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

This topic has been made overly convoluted and has meaningless complexity. Let me start with a few things:

1) Dark Souls is my second favorite franchise of all time.
2) Dark Souls 3 is my second favorite game of all time.
3) I have beaten Demon, Souls 1, Souls 2, Souls 3 and Blood... and yes I can beat them all solo.

Adding a difficulty setting:

1) Very easy, just reduce enemy damage
2) No it wouldn't ruin the game, most games have difficulty levels
3) An easy mode wouldn't diminish my "accomplishment" nor would it change my play style
4) People don't want an easy mode because they get off on beating something others can't

Lastly, somebody mentioned taking out violence and used it to argue against an easy mode. The irony being Souls allows for players to change blood settings.



Around the Network
Chrkeller said:
This topic has been made overly convoluted and has meaningless complexity. Let me start with a few things:

1) Dark Souls is my second favorite franchise of all time.
2) Dark Souls 3 is my second favorite game of all time.
3) I have beaten Demon, Souls 1, Souls 2, Souls 3 and Blood... and yes I can beat them all solo.

Adding a difficulty setting:

1) Very easy, just reduce enemy damage
2) No it wouldn't ruin the game, most games have difficulty levels
3) An easy mode wouldn't diminish my "accomplishment" nor would it change my play style
4) People don't want an easy mode because they get off on beating something others can't

Lastly, somebody mentioned taking out violence and used it to argue against an easy mode. The irony being Souls allows for players to change blood settings.

4) is another sentence spammed ad nauseam. I couldn't care less if you used cheat engine to beat DS, so why would I care if you can or cannot beat the game?

There is something funny here:

-we want an easy mode

-just use a cheat

-no no I want to beat the game legit, so no cheat but add an easy mode

-what's the difference?

...

-if you want it to be harder, just play hard mode

-I don't know what hard means in a game, it could range from a cakewalk to tears of blood

-just find your own challenge

-wait you don't want to use a cheat engine to beat the game and WANT an easy mode, but you also want me to adjust the difficulty? So lemme guess, you want every game to be made for you and basically tell the rest of the World "screw up"?

Also, "reduce ennemy damage" in DS1 wouldn't change much. And violence is a bit more than "blood".



Chazore said:
DonFerrari said:
I loved the use of genius...
How come someone not liking to buy in EGS (not demanding it to close though) and explaining that is because of bad consumer practices and locking down content to a store on a free environment (PC) - basically being against tacking out options - would be the similar to "don't include options to the game even if they don't affect me because that would bring people to the game that shouldn't be allowed"?

Because they don't want us to have a choice. They want it stripped away and called an "option", despite the fact that the other choices are taken completely out of the equation. 

It's not surprising at all that OP is trying to twist the stripping of choices away, and trying to call the one remaining and only thing to go for, as being an "option", especially when used a s a personal jabbing argument point. 

Because as crappy as the Epic Store may be, it's still a choice, an option.And let's be clear on one thing:Yes, I think Steam is far better.

And if you admit to Epic being an option, you admit it's validity as a Store.And you will never do that, because that's not an option in your mind.And thus I just proved not only your hipocrisy, of only accepting options that you conceive as ok, but also my own point(that not all option are for the better).

Thats Discussion 101 for you.



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

It's funny how one wants to perceive the lack of choice as an "option", but also wants to twist it into hypocrisy as well.

Thank god we have devs giving us options within games, as well as selling on multiple storefronts/platforms, instead of just one, because that actually goes give us a choice of options, rather than having them all taken away, and reduced to only 1.



                                       

Alcyon said:
Nautilus said:

Though I do not approve the image, because it's pure provocation, the sentence resumes it perfectly Chazore in this thread.

I am just tired to read the same sentences ad nauseam. Also, I am not part of the DS community, I've done the games I can watch ChaseTheBro stream some invasions but nothing else. But at least I can understand how this meme was born, when some people are spamming ad nauseam "tOo HaRd" without even listening to what others can say.

Also, I always found the mechanic of having your max health reduced after a death in DS2 to be a bad mechanic. You can achieve the same result (look at embers in DS3) without making it feel like a punishment.

I agree, but this is still a discussion, otherwise we would only be throwing insults to one another and thta has another name.

Plus, there are some discussion where the point isn't exactly to convince the one you are discussing with.I mean, if you can great.But sometime one or both party are so stubborn that the discussion becomes a rally to convince the people listening in.

I'm not going to convince Chazore.He is a stubborn man set in his own ways.But winning the discussion like I just did *might* convince other users or even lurkers.And that's why I keep discussing.

Plus it's always fun to talk about controversial topics.



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

Around the Network
Chazore said:
It's funny how one wants to perceive the lack of choice as an "option", but also wants to twist it into hypocrisy as well.

Thank god we have devs giving us options within games, as well as selling on multiple storefronts/platforms, instead of just one, because that actually goes give us a choice of options, rather than having them all taken away, and reduced to only 1.

I'm just pointing out facts man.Nothing more, nothing less.

And the bold is exactly what I am defending.Thanks to the diversity of the industry, we have games for everyone.Easy games.Hard games.And games with multiple difficulties.Hell, even the PC space now has two true game Stores.I'm just defending the existence of purely hard ones.You may even say that I'm on the side of options.

And didn't you say you were done with this thread?That the mods should just lock any discussion similar to this one and all?



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

"but winning the discussion"

It's funny because that's all that OP amounts to in the end. "I've gotta win against this person I think is an utter goit, so I've got to convince others to rally against him, yeah, that'll make me look like a viable saint!".

Man, how petty things have gone in nearly one month.

"two true PC stores", acting as if other stores didn't exist already, forty keks and more.

I wonder when OP will get the biggest hint at me not quoting him, as a sign that I've decided to not bother with him anymore, as he's not worth the time to talk directly to, but worth the time to point out his shortcomings. Usually that sort of thing is picked up by those who are less spiteful.

Last edited by Chazore - on 28 February 2020

                                       

Nautilus said:
DonFerrari said:
I loved the use of genius...
How come someone not liking to buy in EGS (not demanding it to close though) and explaining that is because of bad consumer practices and locking down content to a store on a free environment (PC) - basically being against tacking out options - would be the similar to "don't include options to the game even if they don't affect me because that would bring people to the game that shouldn't be allowed"?

Because the Epic Store, as barebones as it still is, is still an option to the costumer.Even if you could say that Steam is objectively better.

Options is the act of you having more than one single thing to choose from, no matter if option B sucks, it's still an option.

So I brought this up because I knew Chazore hates the store and it would trip him, or rather makes his argument weak, in the face of an option he does not condone.Thus proving my point that not every option should be presented.(not having multiple difficulties)

Nope, have he asked Epic to be closed? And how does on first case 10 stores with mostly same games but different prices you can say you added more options with the 11th store going without add any new games but instead locking some of the games the other 10 had just to it.

Completely different to say you don't like to preach the game can't have more options.



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

Nautilus said:
Alcyon said:

I am just tired to read the same sentences ad nauseam. Also, I am not part of the DS community, I've done the games I can watch ChaseTheBro stream some invasions but nothing else. But at least I can understand how this meme was born, when some people are spamming ad nauseam "tOo HaRd" without even listening to what others can say.

Also, I always found the mechanic of having your max health reduced after a death in DS2 to be a bad mechanic. You can achieve the same result (look at embers in DS3) without making it feel like a punishment.

I agree, but this is still a discussion, otherwise we would only be throwing insults to one another and thta has another name.

Plus, there are some discussion where the point isn't exactly to convince the one you are discussing with.I mean, if you can great.But sometime one or both party are so stubborn that the discussion becomes a rally to convince the people listening in.

I'm not going to convince Chazore.He is a stubborn man set in his own ways.But winning the discussion like I just did *might* convince other users or even lurkers.And that's why I keep discussing.

Plus it's always fun to talk about controversial topics.

Nope you are really wrong. The objective of discussion is either convice/be convinced or get a solution for a problem. What you want is a monologue and preach where others just bend to you.



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

Yikes, this place is a mess. Rather than moderate everyone that contributed, I’ll lock it and leave this advice - civility over righteousness. You don’t have to win the argument. :)