https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A4_auMe1HsY&ab_channel=videogamedunkey

Without reading a single reply in this thread:

Because one gameplay mechanic is difficulty and figuring out how to overcome obstacles is the point.

If you want to take that away you should just go watch a movie instead.

I know this seems like gate keeping and sounds elitist but I claim it's not. If you don't want the challange, when the challange is the point of the activity, you should go do something else. Every activity isn't for everyone.

Sorry Curl, but no. I'm actually fairly against difficulty levels, if anything they more often than not break the experience.
Not every game is for everyone, in some things you're good, in some you're just not.
If anything, more games should be like Souls (and most much older games, while we're at it) and have only one diificulty (or at worst very, very narrow leeway) and it's up to player to either figure it out, or look for another game that suits it needs and skills.

I'll give you an example from similar hobby, boardgames - I mostly like to play so called Euro-games (it has nothing to do these days with country of origin), but mostly of medium weight, medium-hard at most (that being 3.5 out of 5 complexity on Board Game Geek). anything above that is no go zone for me...at least at the present time. There are some amazing games that are more complex, I just don't want to play them, either cause I don't have time, patience or both. But never have I thought that any of them need an easy mode, nor any of them actually have it. Why? Balancing of mechanisms - if anything, if there is lighter version, it's usually completely different game, often by different designer, that resembles its heavier counterpart, but aimed at wider market.

Which brings me to the very point - most video games these days are made for mass market, and they will have wide diificulty level scale because publishers want to sell as many copies as possible. But luckily, there are still games and developers that do not aim for mass market (although some of them do become popular) that do not want to sacrifirce fine balance of underlying mechanisms and then it's up to each person to decide if that game is for them or not.

Because they're jealous since they didn't have those when they were growing up in "arcades" and lost money on intentionally badly designed games to extort money.

I'm not completely against some sort of difficulty scaling in all games, it's just that I think if there must be some, it should be much, much narrower scale - cause, from my experience at least, wide difficulty scaling inevitably breaks the balancing. So, to answer your question, if game indeed has narrow difficulty scaling (so there is only slightly easier option) and if even then one is not able to  manage it, then that game is simply not for them - and there's nothing wrong with it, there are plenty of games out there.

What I'm completey against is all sort of player aids, especially in RPGs - there almost nothing more game breaking in modern AAA "RPGs" than all sort of handholding devs are putting into them. Again, consequence of what is essentially niche genre going mass market and publishers wanting more sales, thus more audience from outside of core genre.

You say you can't hear it anymore, so what are you doing here?

And they had the very lame "give me a story" difficult that even my 3 year old was able to get over 50% of the game finished already (will probably finish the game with time). Am I bothered by it since I finished on Give me God of War with extreme dedication to do it? Not at all, I love that my son that liked to see me play so much was able to enjoy it himself.

This is like saying if you can't drive a manual then dont drive at all.

If you don't take your bike for track days then you have no business riding bikes.

If you cant dance then you might as well stay at home and not go out.

Choices or options is never a bad thing. Never.

If the inclusion of a difficulty setting "breaks the experience" from a development perspective then its n the devs to get that balance right. If it breaks the experience from what can only be described as dogmatic.... then thats on you.

Make game. Give difficulty options that allows gamers tailor their experience of said game to their skill. Release game. 

 Simple.

It is so funny we living in an age that people love to talk about diversity and inclusion on silly things are making someone blatantly showing their non-binary sexual orientation or including token chars on environment they don't make sense, but when it is about allowing someone to enjoy a game (be it by dub/sub a game to more languages or having lower skills required by the way of more difficult settings) some people will totally fret.

It's a completely pointless complaint. Giving players more options to customize the game to their preferences and skill level don't take anything away from people who like to play games on the so-called intended difficulty level. There's is not a single negative side to having more difficulty options in a game that allows people who otherwise wouldn't be able to play it do so.