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
You're viewing a single thread.
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.
Yup — I’ve been gaming since the Coleco Telstar. It’s not that I can’t “git gud”, it’s that I have a life and responsibilities outside videogames. When you work full time, have volunteer responsibilities, and a wife and children at home you don’t have hours a day to “git gud” — you’re lucky if you have hours a week to sit down and enjoy a game in peace.
And I can’t do that with FromSoftware’s games, because they make them inaccessible to people like me. I know they’re laughing all the way to the bank — but they could be laughing even harder if they didn’t limit their (admittedly already huge) market.
But From apparently doesn’t want people like me as a customer — and so I’m not. Their loss — I’d likely play some of their games if they made them so I could kick back and enjoy them, but I admittedly already have a bit of a backlog due to limited playing hours so my gaming life is just fine without them.
(If anyone has an hour, ask me sometime how much I hated Bloodbourne with the passion of 10 000 dying suns).
Ironically this is why I have thousands of hours in just a few games. Sometimes I'll get a bunch of time to play a game. Am I gonna spend that 12 hours fighting fucking Gorefist over and over and over and over and over again, before opening my game up to the internet, and having some random come beat him like I'm 9 years old handing the controller to my big brother? Hell no, I'm gonna continue my mission of landing a Kerbal on every rock in the kerbolar system. It may be just as repetitive, but the difference is a) I'm good at it, and b) I'm constantly working towards a goal in the game rather than bashing my head against a wall until my brains fall out.
Bloodborne was also frustrating. I played through most of it with my cousin who's extremely good at FS games, so he was able to basically walk me through the entire thing, right up to the Orphan of Kos. He wanted me to beat it. After all the time I had spent playing, all the enemies I learned how to parry with the gun, all the reflexes I trained, I couldn't take more than 10% of its health. Never beat it. Cousin got a new job. Never played Bloodborne again.
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."
Edit: I wanna clarify that comment. I don't mean that it isn't good to feel good about conquering a challenge. I mean that it isn't good to think you're somehow more deserving of that feeling than someone who isn't as skilled as you are. The only defense against lowering difficulty barriers in these games that I've seen essentially boils down to "you don't deserve to enjoy the game if you aren't as good at it as I am."
I mean some people have legitimate skill ceilings. It's not just a matter of not putting in the work, it's a matter of not being capable of getting good at a game. I work physical labor ten hours a day. I cannot get good at bloodborne with the time I have to play every week. Even if I had the time, I do not have the mental capacity. Its difficulty quite literally blocks me from playing it, along with every other game of its ilk.
I'm sure someone will come along and say they work 12 hours of hard labor 6 days a week and still find time to play, but that person either a) was already good at FS games before they had that job, or b) has a different flavor of autism than I do.
My point stands.
I shall give you another quote:
- Life's tough when you voluntarily place yourself in the role of the victim and give away all your power.
However as you said, it's important for the game genre to maintain it's status as a difficult game that's feat to conquer and largely it's appeal. If taken away for those who are too time-constricted or don't have enough "mental capacity"(euphemism treadmill goes brrr), wouldn't it take away from those who don't have these problems?
Edit: cleanup
Life's tough when you voluntarily place yourself in the role of the victim and give away all your power.
Ahh, that's a fascinating quote, super useful when you want to feel superior to someone you don't know. Instead of empathizing with another person's capabilities, you can simply say they suck and that it's their fault!
No, it wouldn't take anything away from players who like the hardest difficulty. Motherfuckers stack cups competitively, I'm sure FS fans can remain satisfied with their achievements if they beat the game on the hardest difficulty available. If anything, resisting the temptation to lower the difficulty should enhance the feeling of satisfaction after beating it.
"Euphemism treadmill?" I'm fucking tired after work. I lack the ""mental capacity"" to bash my head against a wall for another few hours. It becomes impossible to properly learn how to play a game when it gets frustrating. I guess I could simply stop getting frustrated by it, in the same way I could simply stop having symptoms of depression or autism.
ETA: I googled that quote, and it seems like it's only been spoken by one other person (I'm guessing one of your alts), also in the context of minimizing someone's mental condition. Let me phrase it like this: dying to the same enemy in a video game dozens of times in a row without seeing any amount of improvement in my own ability makes it difficult to justify continuing to play a game. If I'm not getting better by then, I certainly won't get better when I'm angry at the game. I'm not placing myself in the role of the victim, I'm recognizing my own abilities and lack thereof. I'm frustrated both by those abilities that I'm incapable of improving (as proven by the fact that they simply don't improve), as well as with the developers for not accommodating people like me, who are incapable of playing their games because we cannot improve our skills at them.
It's totally fine if you want to say that people with ADHD or autism or depression should simply stop acting like those are real things with real affects on people's abilities, but all it does it betray a lack of your own understanding of other people's mental conditions.
I feel so much for you, dude. Honestly sucks that people who can't, for physical, psychological or other reasons, put in the time to grind the game get left out simply because the developers don't want to accommodate. I read all your replies and sympathise a lot.
I'm sorry, I'm poor at explaining my opinions in my second language and thus it seems I can't convey my point.
However, I see your point and I do have different opinion on it. It seems we can't find common ground on the question on whether you are capable of improving to the point of beating mainstream game or not and if it should have an option for people who are too busy to learn the necessary skills.
I googled that quote, and it seems like it's only been spoken by one other person (I'm guessing one of your alts)
I also looked it up and it has wiki definition and blog article at least. Also I don't have alts, not me.
It's totally fine if you want to say that people with ADHD or autism or depression should simply stop acting like those are real things with real affects on people's abilities
Wouldn't claim that as I happen to have first hand experience. I won't elaborate under this nick, add me on Matrix if you wish to discuss more.
Good talk, gained exp, have a good one.