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

It's just the notion that you find it 'selfish' to request easier options in 'your' games that irks me. Basically the lack of options is there because some people lack self control when it comes to playing games and don't have the back bone not to use crutches when the going gets a little tough. Isn't that 'selfish'? Easily solved though, add trophies for not going below certain difficulty levels or game speed levels. Many games already do that, switch difficulty, lose your chance at whatever trophy you're playing for.

I've already linked an article earlier explaining that as you age, perception of time and reflexes slow down. The souls games and souls likes are in essence rhythm games. In Beat saber you don't start on expert either and for ages rhythm games had the option to slow sections down to practice since at full speed there's simply not much you can do when you fall behind. It's the same in souls games, miss a couple beats, start over. But perhaps you'll be immune to the effects of time or simply won't care about video games anymore when you approach your fifties :)



Around the Network

I just can't stand difficult old games. Like NES and some SNES games. They're just too ancient and I'm growing filthy casual these years.

Can't grasp why so many obsess about and re-buy NES games on newer Nintendo consoles. Weirdos and nuttters and old timers they are. :P



God bless You.

My Total Sales prediction for PS4 by the end of 2021: 110m+

When PS4 will hit 100m consoles sold: Before Christmas 2019

There were three ravens sat on a tree / They were as blacke as they might be / The one of them said to his mate, Where shall we our breakfast take?


SvennoJ said:
It's just the notion that you find it 'selfish' to request easier options in 'your' games that irks me. Basically the lack of options is there because some people lack self control when it comes to playing games and don't have the back bone not to use crutches when the going gets a little tough. Isn't that 'selfish'? Easily solved though, add trophies for not going below certain difficulty levels or game speed levels. Many games already do that, switch difficulty, lose your chance at whatever trophy you're playing for.

I've already linked an article earlier explaining that as you age, perception of time and reflexes slow down. The souls games and souls likes are in essence rhythm games. In Beat saber you don't start on expert either and for ages rhythm games had the option to slow sections down to practice since at full speed there's simply not much you can do when you fall behind. It's the same in souls games, miss a couple beats, start over. But perhaps you'll be immune to the effects of time or simply won't care about video games anymore when you approach your fifties :)

I lack self control to resist the temptation so I demand that they aren't put in the games.



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

SvennoJ said:
It's just the notion that you find it 'selfish' to request easier options in 'your' games that irks me. Basically the lack of options is there because some people lack self control when it comes to playing games and don't have the back bone not to use crutches when the going gets a little tough. Isn't that 'selfish'? Easily solved though, add trophies for not going below certain difficulty levels or game speed levels. Many games already do that, switch difficulty, lose your chance at whatever trophy you're playing for.

I've already linked an article earlier explaining that as you age, perception of time and reflexes slow down. The souls games and souls likes are in essence rhythm games. In Beat saber you don't start on expert either and for ages rhythm games had the option to slow sections down to practice since at full speed there's simply not much you can do when you fall behind. It's the same in souls games, miss a couple beats, start over. But perhaps you'll be immune to the effects of time or simply won't care about video games anymore when you approach your fifties :)

Just to pitch in something: wouldn't it also be "selfish" to demand the dev to put in more "features"(since options make it like its something that everyone would like and wouldn't harm the game in any way for others, which is not the case), when it is clearly that they don't want to, whatever the reason may be?

Or rather, since you are getting old and thus don't have the reflexes you claim you once had, you want those features in so that you(and emphasis on that) can enjoy them better, even against the wishes of the creator himself?(which admittedly have more right, and moral grounds, than you and me to do anything they want with their games)Wouldn't you say you are being as "selfish" as us, as you are claiming?



My (locked) thread about how difficulty should be a decision for the developers, not the gamers.

https://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/thread.php?id=241866&page=1

DonFerrari said:
SvennoJ said:
It's just the notion that you find it 'selfish' to request easier options in 'your' games that irks me. Basically the lack of options is there because some people lack self control when it comes to playing games and don't have the back bone not to use crutches when the going gets a little tough. Isn't that 'selfish'? Easily solved though, add trophies for not going below certain difficulty levels or game speed levels. Many games already do that, switch difficulty, lose your chance at whatever trophy you're playing for.

I've already linked an article earlier explaining that as you age, perception of time and reflexes slow down. The souls games and souls likes are in essence rhythm games. In Beat saber you don't start on expert either and for ages rhythm games had the option to slow sections down to practice since at full speed there's simply not much you can do when you fall behind. It's the same in souls games, miss a couple beats, start over. But perhaps you'll be immune to the effects of time or simply won't care about video games anymore when you approach your fifties :)

I lack self control to resist the temptation so I demand that they aren't put in the games.

Do you even read? No you don't, you just repeat the same sentence ad nauseam.

SOME GAMES without an easy mode <> ALL GAMES without an easy mode.

What's hard to understand? Do you understand the difference between SOME and ALL? This is beyond me, in 2020 every single folk feels entiled to DEMAND that EVERY SINGLE GAME is made for him. 



Around the Network
Nautilus said:

Just to pitch in something: wouldn't it also be "selfish" to demand the dev to put in more "features"(since options make it like its something that everyone would like and wouldn't harm the game in any way for others, which is not the case), when it is clearly that they don't want to, whatever the reason may be?

Or rather, since you are getting old and thus don't have the reflexes you claim you once had, you want those features in so that you(and emphasis on that) can enjoy them better, even against the wishes of the creator himself?(which admittedly have more right, and moral grounds, than you and me to do anything they want with their games)Wouldn't you say you are being as "selfish" as us, as you are claiming?

It depends, when does it become ageism. Nobody seems to have an issues with color blind options or subtitles for the hard of hearing. Actually a lot seem to applaud accessibility options. Speed is one of them and will be more relevant as gamers get older.



SvennoJ said:
Nautilus said:

Just to pitch in something: wouldn't it also be "selfish" to demand the dev to put in more "features"(since options make it like its something that everyone would like and wouldn't harm the game in any way for others, which is not the case), when it is clearly that they don't want to, whatever the reason may be?

Or rather, since you are getting old and thus don't have the reflexes you claim you once had, you want those features in so that you(and emphasis on that) can enjoy them better, even against the wishes of the creator himself?(which admittedly have more right, and moral grounds, than you and me to do anything they want with their games)Wouldn't you say you are being as "selfish" as us, as you are claiming?

It depends, when does it become ageism. Nobody seems to have an issues with color blind options or subtitles for the hard of hearing. Actually a lot seem to applaud accessibility options. Speed is one of them and will be more relevant as gamers get older.

And we have a lot of "color blind" options in game where colors are important, and subtitles when the sounds are important ....

Or, perhaps, I say perhaps, this isn't the case and you are again talking about games in general and missing the point. What's hard to understand in "GAMES IN GENERAL <> SOMES GAMES".

Oh and by the way, I am color blind.



Alcyon said:
SvennoJ said:

It depends, when does it become ageism. Nobody seems to have an issues with color blind options or subtitles for the hard of hearing. Actually a lot seem to applaud accessibility options. Speed is one of them and will be more relevant as gamers get older.

And we have a lot of "color blind" options in game where colors are important, and subtitles when the sounds are important ....

Or, perhaps, I say perhaps, this isn't the case and you are again talking about games in general and missing the point. What's hard to understand in "GAMES IN GENERAL <> SOMES GAMES".

Oh and by the way, I am color blind.

Actually ageism isn't the right word, it's more like From software is aiming for elitism. I read their reasons again, why not to include difficulty levels and it very much comes down to targeting peer pressure to belong to the 'popular' crowd. Something I turned to gaming for to get away from that crap on the schoolyard. Yet here we are, putting it into gaming:

"We want everyone to feel that sense of accomplishment. We want everyone to feel elated and to join that discussion on the same level. We feel if there's different difficulties, that's going to segment and fragment the user base. People will have different experiences based on that [differing difficulty level]. This is something we take to heart when we design games. It's been the same way for previous titles and it's very much the same with Sekiro."

Nice way to spin it but "everyone" can never mean everyone due to how different people are. People will have different experiences based on static difficulty levels, my experience with Dark souls was very different from yours. And it has segmented and fragmented the user base. I have turned away from a series I used to love while you can't accept that adding difficulty levels would only broaden the appeal of the games. Well except for those that want to belong to the 'elite' club that don't want others to experience the games.

I'm just calling out From Software on their own rhetoric, causing this "just go play something else" attitude to enter gaming.



Alcyon said:

Then we are not really talking about a genre but a specific target audience. If you narrow down that much, then just list a few games. I don't play this kind of games, I don't know why some people would play them and I don't really care if they have fun. I like to target specific achievements in Europa Universalis IV, some tries are taking 30h+ but I can understand why some people wouldn't do that.

But the main point is still here: if a specific game has a very narrow target audience, where is the problem? To be honest, I get it: random player A doesn't have enough time/motivation/skill/willpower/etc to play a specific game, while many people are liking that specific game. So he wants an easy mode, i.e. several changes in the game to suit him, without even noticing that the game could be less popular for the current players. He could play another games instead, but no.

This is exactly the case with Sekiro. A part of the hype around the game is the difficulty (or in a simRacing game, an ultra-realistic setting). By asking for an easy mode (or in a simRacing game, a less realistic setting) you are asking for a change in the core of the game. This is getting boring, again there are enough games. They could just stop to be selfish and claim "every game should be for me".

If you look at the amount of Souls-like games that are out there today, compared to when it was simply just Demon Souls, then yes, you could consider it a mini genre of it's own. There's a reason why people, even a storefront like Steam calls and has the tag "souls-like", rather than "crushingly difficult", because that doesn't roll off the tongue, nor sound like a fitting sub genre name.

I know you do not play these games, and neither do I, but it's not hard to see what they are and what's transpired since the first ever Souls game. 

There is no problem, but there is also no problem when a dev offers a differing difficulty mode, or when people simply mod one in themselves. Hell, I just posted about the devs behind Dying Light putting in an even easier option, years after the game's release, and that game is known and heavily implied to be a "survival" game, as in you fear for your life during the day and the night, yet they have added an option that does away with that very thing, and it isn't harming anyone in the slightest, because people that want to play things on a harder difficulty can simply choose that option, and those that don't can choose the latter.

Do you understand why we as a species try to make our lives a little easier, or does that not come natural to your line of thought?. Yes, the human race does love a few challenges here and there, but at the same time we also like to make things easier for ourselves, from understanding methods to general science, and obviously to games explaining mechanics and tutorials, that have evolved over time.

The thing is, is that those who do not want said game to be changed to suit others, is that they also want other games to be changed to suit them. We have those same people bickering about games being "watered down", and that they want them to stay stagnant and the same, or made more difficult, to which we end up seeing the excuse "game doesn't need to be for you, but I want it to be for me" being used. 

What's getting boring, is watching a minority whine about how they want games to suit their tastes over others, but claiming they aren't harming anyone themselves. It'd be less insulting if they weren't so self aware of their obnoxious elitist bs. 



               

Chazore said:
Alcyon said:

Then we are not really talking about a genre but a specific target audience. If you narrow down that much, then just list a few games. I don't play this kind of games, I don't know why some people would play them and I don't really care if they have fun. I like to target specific achievements in Europa Universalis IV, some tries are taking 30h+ but I can understand why some people wouldn't do that.

But the main point is still here: if a specific game has a very narrow target audience, where is the problem? To be honest, I get it: random player A doesn't have enough time/motivation/skill/willpower/etc to play a specific game, while many people are liking that specific game. So he wants an easy mode, i.e. several changes in the game to suit him, without even noticing that the game could be less popular for the current players. He could play another games instead, but no.

This is exactly the case with Sekiro. A part of the hype around the game is the difficulty (or in a simRacing game, an ultra-realistic setting). By asking for an easy mode (or in a simRacing game, a less realistic setting) you are asking for a change in the core of the game. This is getting boring, again there are enough games. They could just stop to be selfish and claim "every game should be for me".

If you look at the amount of Souls-like games that are out there today, compared to when it was simply just Demon Souls, then yes, you could consider it a mini genre of it's own. There's a reason why people, even a storefront like Steam calls and has the tag "souls-like", rather than "crushingly difficult", because that doesn't roll off the tongue, nor sound like a fitting sub genre name.

I know you do not play these games, and neither do I, but it's not hard to see what they are and what's transpired since the first ever Souls game. 

There is no problem, but there is also no problem when a dev offers a differing difficulty mode, or when people simply mod one in themselves. Hell, I just posted about the devs behind Dying Light putting in an even easier option, years after the game's release, and that game is known and heavily implied to be a "survival" game, as in you fear for your life during the day and the night, yet they have added an option that does away with that very thing, and it isn't harming anyone in the slightest, because people that want to play things on a harder difficulty can simply choose that option, and those that don't can choose the latter.

Do you understand why we as a species try to make our lives a little easier, or does that not come natural to your line of thought?. Yes, the human race does love a few challenges here and there, but at the same time we also like to make things easier for ourselves, from understanding methods to general science, and obviously to games explaining mechanics and tutorials, that have evolved over time.

The thing is, is that those who do not want said game to be changed to suit others, is that they also want other games to be changed to suit them. We have those same people bickering about games being "watered down", and that they want them to stay stagnant and the same, or made more difficult, to which we end up seeing the excuse "game doesn't need to be for you, but I want it to be for me" being used. 

What's getting boring, is watching a minority whine about how they want games to suit their tastes over others, but claiming they aren't harming anyone themselves. It'd be less insulting if they weren't so self aware of their obnoxious elitist bs. 

I have every DS. I still need to find time to play Sekiro.

But, again, for the 1000th time, if only a handful of games are too difficult for you, this isn't a problem. This isn't about elitism, this is about a gaming experience. If you could understand that different gamers are expecting different things from different games, it would help a lot. This is getting boring:

-I don't like the difficulty in THAT game, NERF!

-You could simply play another game ...

-No I want to play THAT game and THAT game is too difficult for ME, NERF

-But why do you want to play THAT game? The difficulty is part of THAT game

-You are an spouting some obnoxious elitist bs. NERF THAT game for me!

Oh, and we don't harm ourselves, the challenge is part of what we like in games. I don't want to see EVERY SINGLE GAME made for ME. Ah "The thing is, is that those who do not want said game to be changed to suit others, is that they also want other games to be changed to suit them." is pure BS. There is a set of people who don't want to see an easy mode in DS. There is a set of people who want to see other games changed. These 2 sets have an intersection but ar different sets. This thread is about letting the devs chose, so obviously we are not asking to change any game.

Again, this is getting boring. I am tired to read the same folks FORCING their way of playing games. No, we aren't doing that, we are simply telling you that there are enough games to suit your taste and you shouldn't FORCE your way of enjoying games into EVEY SINGLE GAME.

Ah, and one last thing: DS games are not even that difficult compared to, let's say Kazio Mario games. Of course you die and retry a lot, but the skill needed to beat the game isn't that high. You don't need frame perfect inputs, pixel perfect moves, deep knowledge of the game mechanics, various speedrunning techniques, etc. The bosses have a clear (and quite slow) pattern and you can take it slow.

One major difficulty in DS (if you are going blind) are the stats. You don't know what the stats do and new players usualy do a bad build, and either they do little damage (so they need to dodge a lot to beat bosses) or take too much damage (and they don't have much room for error). But you can always grind to fix your build.