Yes it does. The very fact you have to argue the validation of not allowing for optional difficulty stems from it. If you have no qualms of games (especially Souls-like) having options, you wouldn't bar the gates.
Also no, enough with the "every game doesn't have to appeal to you" as a means of deflection the mere staple of all games, in having difficulty choices. Having choice does and will never equate to "game having to be made for X person", trying to suggest it is, is simply warping and twisting it to the extreme.
It's funny you call the likes of Gatekeeper as an insult, when it specifically states:
Definition of gatekeeper
Nowhere does it state that it is used as an insult or invented as one. Only those who tend to feel in the wrong will claim it as such (If you don't want to be cited as it, don't do it, it's that simple).
EGS has nothing to do with the topic, nothing to do with elitism, and it feels like you just want to call me stupid because I don't follow your viewpoint. I feel like my mere mentioning of "whining" had touched a soft spot, hence your need to mention me and EGS in a topic where it doesn't fit at all. Also no, I don't support EG as a company, their philosophy nor their practices, and I especially dislike their anti-consumer, anti-competitive take, and to top it all off, no, I don't want to use another shitty bare-bones client, I've got enough of those already. I prefer having my library in at least 1-2 places, 1 at most (like console gamers mostly want).
Yes I can, because if you're wanting to not call them a minority, then what does that make the non souls gamers out there, ghosts, nothing?. You have to look at it from the bigger angle, there are more gamers out there not interested or not playing Souls or Souls-like games in general, be they PC gamer, console gamer and mobile gamer. You know very well mobile gamers already dwarf console gamers, and as such they'll dwarf Souls-like, hell even CoD gamers dwarf Souls and Soul-like. We could look at a myriad of specific genres and franchises where said player numbers dwarf Souls games. Souls is not the new CoD, they aren't within the same vein of casual shooters, they are niche for a reason, and yes, there's billions of us on this tiny rock so a few million becomes a drop in the bucket within this industry, let alone outside it. You can't just defy the laws of reality and go "millions>billions", because that'd never fly, and you know this. I already know full well I'm the minority within the RTS genre, but I'm not going to kick a fuss and turn blue in trying to argue that my genre isn't a minority, because I know it's a reality, and one I cannot deny.
Also, you're forgetting the one thing that the vast majority of games come with: Normal difficulty at the start. Most games start out like this, rather than hard or extreme modes, because that "choice" is left up to the gamer to decide, which makes for the majority of a gamer's playthrough session at the start.
I don't know why you're starting out anti-pol at the start of your quote, but near the end you're pulling a minority victim excuse with "you wouldn't dare trample a minority!".
Well no, I wouldn't need to, because to be frank, society does that in general. Society doesn't want everything to be so hard or difficult, which is why we strive for "options", rather than regressing to medieval times and I dunno, acting like big burly Scotsman, pining for that hard as hell log toss challenge. Also, I want to see games with options, rather than the minority becoming the majority in 50+yrs time and warping an industry, because they thought their ideals were better (they aren't, because it means to regress, and that's not something we should be doing as a species).
"would you trample the minorities right to have SOME games with the difficulty they desire?Because fuck them, since they don't share your opinion?"
You know that can be thrown right back at you with those simply wanting optional difficulty right?. Fuck them for asking, no, fuck them for thinking it, right?.
The road to hell doesn't exist, and I'd like to keep religion well away from this topic.
I only brought EGS as an example of your hypocrisy towards the "options" argument. They are bringing options to the table, whether those "accusations" of being anti-customer are true or not, and yet you deny it being good to the PC space because of simply don't like them, even with the Store being a success story(with its discounts, free games and whatnot). Nothing more, but I'll drop :)
And yeah, it's an insult, whether the terminology is correct or not.People may decide to not buy the games due to the difficulty, but I'm not stopping them from going in.Its like a night club with an etiquette code.If you want in, you have to come dressed a certain way.Its private property, so the owner can do whatever he wants.Same for games: The devs can do whatever they want with their games, including difficulty, and you are the one who decides if you want to get in or not.Im not stopping you from doing anything, nor any company would do that, it just dosen't make any consumer sense.It does however, make sense making purely hard games, because there is a big market out there for it, as proved ad nauseum in the thread already.
And yet again, you are wrong.If the majority decided what everyone would do(in the videogame industry), we wouldn't have had so many hard games by this point.Yet here we are, growing by the day.So I ask you one more time:Where is your proof that you are the majority, and that the majority even cares that there are a few hard games that they are not good enough to play?Show me the facts, while i stay here seeing the sales numbers for most hard games just keep rising.That actually makes me curious about how much Sekiro has sold so far.Last time was 4 millions.Wonder if it's at 6 millions already?
Oh and I din't even need to bring that up, but your argument is easily countered.First because of facts backing it up.Does your billions all play videogames, let alone even care about the fact that there are 10 games released every year, out of 300, that they can't play? But most importantly: Since you cant back up these "There are billions of us!", I can say the same for any argument: - Racing games only sell up to 8 millions.That's a waste of money, since Billions of people aren't playing that.There should be an option to turn it into a action adventure game! - You know where I'm going with this.
Just because something is standard, it means that every game should come with it!Color me surprised!It makes me wonder now why sometimes devs take a chance with something new, if it isn't standard... Maybe because the game might be... more fun that way?!?!?
Nah, the devs must be wrong.I'm sure of it.
And its funny, society wants options on everything?That's also new for me.Guess I must have been hallucinating when I saw places/stores that only catered to a certain niche of the society.I mean, I MUST have been hallucinating when i saw a story that only sold natural food, or a restaurant that specialized on italian food and nothing more, or even bars that catered more to homosexuals to, I don't know, make them feel more comfortable in a place they know they will feel safe.Yeah, I was seeing things, because as you have shown me right now, those things don't exist.All supermarkets sell everything, because options right?And all restaurants also prepare anything, because options right?People dont... *gasp*... go to different places because of different needs, do they?...
Nah, I must be wrong.I'm sure of it.
About the quote: Dude, do I really need to explain it?It's a metaphor for usually things go south(I mean it backfires, if you didn't know) when people do something with good intentions but without caring about the reality of things.It means harming society and/or the place where you live without intention, thinking that what you had done was right but in actually was wrong.It has nothing to do with religion.Can't believe I had to explain it.
My (locked) thread about how difficulty should be a decision for the developers, not the gamers.