By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming Discussion - Should video games play themselves (easy mode for Sekerio?)

 

Should games like Sekerio have an easy mode?

Yes. 15 35.71%
 
No. 25 59.52%
 
Unsure. 0 0%
 
Other/comments. 2 4.76%
 
Total:42

No.

So far in my playthrough of Sekiro, it is easy compared to previous Souls games. It's easy to get the hang of and way more linear (so far).



A warrior keeps death on the mind from the moment of their first breath to the moment of their last.



Around the Network

I don't think From Software has any obligation to make any kind of easy mode.  

I'd argue that difficulty is kind of arbitrary.  

It's easy to define an easy or a difficult mode in the context of the same game.  Clearly enemies with more health are going to be challenging.  But "easy" in one game can be a very different thing from another game.  For example what if From Software made the current mode the "easy" mode,and made a more challenging mode?  The real crux of the conversation is about making the game more accessible, and the question there is how accessible does a game need to be?


What kind of standards should that easy mode have?  I think the best way to think about it is statistically, what percentage of players should be able to complete easy mode?

Someone might put out that 95% of players should be able to get through a game like Bloodborne.  Or some other (arbitrary) percentage.  

However you put it, these difficulty standards are at least somewhat arbitrary.  I don't think that any developer should have some set standard like that, that they should be aiming for.  



Sekiro doesn't need an easy mode, but having one wouldn't in any way take anything away from the game. People who want to play the standard, developer-intended way could still do so, and others who can't play the game that way would have a chance to play the game through too. FromSoftware is in no way obligated to put an easy mode in the game as they are working with a specific vision in mind for it, but people who say having it would somehow ruin the experience are just being stupid. The existence of an easy mode wouldn't in any way harm the experience for anyone not using it.



Yes, so I can play it while high and get real euphoria while experiencing the game.



haxxiy said:

I think a lot of people are saying this about Sekiro specifically because parrying took the place of dodging as the main damage-avoiding mechanic, compared to Souls games. And a lot of people didn't notice it, or insisted in ignoring game mechanics you were specifically told to use by the tutorial. But it's not particularly harder than the Souls games. Honestly, it's their most acessible yet.

Good to know, now it's for sure off my radar. I can never get parrying right, not in any game, not even zelda. I relied on shield and magic in the souls games, timing is not my thing. A larger timing window or clear cues could help, yet apparently having an option like that is an insult to the artistic vision.



Around the Network

It's NEVER a bad thing to have more options.



Bofferbrauer2 said:

Some games have a fantastic story, onto which the gameplay is actually more of a hindrance sometimes, espeically for those who just want to enjoy the story.


I really hope this is a joke or a sarcastic comment.

Gameplay is what makes it a game. Story is and should always be secondary. If you want storys go watch a movie or read a book, I've not played one game in my entire life that has a story better than a sub-par movie or book. Surley I've not played all games ever made, but I've played enough game to make this blanket statement. What I can give some games credit for is, in some instances is interesting worldbuilding and/or atmosphere, but story always simplistic.

Back on topic of difficulty:

I thing I would like to see being used more, that was a thing in mainly older adventure game (like the Sierra kind), is games that allows the player to actually fail. What I mean with this is that some action/actions (or in action) you make in the game makes it unbeatable later on. This without actually telling you that you made the wrong action when you make it but leaves it up to you to discover it further down the line.

This is a pipe dream tho since all the focus currently is about accessability and all that crap.



Yes, definitely! I love that I can just simulate in games like FM and ROTK and just let the AI play each other. Especially useful after playing around with the editors a bit to see what kind of effect that has in the long term. Something that would take far too long if I had to play it all myself.



Spindel said:
Bofferbrauer2 said:

Some games have a fantastic story, onto which the gameplay is actually more of a hindrance sometimes, espeically for those who just want to enjoy the story.


I really hope this is a joke or a sarcastic comment.

Gameplay is what makes it a game. Story is and should always be secondary. If you want storys go watch a movie or read a book, I've not played one game in my entire life that has a story better than a sub-par movie or book. Surley I've not played all games ever made, but I've played enough game to make this blanket statement. What I can give some games credit for is, in some instances is interesting worldbuilding and/or atmosphere, but story always simplistic.

Play Vampire: The Masquerade: Bloodlines and you'll possibly understand. That game has a superb story, but the gameplay feels more like a hindrance than adding anything to it. Planetscape: Torment has a really great story, but gameplay seems to just bring up roadblocks sometimes. The whole Drakenguard series has a truly genius storyline, but absolutely piss poor gameplay.

I'm not saying they should play themselves, reread my post. I'm saying that there should be a story difficulty mode which makes fights and challenges extremely easy for those who just want to enjoy the story. Or do it like L.A. Noire, where you can skip fights if you fail them a couple times, so you can continue enjoying the story.

And yes, I enjoy a good story with my games. And I'm by far not the only one.

Also, there's a reason why Game movies (as in, Movies made out of the videogame's cutscenes) are getting more and more popular: The gameplay just gets in the way for those who want to enjoy the overarching story.



This debate always comes around whenever a From Software game is released, and I always have the same answer.
It should have an easy mode only if the developers believe it should.

If they are tailoring the experience to be a certain way and they believe an easy mode doesn't fit their vision (which I suspect it doesn't), then people should get over it and move onto one of the dozens of other gaming experiences being released this year...not to mention that huge back catalog many gamers put off. There's plenty to play, but as consumers we shouldn't feel entitled to have every game catered to us.

Yes, it is a product we're buying so we should have some expectations on content and quality. But video games are also an art form. We wouldn't expect James Cameron to let Jack survive even if there was plenty of space on that slab of wood, and we wouldn't tell Shakespeare to rewrite Romeo & Juliet so that their plan goes off without a hitch and they end up living a long life of love (spoiler alert, they don't).

Point is, From Software poured hours and hours of hard work into manufacturing a feel and a style that is all their own. They may not reach audiences like other blockbusters, but they have found success with their style of development and a following that is now in the millions of gamers that enjoy the pain. Who are we to take the reigns from them on how that experience should be when it's not our art?

Just vote with your wallet if you think the game is too hard to get through. Or watch it on Twitch or YouTube.