you all which might help articulate on some of the points trying to be made here.

I hope you didn't waste too many seconds of your life posting that. I wouldn't watch one of his videos if you paid me. And you probably won't offer.
 
Last edited:
Because they are paying for content and they have to right to enjoy it and it not be locked out by a lack of skill.

A developer worth his or her salt can tune the difficulty very easily to cater for a wide and varied audience. Ultimately people who play on a higher difficulty are getting more out of the game as all the mechanics are getting used but at least this way everyone can enjoy it.

What do you get out of everyone been able to play who wants to? Some fear mongering about artistic vision been compromised?

No one has to pay for ANYTHING they don't want to. If this is the essence of your rationale, please explain who is forced to purchase a game - ANY game?

You speak of empathy, of catering to everyone, yet you have no empathy for creators who often pour their heart and soul into their work without any guarantee of recompense. Creators who often suffer for their work, who agonize over every decision regarding their work.

And you want to glibly tell them without any investment of your own, "Don't do it like that." Who the hell are you?
 
I paid money for this book. I demand it have pictures and little speech bubbles so I know what's going on all the time. There are too many big words. I paid money so I should be able to understand every part of this book despite my own shortcomings. I paid as much as that well-read guy over there, so I should get the same experience he's getting despite being a completely different person. I demand the publisher force the author to make the changes I require, as there are probably hundreds of other people with the same inadequacies I have. These kinds of changes should be mandatory. I just want to enjoy Atlas Shrugged, but in like....30 minutes. I don't have time to get gud read. Stop oppressing me, Ayn.
 
I paid money for this book. I demand it have pictures and little speech bubbles so I know what's going on all the time. There are too many big words. I paid money so I should be able to understand every part of this book despite my own shortcomings. I paid as much as that well-read guy over there, so I should get the same experience he's getting despite being a completely different person. I demand the publisher force the author to make the changes I require, as there are probably hundreds of other people with the same inadequacies I have. These kinds of changes should be mandatory. I just want to enjoy Atlas Shrugged, but in like....30 minutes. I don't have time to get gud read. Stop oppressing me, Ayn.
Cliffs notes bro. You can do it.
 
No one has to pay for ANYTHING they don't want to. If this is the essence of your rationale, please explain who is forced to purchase a game - ANY game?

You speak of empathy, of catering to everyone, yet you have no empathy for creators who often pour their heart and soul into their work without any guarantee of recompense. Creators who often suffer for their work, who agonize over every decision regarding their work.

And you want to glibly tell them without any investment of your own, "Don't do it like that." Who the hell are you?

And who are you who can apparantly play any game to tell others they dont deserve to play a game they bought with there hard earned money? Are publishers beyond reproach, do they give users warning that only an elite few might be able to get past chapter 1 or 2 before they make the purchase?

No one is telling creators what to do in terms of content or artistic vision other than if they are selling to everyone they should consider peoples age, reactions, free time, disabilities etc.

Games are made by committee and sometimes they get it wrong. That point has been proven time and time again. Sometimes it's just about resources and sometimes it's the marketing department not been in sync with the development team.

I guess it makes you feel good that you can experience something others can't. Most of us have grown up and are happy for everyone to enjoy an entertainment product on their own terms.
 
When I play a game on hard I have no insecurities that another player might have beaten the game easier on a lesser difficulty. If I needed a sense of gratification the difficulty trophy or "bragging rights" would be enough. I feel the mentality that it lessens the experience for someone else who beat it on a higher difficulty to be a bit immature tbh.

This only shows you don't understand what you are being told.

It's not about insecurities of what others can do. Even if no-one else would ever play the game, the option to make the game easier will have an effect on how the game is perceived by the only player who plays it. Playing a hard game where there is no feeling whatsoever that choosing something from the menu screen will make it easier is a lot different than playing a hard game where the player knows there is no way to make it easier. It's different to encounter a boss with knowledge that the boss can be made easier by a simple click on some options screen than it is to encounter a boss knowing that there is no other way around it.

I don't like many modern games at all. I don't like playing the Souls series games. It's because I generally dislike games with a dodge button and a lot of modern combat mechanics. I can't stand playing games like that, no matter how hard or easy they are. However, I absolutely LOVE the idea of Souls games. I love that they exist. I wouldn't want to know there is some basic easy mode in them. As soon as I would know that, the games would stop feeling special in my mind - even though I don't even play them. I would HATE it if the idea of games with a focus on unrelenting difficulty would stop existing. The video game world is more exciting with games like that in the market. And I say this without ever beating any Souls game, or even playing them much at all.

It's kinda like how I appreciate a nearly unclimbable mountain top, or a huge grizzly bear in some forest. I enjoy the fact that these things in nature exist. I wouldn't want that mountain top be flattened and lowered by a press of a button. I wouldn't want that bear become tame by a press of a button. Their very nature would then be something completely different even if it's just an option to change them by the press of a button. It has nothing to do with some people being able to climb the mountain or face the bear without danger. It's about changing the feel of both of them whether or not anyone ever climbs the mountain or faces the bear.

There should be an option for people to buy games they know they might never be able to beat.
In this subject matter the option isn't only about having an option to make a game easier. It's also about the option to choose a game with a certain sense of difficulty, to choose a game where the player knows he might never be able to beat it. That option is not there if every game would have the option to make them easier. Please don't advocate for taking that option away from modern gaming market. It's clear you don't understand this concept but it doesn't mean it doesn't exist. Please try to understand it.

I like the feeling of look at a Rubik's Cube. I have never solved it. The feeling I get from just looking at it or starting to try to solve it would be very different if they would suddenly have an option to almost solve them by pressing one button. Just because I have bought a Rubik's Cube it doesn't mean I should be able to see all the sides in their solved form. The point of the item is to make its final form to exist by doing certain things. Would you hope that from this day on every normal 1000 piece puzzle would have marks that show where the pieces belong on their backsides? Sometimes some games, puzzles and items deserve to be only made into their final form by no hand-holding, with only skill and dedication.
 
And who are you who can apparantly play any game to tell others they dont deserve to play a game they bought with there hard earned money? Are publishers beyond reproach, do they give users warning that only an elite few might be able to get past chapter 1 or 2 before they make the purchase?

I'm not telling anyone to do anything, quite the opposite.

No one is telling creators what to do in terms of content or artistic vision other than if they are selling to everyone they should consider peoples age, reactions, free time, disabilities etc.

Clearly the difficulty can be (and often is) part of the artistic vision. Do you think that (let's use Souls as an example since it's so obvious) a game that is made with such care and attention to detail omitted optional difficulty as mere oversight? Do you imagine there were no conversations regarding this issue? Don't be naive. The difficulty is crucial to their artistic vision. I mean the box is labeled, "Prepare to Die" in big bold lettering.

242276-dark-souls-limited-edition-playstation-3-back-cover.jpg


And the second bullet point on the back of the box is "Challenge". Not sure if the box was labeled the same in all territories to be fair.

I guess it makes you feel good that you can experience something others can't. Most of us have grown up and are happy for everyone to enjoy an entertainment product on their own terms.

I don't feel bad that not everyone gets to experience everything, no. That's life. Do you truly believe that all things can be experienced by all people? A human life is finite. Time, resources, ability and accessibility vary wildly from person to person. And there is NOTHING that can change this. Experience is different for all. That's part of what makes life beautiful, varied and interesting imo.

Take this conversation. Your experience and perspective is incredibly different than mine. Our lives have informed our views in very different ways regarding this issue. What's wrong with that? Life can't be a homogeneous ball.
 
This only shows you don't understand what you are being told.

It's not about insecurities of what others can do. Even if no-one else would ever play the game, the option to make the game easier will have an effect on how the game is perceived by the only player who plays it. Playing a hard game where there is no feeling whatsoever that choosing something from the menu screen will make it easier is a lot different than playing a hard game where the player knows there is no way to make it easier. It's different to encounter a boss with knowledge that the boss can be made easier by a simple click on some options screen than it is to encounter a boss knowing that there is no other way around it.

I don't like many modern games at all. I don't like playing the Souls series games. It's because I generally dislike games with a dodge button and a lot of modern combat mechanics. I can't stand playing games like that, no matter how hard or easy they are. However, I absolutely LOVE the idea of Souls games. I love that they exist. I wouldn't want to know there is some basic easy mode in them. As soon as I would know that, the games would stop feeling special in my mind - even though I don't even play them. I would HATE it if the idea of games with a focus on unrelenting difficulty would stop existing. The video game world is more exciting with games like that in the market. And I say this without ever beating any Souls game, or even playing them much at all.

It's kinda like how I appreciate a nearly unclimbable mountain top, or a huge grizzly bear in some forest. I enjoy the fact that these things in nature exist. I wouldn't want that mountain top be flattened and lowered by a press of a button. I wouldn't want that bear become tame by a press of a button. Their very nature would then be something completely different even if it's just an option to change them by the press of a button. It has nothing to do with some people being able to climb the mountain or face the bear without danger. It's about changing the feel of both of them whether or not anyone ever climbs the mountain or faces the bear.

There should be an option for people to buy games they know they might never be able to beat.
In this subject matter the option isn't only about having an option to make a game easier. It's also about the option to choose a game with a certain sense of difficulty, to choose a game where the player knows he might never be able to beat it. That option is not there if every game would have the option to make them easier. Please don't advocate for taking that option away from modern gaming market. It's clear you don't understand this concept but it doesn't mean it doesn't exist. Please try to understand it.

I like the feeling of look at a Rubik's Cube. I have never solved it. The feeling I get from just looking at it or starting to try to solve it would be very different if they would suddenly have an option to almost solve them by pressing one button. Just because I have bought a Rubik's Cube it doesn't mean I should be able to see all the sides in their solved form. The point of the item is to make its final form to exist by doing certain things. Would you hope that from this day on every normal 1000 piece puzzle would have marks that show where the pieces belong on their backsides? Sometimes some games, puzzles and items deserve to be only made into their final form by no hand-holding, with only skill and dedication.

I do get what your saying and there is something to be said for feeling proud of doing something not many people can... I just think that as good as that feeling is it isnt worth the cost of people not been able to enjoy games they have bought. The souls games are brilliant and I've beaten them all but Sekiro but I wouldn't want others to not experience the pleasure I got out of them.

For me the trophy or been able to say I beat it at the chosen difficulty is enough (for example the Uncharted and Last of Us difficulties I'm really proud of beating at hardest difficulty) but I wouldn't begrudge someone who played on explorer and had a good time 😊
 
I'm not telling anyone to do anything, quite the opposite.



Clearly the difficulty can be (and often is) part of the artistic vision. Do you think that (let's use Souls as an example since it's so obvious) a game that is made with such care and attention to detail omitted optional difficulty as mere oversight? Do you imagine there were no conversations regarding this issue? Don't be naive. The difficulty is crucial to their artistic vision. I mean the box is labeled, "Prepare to Die" in big bold lettering.

242276-dark-souls-limited-edition-playstation-3-back-cover.jpg


And the second bullet point on the back of the box is "Challenge". Not sure if the box was labeled the same in all territories to be fair.



I don't feel bad that not everyone gets to experience everything, no. That's life. Do you truly believe that all things can be experienced by all people? A human life is finite. Time, resources, ability and accessibility vary wildly from person to person. And there is NOTHING that can change this. Experience is different for all. That's part of what makes life beautiful, varied and interesting imo.

Take this conversation. Your experience and perspective is incredibly different than mine. Our lives have informed our views in very different ways regarding this issue. What's wrong with that? Life can't be a homogeneous ball.

I agree the marketing for Dark Souls was spot on and accurate. Also with Dark Souls specifically theres a few options open to you to make the game easier such as over leveling etc.

Sekiro I dont think was as in sync with its marketing and if you arnt very good with quick reaction timing the game is pretty much useless as there are very little alternative avenues to explore. Even if I could get good (and I probably could) I just dont want to invest the amount of hours it would likely take.. I just want to have a good time with games and feel slighted if that option isnt available to me (while not affecting how others like to play that game), as I believe it would take little effort relatively on the developers part to accommodate all types of consumer.
 
Last edited:
I agree the marketing for Dark Souls was spot on and accurate. Also with Dark Souls specifically theres a few options open to you to make the game easier such as over leveling etc.

Sekiro I dont think was as in sync with its marketing and if you arnt very good with quick reaction timing the game is pretty much useless as there are very little alternative avenues to explore. Even if I could get good (and I probably could) I just dont want to invest the amount of hours it would likely take.. I just want to have a good time with games and feel slighted if that option isnt available to me (while not affecting how others like to play that game), as I believe it would take little effort relatively on the developers part to accommodate all types of consumer.

I get wanting to enjoy something that may be out of reach, but we all have things we'd like to experience that may be out of reach. That's life.

y5ijFrQ-sEQ7x34mr3NECUFVJuwa03dZxtqCViXmWhUquO-jNQ3MTXBnmo2raiS0aPDNQaEQRb8PZoCYqBqoZ_sN6Hg2uub5vRD155Kh_kE0ECPX50TI7f8NQhr9oeN1cn5WX_V6q8BTM2UUwYISjaR9ML1k9gAAHjE


:P

Expecting all things to accommodate all people, while an idealistic fantasy, turns a blind eye to reality imho.
 
I say yes. I'm getting older and time is a more precious commodity to me than money. Which means I buy way more games than I can ever play. Games like COD I'll always play on Veteran because I know it's still going to be 6ish hours.

Something like Doom Eternal where each difficulty ads about 5 more hours to the playtime I'll play on normal so I can play it and enjoy it without it taking over my life. There are even games that *gasp* I'll play on easy because I'm not looking for a challenge, I want to see the story and have fun without having to spend hours perfecting a moveset so I can weaken an enemy just before hitting a weakspot to do 2% damage. Sometimes you just wanna hit AAA and be done.
 
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? 😊
If a game that is designed to be difficult is too difficult for you you are not part of the intended audience.
 
I do get what your saying and there is something to be said for feeling proud of doing something not many people can...

No, I'm not really talking about that.

This feeling only comes _if_ someone beats the game. What I talk about is that these games have a feeling that they _might not_ be beaten.

And even if one is able to beat it, it's not really the feeling of beating the game that's the most cherished thing about it, but it's the experience before you were able to beat it. It's the journey of going through extremely dangerous grounds. And it's the feeling you have before you even start the game. It's much different to enter a cave where you know there's no other opening to it and no other routes through the cave than it is to enter a cave where you know the contents of the cave will be easier to face depending on which door you take. This sense of entering an unrelenting cave of horror is not the same if you have the option to change the contents of the cave less horrific. It's not about beating the cave. It's also about the feeling you have when you enter the cave.

I just think that as good as that feeling is it isnt worth the cost of people not been able to enjoy games they have bought. The souls games are brilliant and I've beaten them all but Sekiro but I wouldn't want others to not experience the pleasure I got out of them.

For me the trophy or been able to say I beat it at the chosen difficulty is enough (for example the Uncharted and Last of Us difficulties I'm really proud of beating at hardest difficulty) but I wouldn't begrudge someone who played on explorer and had a good time 😊

Again, it's not about being able to say something is beaten. It's about having played a game with a certain sense of dread that was impossible to remove from the game whether or not you beat the game. Not every game necessarily should be like that, but I definitely think some game should be exactly like that.
 
I first thought NO, then undecided and finally ended up voting YES because I wouldn't be playing Halo on Legendary if it hadn't had an easy setting when I first played it. I hated shooters and sucked at them, but felt I needed to play Halo as an Xbox 360 owner.

I could barely get through Halo CE on easy, but I fell in love with series and eventually got to where I now play on at least Heroic, usually legendary.

But then I changed my vote back to NO because I realized Halo and most games that have players with varying skills already offer the option of different difficulties.

I will say, I am sure am glad Moon offered a difficulty choice for Ori WotW because I suck worse at platformers than I did at shooters when I first played Halo.
 
I think this is one of the reasons why quality has dipped since the PS3 and Xbox 360 era. Developers are focusing much on profit, so they design a game to accommodate all. And it's not only difficulty but the removal of certain gameplay features. For example, let us look at Dragon Age: Origins. The game had several cool mechanics that were removed in later additions.

When playing as a warrior, you no longer have to consider the weight of the armor and improve your character to better manage it. Self-crafting is pretty much gone, and much more. Future games might have better gameplay, but the mechanics many of is have come to enjoy are gone for the purpose of bringing in new audiences.
 
For all who demand an easy mode in everything, I would ask this.

Imagine you are a creator of a game, or whatever really, and you view an element of your creation as integral to the whole. Would you so readily sacrifice that aspect for a theoretical increase in sales.

I can answer for me. I wouldn't even do it for a massive increase in sales. Artistic vision/creative integrity matters to me, and I wouldn't compromise on my vision. Any genuine creator or artist knows from the outset that their work will not speak to everyone. And that is FINE.

Absolutely THIS!!!

Imagine a creator thinking they'd like to make a game that has the essence of the danger of deep pits in it. The game would aim to make encountering a pit as terrifying and dreadful as possible. They'd make the game system punish the player from falling down the pit in certain ways that both make the player feel horrified when encountering the pit and feel extremely relieved when they finally get over the pit. That's what they would want to make. That's what they would like the player to experience. And then there would be players who become super interested in this concept.

Now suddenly the creators are forced to make an easy mode for some whatever inclusivity reason. They would have to make a version of their game that doesn't have what they wanted it to have the most. It might be easy to do. It might bring them more money. But they would have to make a version of their game without the actual idea that was the very point of the game. They would have to make the game, the rewards, the endings, the cutscenes, the bosses, be able to be reached without ever having the player to play with the idea of the most terrifying pits.

It would not only lessen the value of those most terrifying pits to the creators but it would also lessen their value to the players who became interested in the idea the creators were dealing with. Their creation wouldn't be the same anymore. Their idea of the most dangerous and terrifying pit would now be the most dangerous and terrifying pit only sometimes. Their creation would now often be a cakewalk instead of unrelenting sight of terror. Their initial idea wouldn't exist anymore. The mere existence of the possibility of making the pit less terrifying would remove the initial idea from existence.
 
Should movies never be watched in anything but in a cinema? Sometimes compromises need to be made. No one is saying it's the optimal way to play but at least the end user is getting enjoyment out of it and the rest of us can play the way the developer intended as were fortunately skilled enough to do that.

What about image quality? The developer intended this dungeon to be super scary but your tv settings are bright and over saturated with artificial sharpening. Your got your colour temp far too cool. Play on a calibrated screen or NOT AT ALL.

You see my point? Life is a compromise. Just let people enjoy games how they want 😉
 
You see my point? Life is a compromise. Just let people enjoy games how they want 😉
And let developers make what they want to make. If devs like FROM don't want to add "easy mode" then shouldn't be force to and guess what, it worked out for them just fine.

Edit: AphexTwunt AphexTwunt
675630.jpg

giphy.gif
 
Last edited:
Here's one for you fine gents who are totally discussing this in good faith: Alien Isolation. At launch, this game didn't have an easy mode. It was later patched in because of complaints from poor bastards like me had thought the game was to difficult and we wanted to play the game. Now did the developer "compromise their vision" or simply make it more accessible?

Yes. They compromised their vision in exchange for more money and/or to hear less bad comments.
Some do that. Some don't. It's their call. But don't ask for every developer to do that.

Should movies never be watched in anything but in a cinema? Sometimes compromises need to be made. No one is saying it's the optimal way to play but at least the end user is getting enjoyment out of it and the rest of us can play the way the developer intended as were fortunately skilled enough to do that.

What about image quality? The developer intended this dungeon to be super scary but your tv settings are bright and over saturated with artificial sharpening. Your got your colour temp far too cool. Play on a calibrated screen or NOT AT ALL.

You see my point? Life is a compromise. Just let people enjoy games how they want 😉

Yes, life is a compromise and sometimes you just have to accept not all games can be beaten. And maybe even make a compromise and start enjoying the games you can't beat. Enjoying a game doesn't require getting through it.

If you enjoy the games for their stories, then just accept that these stories also have an ending where the main character fails on the mission. A game over screen is the end of that story. If you want to see another ending, try again. You might not be able to see other endings than the character dying sooner or later but you can try to change the story so that the character at least manages to go a bit further in the mission.

The problem seems to be that some players don't want to accept that ending for the story even though it's a legit ending.

One thing I love in video games is that the story might be of a hero who fails when encountering the very first enemy, or the second, or the one that comes after 10 hours to the game. Or the character might be able to save the world or whatever the mission is. 99,9999999999% of books and movies don't offer that. There are some multiple path movies and there are the fighting fantasy books where you can make choices on which page you will choose next and some enemy even might kill you along the way. But video games are the main medium that brings people this unique experience the best. Today there are many people who are advocating for removing the game over screen completely and I feel that is really hurting the diversity and uniqueness of video games.
 
something tells me there might be a correlation between having voted yes for such an insane, backward concept and having had one's ass handed to them by Sekiro last year... or maybe it's just a coincidence
 
Yes. They compromised their vision in exchange for more money and/or to hear less bad comments.
Some do that. Some don't. It's their call. But don't ask for every developer to do that.



Yes, life is a compromise and sometimes you just have to accept not all games can be beaten. And maybe even make a compromise and start enjoying the games you can't beat. Enjoying a game doesn't require getting through it.

What about internal focus testing before a games launch is that not compromising a games vision? What if not everyone on the team feels a certain way is that not affecting the games vision?

For those saying compromise with a game you can't play because of lack of skill. Paying full price just to put the game down early and put on youtube instead is hardly a good compromise for the player, it's more likely to put them off buying games.

I guess we fundamentally disagree that letting a small percentage of people play on easy allegedly compromises a games vision for everyone. Even if that was true we also disagree that that compromise would actually be worse than letting some users give up and waste their hard earned money.
 
something tells me there might be a correlation between having voted yes for such an insane, backward concept and having had one's ass handed to them by Sekiro last year... or maybe it's just a coincidence

"Insane backwards concept as an easy mode"

Where even am I right now. Stop the world I want to get off. 😂😂
 
Last edited:
we can make a deal, easy mode in every game and all the highest difficulty modes ready for the first run instead of being blocked behind bullshit requisites considering that 90% of people never complete games a second time and wants the best experience during the first run.
 
Last edited:
we can make a deal, easy mode in every game and all the highest difficulty modes ready for the first run instead of being blocked behind bullshit requisites considering that 90% of people never complete games a second time and wants the best experience during the first run.

Yep no issues with that. Let people play how they want to play. Iron man, one life, inverted controls... it's all good 😉
 
If the logic here is every game should be for everyone then let me ask you guys why FFXIV doesn't have offline SP mode for someone like me who doesn't like to play online and doesn't want to pay subscription? It should have the option play the game completely offline to carter to my taste....right?
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom