Am I allowed to request a more consistent game? :p

I do like the game, but won't ever play it again due to the frustrating parts that come with it, nor will I buy any more games from From software, simple.

@Nautilus, yep the multiplayer is kind of an easy mode. It's pretty random though and won't be available forever. It's probably a long wait by now if you need any help. I didn't like the multiplayer one bit but got stuck on many of the bosses (while breezing through the exploration parts) so had to use it anyway. There are AI npcs to help you, but every time I went to get them while not being hollow I got invaded. Annoying. I ended up logging out of psn to play in peace, but then had to log back in since the npc AIs were pretty useless and ended up getting me killed anyway.

I mean sure, thats completely fine.Even if I disagree with you, what you have problem with is the game balance, not the difficulty per se.One type of issue that I have with many games, including hard ones.Its a different situation and discussion.

And yeah, the multiplayer is very unbalanced and being invaded is not fun, personally.

Nope. At most I would say you are overly defensive of the no easier mode and deny every point or opportunity pointed towards it. And although you wouldn't be lying when saying you didn't suffered the problem pointed, you can't say he didn't.

Of course I deny.... it's the whole point I'm trying to defend.And It's irrelevant if said gamer has suffered difficulties with the game, that's the point.The game is made to be harder, no matter the skill set of the player.It's meant for you to get better at it and "suffer" to be able to improve yourself, because that is what the game is trying to achieve.If some compromise is made, part of what makes the game appealing is lost.

It's all written in the OP....

When you refuse to accept any counter argument you shouldn't even make a thread.

The problem is, what makes a game appealing means different things to different people. What makes a game appealing to the developers could very well be very unappealing to others. And the experience of difficulty is different for different people. So what is the game really trying to achieve. To make you pass an arbitrary rather meaningless difficulty bar which for some isn't difficult at all yet will have others move on or not even try. Games are not like a driver's license test where you have to meet set performance requirements, which for some are very easy and some can never get a driver's license. So if the difficulty is what's supposed to make the game appealing, it can only be appealing to a certain subset of gamers with the right 'skill' level to match its difficulty curve. Luckily there are many more things that make the souls games appealing.

Oh, I do, It's just that you are not making a good case, that's all.

But games shouldn't have to be appealing to everyone.That's the point.I thought I made that very clear with my Original Post.

Its impossible to make different difficulty options in a game that applies the difficulty itself in every single part imaginable of the game, from the exploration to the combat itself, with reasons explained ad nauseum at this point.So I make the question to you: Is it fair then to the people that want truly hard games, to not have them, because some people just can't get better, for one reason or another?the moment you apply the logic " It's unfair for the ones that can't play better" the opposite is also true: " Is it unfair for those who can play better, to not have a game that is TRULY hard, not the "hard" difficulty levels that games usually have(which is still easy or just normal)"?

The answer is simple:There are enough developers out there to everyone have a game that appeals to them, even on the same genre.So I can't fanthom why people are so against gamers just having the opportunity to play something that really speaks to them.

When the whole argument is general about how games, in general, should be accessible and never adress the point, which is "why this specific type of games should or not have an easy mode", I will also refuse the "counter-argument" since it doesn't even adress the point. The whole idea behind the topic is "there are tons of games, having some hard games appeal to some gamers".

If you continue to explain why games, in general, should have an easy mode, don't reply here. Or accept that we will dismiss it.

Is it fair to people that want a harder experience to have to wait until ng+? Again, if it can have ng+, be more difficult for a second play through, the opposite is also possible! A static difficulty level simply does not work for everyone. But sure, if it's only supposed to be appealing to those that fit the difficulty curve, then well done.

It's just weird people complaining about extra health or bigger timing windows, enabling more checkpoints, ability to skip bosses, like that would alter the core game. It doesn't. But that's just my opinion :)