| pokoko said: It's up to the developers, of course, but there is no real reason not to give players options whenever possible in single-player games. Options hurt no-one but they do allow those who might not have been able to to handle a game the chance to play it. Yeah, I know gamers are known for their childish "get gud" bullshit but those kinds of people shouldn't be allowed to define the entire medium. If their ego needs validation from videogames then they're not really worth worrying about to begin with. There is just no good reason to exclude people. Especially when you look at it from an economic perspective. Series like Elder Scrolls have a ton of female gamers, older gamers, and "casual" gamers who just want an enjoyable experience. Easier modes let them join in the fun without any loss to those who want more difficulty. |
First bolded: I agree and those kind of gamers exist for every franchise
Second bolded: Eeeeh when you look at this from an economic perspective it would be very risky to add an easy mode on a "franchise" that has grown a market for its challenge implemented in the games it has and as widely popular this series might be in the media,that still would not translate it will be buyed by a lot more casuals considering the risk of losing core audience that stick with these games because of their difficulty.
Look, i would like to agree with the options hurt no one sentiment but having to play the game with thinking about switching to easy mode frequently when i get a bit frustrated would ruin the experience for me because afterwards it would make me feel like i accomplished nothing if i do switch to easy mode and if i did not it would still keep being in my mind so the game its purpose would not be effective and a lot of other players would feel the same i assume.
