Why do people get upset by OPTIONAL difficult assists?

[Mnementh]

DonFerrari said:

Mnementh said:

Yeah, it is all about patience. Many people have learned to play fast action games and expect the Souls games to fall into that category. But they are slow, you should go into them patient. And that's the whole point. People going in guns blazing will think it is hard, people going in patient will think it is moderate in difficulty.

The antithesis is Serious Sam. Going in slow and deliberate probably leads to a subpar experience.

Yeah, but did anyone complain about this difficulty setting? Never heard any discussion. And this is the thesis of the OP, why get people upset. I don't think people get upset outside of Souls.

Yeah, maybe you're part of that mass market and that's why you find no fault. That is OK by the way, nothing wrong with it. The only thing is you should accept that people have different preferences.

Yeah, many people seem to forget that.

Rubber banding and adapted challenges are critized in it's own right. In many games part of the experience is to build the character and progress. If that is part of the game, you want to see, that in the beginning some challenges are impossible to beat, but if you come back later with an upgraded character they get a lot easier. If you adapt the challenge this feel of progression is lost.

Ahem. So for which games are major discussions (not a single youtuber or something, but a bigger discussion) about the difficulty settings? This is the thesis of the OP and yours seemingly, but I fail to see impactful grumblings aside from Souls.

Eeeeerrrr I have been playing for the last 30 days and beat most of the hard games of the time. But if you want to consider me someone from mass market that can only finish games if they are easy ok. I'll excuse me from the burden of talking to elite player top ranker.

Sorry what? My whole post was about different gaming tastes and that there are and should be games for different tastes and THAT is elitist? I am actually not for the hard difficulty. But as I and others said many times, Dark Souls isn't that hard, it just needs a different approach. You and others here basically say, that games shouldn't be produced for my tastes, that my tastes don't count, yet I am the elitist, not you?

For years I was very unsatisfied with gaming. This was, because most games only tended to the biggest markets available, and niches fell out of view. Luckily we got the indie explosion. Many indies are filling the niches of gameplay and concepts the big AAA stuff avoids, because they need the bigger markets to recoup there costs. That's why I often have more fun with indies. Not always, my tastes partly overlap with the mass market, but partly not. I find it quite disturbing, that you say, there should be no games for me, only ones for you.

And if you read my posts, you would've seen I have nothing against difficulty settings, I only say it solves not the problem of the complainers about Souls. Because Souls is not difficult, it just plays differently. And I like Souls for being differently.

HoloDust said:

DonFerrari said:

Enjoy yourself playing old games and indies for the rest of your gaming life if you so much wishes.

Why thank you kind sir, I actually do mostly prefer (and have been for all of my 40+ years of gaming) non-AAA games, often in more niche genres, and luckily for me computers have always been home to most of them, so I tend to stick to that.

From time to time there is a good AAA game, but like anything else, they fall under Sturgeon's Law ("ninety percent of everything is crap") as well, and considering there are (relatively) so few of them...well, you get the picture...

40+ years. Nice, you beat easily my 25+ years of gaming. And for DonFerrari: If I had to play old games and indies for the rest of my life I would lose only a few interesting games, and looking at my backlog I would be fully content with that. I have so many interesting DOS games yet to play, and as I never was a console player in the old days, so many games and game series I never even saw. And Indies producing some of the most interesting games these days.

DonFerrari said:

HoloDust said:

Why thank you kind sir, I actually do mostly prefer (and have been for all of my 40+ years of gaming) non-AAA games, often in more niche genres, and luckily for me computers have always been home to most of them, so I tend to stick to that.

From time to time there is a good AAA game, but like anything else, they fall under Sturgeon's Law ("ninety percent of everything is crap") as well, and considering there are (relatively) so few of them...well, you get the picture...

Sure I get the picture, there are a lot of people with different tastes among them. And some of those like titles that most don't, and thank god VG is so diverse that this people can still find enough content to please their heart and playing time.

Exactly. So why people demanding every game should please their tastes (which implies they shouldn't be there for different tastes)?