Forums - Gaming Discussion - Difficulty vs Accessibility: A responsibility for the developers, not for the players.

SvennoJ said:
Alcyon said:

Then Dark Souls isn't for you. I don't like racing games, so I don't play racing games. Should they add "more options" and give me a "non-racing option" in their racing game? Or perhaps, I say perhaps, I should not play racine games?

There's way more to souls games than just beating the difficulty. Racing games have many options as well. Only 5% of people owning GT Sport actually play in sport mode. Some just like to collect cars, make liveries and take pictures of cars. You never have to race one bit to have fun, although a bit of driving to get cars speeds things along. So yep, plenty non racing options in GT Sport ;)

I'm glad PD doesn't listen to the die hard sim racers that want everyone locked to cockpit mode, wheel only, no assists and full damage. They do expect you to use a wheel without (most) assists when invited to the top drivers live events which is completely fine. But they do understand that you're not getting a new audience to your games if you expect them to be experts from the get go, and that the average majority keep the lights on and the free content updates going.

I don't like to race on the multiplayer even though I have wheel and can play with 0 assist fairly good most of time I would play on the controller and some assistance because I can't have my wheel on the room due to children.



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Around the Network

Dying Light devs just implemented a "story mode", years after the game's release, which adds in an easier mode to the game:

Story Mode Details

Decreased damage dealt by zombies by 25%
Increased damage dealt by player by 50-100%
Decreased fall damage by 50%
Normal attacks use 25% less stamina
Charged attacks use 25% less stamina
Medkits are twice as effective
Player loses 50% less experience points upon death
Days are longer by 25%
Nights are shorter by 25%
Traders pay 20% more for player’s items
Player earns 50% less Legend experience
Airdrops remain on the map twice as long

I'm not sure if anyone has been asking for this over the years, but the devs felt some reason to patch it in after 5-6 years down the line. Either way it's a nice addition to those that just want to play the game for the story, and not just and only challenges. 



               

Alcyon said:
SvennoJ said:

Can you name 20 current racing games :p

Sim(cade) racing games naturally share the same tracks and cars, so it's totally fine to have iRacing next to Asetto Corsa next to GT Sport. What other games have the same lore, art, level design, atmosphere and story as the souls series? Difficulty is just a small part of what defines the souls series, and imo not the important part.

Series/games I remember

Grand Turismo

Forza

Need for Speed

Sega Rally

V Rally

Ridge Racer

Micro Machines

Mario Kart (and clones)

Formula One

WRC

Project Cars

Gear

Dirt

Driveclub

Nascar games (I don't remember any but they exist)

Moto GP games

Burn-out (I think, the game with Takedowns)

For the rest, I need some help

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_driving_and_racing_video_games

And "all racing games are similar duh" isn't a valid answer. Seriously, stop making nonsense.

Sorry, thought we were talking about sim racers.



SvennoJ said:
Alcyon said:

Series/games I remember

Grand Turismo

Forza

Need for Speed

Sega Rally

V Rally

Ridge Racer

Micro Machines

Mario Kart (and clones)

Formula One

WRC

Project Cars

Gear

Dirt

Driveclub

Nascar games (I don't remember any but they exist)

Moto GP games

Burn-out (I think, the game with Takedowns)

For the rest, I need some help

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_driving_and_racing_video_games

And "all racing games are similar duh" isn't a valid answer. Seriously, stop making nonsense.

Sorry, thought we were talking about sim racers.

And that are still releasing =p

Plus it is funny that he mocks not all racing being similar, because no one said that, even though he grouped games that aren't really on the same genre.



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

DonFerrari said:

And that are still releasing =p

Plus it is funny that he mocks not all racing being similar, because no one said that, even though he grouped games that aren't really on the same genre.

Yeah, iRacing and Micro machines are as far removed from each other as Dark souls and Fat princess. You walk around in both carrying a sword, same thing! Don't like the difficulty in one, play the other :)

Anyway, atm I wouldn't mind having an arcade mode in Dirt Rally 2 with rewind feature. Even without hardcore damage on I still somehow get stuck in the scenery and get terminal damage forcing retirement from the championship. Realistic maybe, fun no. At least you have 5 restarts or you can simply restart the game when you're out of restarts (it doesn't save until you click continue). There's not much choice on the rally side of racing and I blame the move to more time consuming strict career nonsense for that. Dirt went the wrong way by neglecting rally for rally cross and focusing too much on silly festival nonsense. Dirt rally goes too far the other way with so called realism restricting the user base. WRC seems to sit in the middle but has been low quality for ages with crap handling. I haven't tried WRC 8 yet though, maybe it has improved. The last one I played was either 6 or 7, disliked it so much I traded it in.



Around the Network
SvennoJ said:
DonFerrari said:

And that are still releasing =p

Plus it is funny that he mocks not all racing being similar, because no one said that, even though he grouped games that aren't really on the same genre.

Yeah, iRacing and Micro machines are as far removed from each other as Dark souls and Fat princess. You walk around in both carrying a sword, same thing! Don't like the difficulty in one, play the other :)

Anyway, atm I wouldn't mind having an arcade mode in Dirt Rally 2 with rewind feature. Even without hardcore damage on I still somehow get stuck in the scenery and get terminal damage forcing retirement from the championship. Realistic maybe, fun no. At least you have 5 restarts or you can simply restart the game when you're out of restarts (it doesn't save until you click continue). There's not much choice on the rally side of racing and I blame the move to more time consuming strict career nonsense for that. Dirt went the wrong way by neglecting rally for rally cross and focusing too much on silly festival nonsense. Dirt rally goes too far the other way with so called realism restricting the user base. WRC seems to sit in the middle but has been low quality for ages with crap handling. I haven't tried WRC 8 yet though, maybe it has improved. The last one I played was either 6 or 7, disliked it so much I traded it in.

Yep I cringe when people ask for damage modeling on GT and others simulators, first none of them can really properly simulate the real damage and effects it have on handling. Like on a F1 even a very slight bump could destroy your foil and make you retire from race. You are supposed to not hit anyone, if you do that them you don't need damage, and if you aren't capable of doing that them you would hate if damage was modeled the right way. I rather have a good punishing system for multiplayer and let it out of single player, on SP you decide if you want to be challenged so much that if you bump someone you hit restart race or forfeit because that is what would happen in RL.



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

I have no issue with games being hard, my real problem is the saving progress. As an adult working full time with a family I find it hard to get time to play, so it pissed me off to spend an hour in a game just to be killed and lose all my progress. If a boss is hard I enjoy finding a way to kill him, but not doing all the dungeon again. For me difficulty is not a problem, I enjoy the challenge, but losing all my progress just because a bad turn. That is going to make leave a game.



SvennoJ said:
Alcyon said:

And, again, using general arguments to discuss about a few games isn't the best way to get a point. If, out of 20 racing games, A SINGLE ONE is for the die hard sim racers, where is the problem?

Can you name 20 current racing games :p

Sim(cade) racing games naturally share the same tracks and cars, so it's totally fine to have iRacing next to Asetto Corsa next to GT Sport. What other games have the same lore, art, level design, atmosphere and story as the souls series? Difficulty is just a small part of what defines the souls series, and imo not the important part.

There isn't any "simulation" in the question. If you wanted 20 SIMULATION racing games, add SIMULATION in your question.

DonFerrari said:
SvennoJ said:

Sorry, thought we were talking about sim racers.

And that are still releasing =p

Plus it is funny that he mocks not all racing being similar, because no one said that, even though he grouped games that aren't really on the same genre.

Funny how peoçple like to create a gazillon genres when it suits them, but refuse to accept that soulboirnes are not for them and must add them in a specific genre. I didn't group games, he asked about RACING GAMES, I gave a list of games when you ... RACE. Wow, I answered a specific question, and you are not happy with the answer, what a surprise.



Alcyon said:
SvennoJ said:

Can you name 20 current racing games :p

Sim(cade) racing games naturally share the same tracks and cars, so it's totally fine to have iRacing next to Asetto Corsa next to GT Sport. What other games have the same lore, art, level design, atmosphere and story as the souls series? Difficulty is just a small part of what defines the souls series, and imo not the important part.

There isn't any "simulation" in the question. If you wanted 20 SIMULATION racing games, add SIMULATION in your question.

DonFerrari said:

And that are still releasing =p

Plus it is funny that he mocks not all racing being similar, because no one said that, even though he grouped games that aren't really on the same genre.

Funny how peoçple like to create a gazillon genres when it suits them, but refuse to accept that soulboirnes are not for them and must add them in a specific genre. I didn't group games, he asked about RACING GAMES, I gave a list of games when you ... RACE. Wow, I answered a specific question, and you are not happy with the answer, what a surprise.

I'm not part of that convo you two are having, but I just wanted to say that even I noticed what Sven was trying to ask you. I knew Sven was asking for 20 sim based racing games. It's not like it was hard to follow, given the previous quotes you two have had with one another. 

At the end of the day, if you're going to list 20 simulated racing games, your list is going to have you delving back in time, rather than only listing whatever 20 sim games you can find in the present, because, well, there's just not that much big of a crowd for racing sims over arcade and semi sim racers out there. That and the actual proper equipment you're supposed to sport for that niche sub genre nets a hefty price, meaning even less people within that sub genre. 



               

Fuchigole said:
I have no issue with games being hard, my real problem is the saving progress. As an adult working full time with a family I find it hard to get time to play, so it pissed me off to spend an hour in a game just to be killed and lose all my progress. If a boss is hard I enjoy finding a way to kill him, but not doing all the dungeon again. For me difficulty is not a problem, I enjoy the challenge, but losing all my progress just because a bad turn. That is going to make leave a game.

I too am an adult with stuff to do, but I still prefer fewer save points, because when I know I cant die before saving, then Ill be more cautious, making the game more exciting. To date, 30 years of gaming, the best gaming feel I ever had was on ZombiU with the hardcore mode, 1 single life, if you die, you had to restart from the very beginning, you would lose the save so there was no getting back if you died.

It gave me a lot of tension, pressure, specially having to manage 2 screens, with no pause when looking into inventory and stuff, it created a lot of realism, and I actually felt myself in that world fighting to survive.

And if I lost 1 hour progress, then I would know it was my fault, and I would know I have to be more careful next time, that enhances the game for me. And I respect more developers who treat us like real gamers, there should always be an easy option for kids, even tough I'd prefer if there wasn't, I'd prefer there would be more games aimed at kids, and other games aimed at teens and adults. 

But kids these days are too soft, I was finishing games like Zelda and Tomb raider back in the day when we didn't have internet and we could get any help and our parents would have no clue, we had to figure it out by ourselves, I was age 8 and I finished the first tomb raider by myself, there was no easy mode or frequent checkpoints, and there were more ways to die, jumps had to be very precise. At around the same time I finished GT, there was no easy mode, and it was hard to get gold in everything.

All other games that have restarts from a checkpoint 2 minutes ago, they all lose the impact, because you never care if you die, you know youll just get back to where you were. If gams had less checkpoints and less lives, then games would put us more on the edge, and be more realistic, example, if you fall off a cliff, you wont just magically get back in real life, that's why in real life we are more cautious and think more about the actions we do.

Worst of all was Mario odyssey, a game in where you cant lose even if you try, so what's the point, I still enjoyed the game but it would have been a much better game if you had a limit of lives, and had to really try and be careful. That's like watching someone playing the game on youtube, yeah its still cool and all but what's the point, you wont get that feeling of pressure to succeed, because you already succeeded from the get go.

The reason I started playing games in late 80's was to be able to pass the challenge of passing a level or finishing the game, they we had more challenges, to hit better scores and such. That's why games were more addictive and exciting back then.

Some modern games still have that feeling, like resogun for example, you will have to sweat a lot to complete all the challenges. And the hardest mode is next to impossible, I love it.

For me, difficulty can make or break the game, example, I loves new super Mario U, but I hated new super Mario on 3ds and wii, because those were far too easy.

Last edited by victor83fernandes - on 20 February 2020