I, for one, would hugely favour the inclusion of difficulty settings in FS games, but it's still a funny meme
I, for one, would hugely favour the inclusion of difficulty settings in FS games, but it's still a funny meme
Sekiro is the only From Soft game that doesn't already have difficulty "modes". All the other games, you can just grind until your OP, or bring a summon. This is actually superior to the approach to difficulty in many games who lazily just scale damage and health. Sekiro has a better argument for difficulty modes than Dark Souls and Elden Ring.
FromSoft is moving in this direction. Sekiro has a few accessibility options: controller/keyboard remapping and subtitles. Elden Ring adds to this formula with colorblind filters. They could do much better.
I can't understand why people are so upset about how someone else plays the game. Just seems like a continuation of the "get gud" gatekeeping crap. It's kinda ironic because of how the game mechanics of From Soft games encourage and expect player collaboration. I mean even if you've never used a summon, I'll bet you didn't find the Dark Souls DLC area without a helping hand.
Every game is improved by more people enjoying it.
I can see complaining about it if the game's design is affected by the changes. For example, the addition of compass/map markers greatly affects quest design.
It's also why imo some of elden ring's bosses suck if you try to solo them - they're designed with summons, spirits, and overleveling in consideration.
On the flipside it seems like the boss design in sekiro gets a lot of praise. I'm playing through sekiro now and don't have an opinion on it yet (though the combat does feel very good so far).
I'm not a git gud person (I'm quite the noob at souls games) though, and I hope they continue to make their games more accessible. But I understand how veteran fans of their games might be concerned about changes that may affect how they like to play.
Agree 1000%. Very well put
Yeah, Sekiro made me realize that I do, indeed, suck. I'm fine with Dark Souls and Elden Ring.
Not every game has to be made for everyone. If it's too hard, or you don't want to make the adjustments to learn the game, just skip it.
In my books, adding difficulty settings to the game does not take away from my gaming experience. It does, however, make the game more approachable to people who want a more laid-back experience. Not even touching on people with disabilities for whom this would make FS games more accessible as well.
I try my best then cheat if necessary. I like the world of Elden Ring but I can’t get better at the gameplay. I get punished enough IRL.
And that’s what many people (myself included) have done — but honestly, it wouldn’t take anything away from anyone nor detract from the game, and certainly wouldn’t be difficult to implement if they just put some very basic skill settings in there to make their games more accessible.
It's what I do, and it fuckin sucks. I'm deeply interested in Dark Souls/Bloodborne/Sekiro/Elden Ring/Remnant as stories, but the fact that I would need to spend hundreds of hours getting good at the game (assuming I even can expend that mental effort in the few hours I have to play video games after getting home from work) keeps me from playing them. Wouldn't cost these companies anything to put in "I have a fuckin life" settings.
Remnant pisses me off the most, because it has "difficulty" settings, and it's still impossible for me to play solo on the easiest one. No adult, no matter their skill level, should have to open a game up to online multiplayer so that someone else can come beat a boss for them in the easiest available difficulty, and yet I've had to do that with virtually every one. Waste of $30.
While this is true, the same logic would apply if they had an easy mode. "If the game on easy is no challenge, then leave it on the default difficulty." Just make it so you have to intentionally pick easy mode at the start and disallow changes on that run.
Now don't get me wrong, I'm not so naive as to think adding an easy mode would be a free, no effort thing. It would absolutely add work for the devs. But I think, probably not that much. And a bunch more people would buy the game. It'd be totally worth it for them, I suspect.
It would literally only improve people's enjoyment of the game but as long as it keeps Gamers' little egos intact, I guess it's best to block some players
Gamers' little egos intact
Egos are important though. Feeling good about conquering challenge is not a bad thing or something to mock.
I guess it's best to block some players
I don't think they are blocked per se, they are blocking themselves by not putting in the work and improving.
We get to the saying: "Do not pray for easier life, pray to be stronger men."
Sounds like the author needs to git gud.
There are many accessibility concerns that would very much affect the game design, difficulty scaling or the general feel of the game. Saying "it doesn't affect you" or "it literally costs them nothing to add" is utter horseshit. There's probably an argument to be made that the games could be made more accessible in ways that wouldn't affect the enjoyment of fans of this particular flavor of games, but this comment section seems to offer very little compromise between "git gud" and some poorly thought out Bethesda style "difficulty" adjustment.
For those who want that challenge, playing on a harder difficulty would still provide it. It literally wouldn't take anything away from you. Has anyone actually asked what we actually want, or do you just assume we want to give ourselves infinite health and damage? For some bosses, Bethesda style damage scaling would be a welcome addition. Bosses taking a longass time to kill doesn't make the game any better, it just filters out people who don't have hours to grind through a single enemy.
It could be implemented the same way Mortal Kombat tends to do it, where the more often you die to an enemy, the less often that enemy attacks. Turning off that kind of adaptive difficulty could still give players like you the high you get from beating a boss after 12 hours of attempts, while allowing those of us who actually care about the story to move on after dying a few dozen times.
It could incorporate multiplayer the same way Dying Light did, where you're able to play co-op without being invaded unless you want to be invaded. If you worry that nobody would ever turn on invasions, ask yourself why that is. Is it possible that most players don't actually enjoy that aspect of the game?
Do you have examples how that would affect game design, difficulty scaling and the general feel of the game? I don't see it personally
Every Soulsborne game gets this request 😂
Imagine if they actually did and more people were able to get into these games
I think Elden Ring was their answer. It's way more approachable than prior games. You can absolutely skip areas to explore the rest of the massive world and overlevel. I did that frequently. Then after 50+ hours, finally took on those harder challenges. And if I gave up, I still had a lot of gameplay.
Unlike in Sekiro where you're definitely bottlenecked and can't make progress until you beat the boss.
Being against inclusive difficulty settings on principle speaks to a self worth derived from exclusion rather than mastery.
Mario doesnt have lighter difficulty modes because thats the intended way to experience the game. Shmups dont have lighter difficulty modes because they are meant to be difficult but still, no one complains.
FS games are memes and everyone wants to play the popular meme games, but they are intended to bw difficult as a core game mechanic.
New Mario does have difficulty modes, via character selection. In Super Mario Wonder, Yoshis don't get hurt when taking damage, they just get knocked back, and Nabbit doesn't take damage or get knocked back.
Some shmups do have difficulty modes, too; one of the first serious shmups I played was the sixth official Touhou game, Embodiment of Scarlet Devil, which has 4 difficulty modes.
Yeah because we all know the intended way to play a game is the only right way to play it
Mario does have settings/features to make the game easier. That's been a core Nintendo thing for Mario for years... Make it anti-frustrating.
"respect"
Just install a mod where you can't take damage and go nuts then if that's what you want.
Sekiro really isn't THAT difficult. Just stop button mashing and pay attention to what your enemy is doing.
If that's too difficult. Then the game Just isn't for you. You are not their audience. And they're fine with that.
First, there are console players out there who can't mod their games. Plus, outright removing damage isn't the same as tuning the numbers to your liking lol
Second, I platinumed the game and played through it multiple times with the Demon Bell rung and without Kuro's Blessing. I do like the challenge and I liked the game being difficult. Just because you and I did, however, doesn't mean that others do. You're not impacted whatsoever if FS decides to add difficulty sliders: everyone has their own separate experience playing the game.
Third, yea, I get that sentiment and I was of that opinion for some time too. But as mentioned above, you do not lose anything from being offered multiple difficulties. It's never a bad thing to be offered multiple options in anything in life - makes it easier to decide what you want. It makes the games more accessible.
Not trying to win you over - just a few points to consider
It's just not what THEY want to do. That's not their art.
All games are not for everyone. Just like all music isn't for everyone.