If we’re looking at difficulty as a problem — which could be from a design perspective or an accessibility perspective —A user selected difficulty mode is only one option. Why is it the poorest solution? It’s opaque — it’s not always clear what is different, and more often than not is is something lazy like changing the damage taken and received. As @SplooshDmg pointed out, often the problem with difficulty is the game doing a poor job of teaching the player, and this kind of ‘Easy Mode’ does nothing to teach the player the rules or ways to engage the game properly.
A great counter-example is Mario… really all Nintendo games. I don’t think anyone is going to argue that Nintendo had made some of — if not the most — accessible games for decades. I don’t think any of them have ever had an option to select difficulty, but rather through organic design and accessibility options provide multiple paths through their games, save Mario Kart 8 which has genre appropriate “courses”.
"2 - Why do you think you could decide that for other people?"
I don’t. I think developers can decide their audience, thus decide for their audience.
"3 - If developers add several difficulty levels, that is part of their vision for the game. Otherwise they wouldn’t. There is also no real reason to not make that a part of your vision."
There’s no reason to think that’s true. For some games, sure. But plenty of others, too many, are made by committee — there’s little “vision” that can trump profitability.
"4 - Demanding to play a game at a certain difficulty level is paternizing."
It’s literally the opposite of patronizing.
"5 - That’s for the individual player to decide. The alternative could be a game, that isn’t being played. Which somehow defeats the purpose."
Why? Why should the player be able to decide here? You don’t get to choose your level of participation and entitlement to content with any other media. You're attitude goes beyond media or even entertainment — you're treating gaming like it's dining.
"6 - Difficulty levels do not equal genres, art styles and the like."
I don’t know what you mean by this. If you're saying you can't define your genre or style by difficulty, don't tell From Software or the plethora of rogue-likes.
"Again: If you don’t want to play easy mode, you don’t have to. You’re not affected by the choice of others."
This simply isn’t true. Even just having to ignore something isn’t cost-free — ask someone on a diet to just ignore the dessert that doesn't affect them if they don't eat it — but to say that having designers forced to do anything to please any group of gamers doesn't affect everyone is myopic and naïve. This is an empty, false statement designed to guilt people who disagree.
@Zochmenos Absolutely, and well said. After talking with some cool people on here, I do think there is a case to be made for busting open some part of the "gate" in terms of accessibility — I think we should all be able to get to some kind of similar starting line — but I totally agree with your perspective that there are some that are trying to sneak through that opening for reasons that should not be given too much water by the industry.
@mousieone "Which is why I didn’t try to engage you; what’s the point."
Well, why not? I've disagreed with both @SplooshDmg and @Widey85, and through conversation I saw their point of view and they changed my mind about some things, and I hope I might have shown them a different perspective too. If you have "good, valid reasons", I'd love to hear them! I am very confident in my positions, but I'm not 100% firm on my stance about anything.
I love the sphere analogy, and my feeling is the best thing we can do is let our tigers and tigresses out, if only to pop those bubbles! I think you're selecting the 'Easy Mode' of conversation, where we let the internet-at-large pre-digest all the arguments for us, and all the assumptions about the people who have the ideas we don't agree with, and we dismiss them.
I'd love to hear your points, and why you think I'm fundamentally wrong... I think the fundamentals are the best part of my argument;) Worst case scenario, we agree to disagree (which I currently do not agree to) and maybe sharpen our own points, and best case, we kick some ideas around, hopefully learn about about a different perspective, and abate any cosmic entities tempted to throw us on an island.
@lokozar There’s plenty of reasons to be against an easy mode without it being "...because it makes me feel less [elite]”.
1) “Easy mode“ is one of many solutions to difficulty problems, and in many cases the worst choice.
2) “Easy mode” is no guarantee of fun. If it’s fun to win, but not fun to play, we should ask ourselves why that is on a case by case basis. I think there’s something to be said for “bad game, good entertainment” (Witcher 3) and ”good game, bad entertainment” (Dark Souls) categories in video games.
3) Integrity of developer vision. Certain games have difficulty that is integral to other elements of it’s design. Zelda BOTW’s weapon degradation is a good example of a frustrating system on it’s surface that holds so many other reward systems up on examination. From Software games are entirely underpinned by their difficulty. Every system and mechanic falls apart without it.
4) “Easy mode” is patronizing, especially for those with outside-of-game challenges that should be addressed by accessibility issues (which can be difficulty-related, but also can be possibly solved by less brute force methods).
5) Is the price of a game for a ticket or a tour? I don’t think video games are like other entertainment media in the sense that you are entitled to all the “content” just by having paid the price for it. That’s literally the “game” part. I think it’s up to the developer to decide that and balance their game a round it.
6). It’s ok to leave people behind. Not everything is for everyone. I believe that it is because not every game is made for everyone that the hobby can be so broad. Gaming is for everyone, games don’t have to be.
Consider television. When there were 3 networks over antenna with no “gatekeeping”, content was pretty poor. It made people more similar rather than appealed to more people broadly. No that there are multiple distributions such as cable, streaming, etc. we’ve had multiple “Golden Ages” of content. Nobody would argue that The Sopranos should be made accessible to everyone, yet that show paved the way for better storytelling for everyone across all demographics and entry points in the medium — every “watcher” of television reaped a benefit.
@Zochmenos That's an interesting part of the meme that's not be addressed well by these "think pieces" ( though I think we cut through on here alright considering it's a comment section ).
The meme exists in other places: "play better tennis", "don't get hit" in Smash Bros., etc. It really is a cheeky reaction to the request for a shortcut that also contains this kind of Socratic wisdom of being purposely frustrated into asking better questions.
@Shigurui I think Bayonetta does a very good job for the most part with it's difficulty, particularly because it is designed to be played multiple times and it grades you per encounter and Easy Mode, items, etc. are not "free".
It not only manages to have those accessible modes, but is completely transparent about how it wants to be played... "git gud", or get Enzo trophies.
It doesn't lessen the game for me at all.... I'm pretty sure I used Bayonetta as an example of a difficulty mode toggle done right. I agree with you about Bayonetta but to say "more games should be like this"... like it how? I think it works for Bayo, and most Platinum games because they are so highly replayable and have that arcade/skill-based DNA in their design. A good counter-example is Nier: Automata which is long and has multiple endings (not very replayable) plus a clever (and easily breakable) system to mitigate difficulty with the chips... what the point of a multiple difficulty toggle here? It's hard to say what is Platinum legacy design and what is Taro trolling players, but I think it's a good counter-example for why difficulty and challenge should be addressed per game thoughtfully, not as a standardized presentation games need to force themselves to follow.
My only issue with the difficultly presentation overall are the items you mentioned... if you're playing to improve and get the best scores, they're beyond useless and the whole item system just seems poorly implemented and at odds with game besides having "shinys" to pick up.
Bayonetta is one of many games where a significant portion the "cash value" punishment for failure is the long loading screen. It's going to be interesting (as Demon's Souls PS5 players can probably attest to) if and how developers account for this going forward, and how we look at "punishing" games from the past when we can play them on devices where the loading screen is essentially disappeared from the loop. Without the loading screens, Bayonetta is practically Celeste and items seem even more pointless.
@NEStalgia I totally disagree about your Souls take but I might be in the minority. There's plenty of games that are difficult for difficulty's sake, but for me From games are just so absolutely demanding of your attention that it steeps every moment in consequence, which feeds into every other part of the game. You're always making interesting and consequential decisions — more than most games. What I love the most is the exploration — exemplified by the fact that I can to this day tell you how to get to any point in Lordran in vivid detail, and even where many enemies are. It's as real of a place as I've been to. Without the stakes grounding you there, making you pay attention to every step and piece of terrain, it would just be a Zelda map.
Sekiro is my favorite From game and I didn't beat the final boss either time I played through it — if there's nothing left to see or explore, I lose a lot of motivation to finish the game.
I disagree with your take on the arcade too. There's something very special about the arcade gameplay loop that a high score is only a part of. They're traditionally skill-based games, so you're not wasting your time playing them — you're literally getting a better value for your money the better you get.
Every game boils down to doing the same thing over and over. The difference is that in the arcade idiom, the progress is internalized in the player.
It's really interesting to think about it from the other end like that... beating DOOM Eternal is definitely an accomplishment, and even moreso for the all the personal reasons you mentioned. That game chewed me up and spit me out, and you're right that I just didn't have the mental attitude to hang with it. I got incredibly frustrated trying to remember all the buttons, all the weaknesses, cycling the weapons, and managing the ammo. It's was like juggling chainsaws and I couldn't hack it. And yet, I get through these From games like a cold knife through butter because it just jives with my mentality — not because I'm skilled. If you saw me play, at least when the series was new, you'd never understand why I liked it. I demoed Demon's Souls when I used to work at a video game store and could take used stuff home... I honestly spent 30 hours in Boletaria 1-1, not even reaching the Phalanx. I couldn't get enough. I brought everything back and bought a PS3 slim and that copy my next paycheck. I think it was because however hard it was, it always felt fair.
I've also had beating certain games as a kind of confidence builder, in the sense that no matter how frustrated I may get with a task, there is something at the other side of it I can get through to — somehow.
I have a friend, a young lady who got a Switch a few months ago and swears she terrible at games — having grown up with a brother who's pretty hardcore with the hobby. She blasted through Ori, and some other eShop Metroidvania and I'm scratching my head... Ori is not an easy game for me! There's tons of games that I feel stranded on an island of difficulty where nobody else seems to be. I breezed through Hollow Knight because for whatever reason everything just felt like it was exactly where I thought it should it be, like the developer and I were of the same mind. I never got lost, I never got too stuck on a boss battle, and that experience felt unique among fans. On the other hand, I couldn't 100% Yoshi's Wooly World. The logic didn't click and it was a frustrating exercise trying to find everything in the levels.
I guess all this is to say that when we talk about difficulty, it's not a universal concept — and more to my point, it's definitely not something that can just have a slider slapped on it to be adjusted. Sometimes it's something much deeper that we don't understand exactly why something feels challenging in a good way, or easy in a bad way, or fair or unfair or anything like that.
You say you don't have confidence, but I wouldn't be able to tell people BPD... that takes courage. I really like you're approach and attitude about gaming as well. @John117 had a really interesting idea about curating games based on how their difficulty is suited to different kinds of players. I know that color-blind people have great resources, but I think it would be really cool to have a site or resource that tracks difficulty and accessibility across all of the different issues we have, named or not, or at least to start thinking about things in less generic terms so we're not putting ourselves on the 1-10 slider scale along with difficulty options when there's a lot more uniqueness and nuance in both.
@mousieone Everything you’re saying makes sense on the level of the narrative, but if you dig in (after a hundred plus comments), it’s not that simple. There’s trade-offs here that are not obvious, and dealing in narratives only obfuscates they issues.
It’s ridiculous to think that people who don’t want ‘Easy Mode’ in games also don’t want accessibility issues addressed (which could be difficulty), just like it’s ridiculous (and insulting) to think that people with accessibility issues don’t want a challenging game.
I think we’ve done a pretty good job for a comment section for getting past the placard slogans and canned defenses into some of the nuances of the issue of difficulty and coming up with some interesting takes and suggestions.
@GamingFan4Lyf I agree with a lot of this. The punishment in Souls games is really more psychological than anything. Needless deaths in other games feel like you wasted a lot more time because they literally discard all game data since your last save point. Because the clock never stops in From games — you never go load an old save — you don’t erase time spent the way other games do, so I can actually be seen as more generous.
@SplooshDmg My pleasure! It's a really important concept I think when talking about difficulty in games. How many titles just do a terrible job teaching players how to play, with tutorial dumps in the beginning — like an afterthought — and never bother with the lessons from Super Mario Bros 1-1 to organically teach with in-game scenarios? From Software is guilty of being too obtuse (though they're getting better), and Doom Eternal is arguably over-tutorialized, pausing gameplay every few minutes for multiple reasons.
Platinum Games have good examples too. I think they do a great job of making games that have a high-skill and low-skill path through them that are both enjoyable, but if you watch a high-level playthrough of say, Vanquish, you could wonder how you were ever expected to learn how to play that way with the tools you were given in the game. How many people played it like a Gears of War clone, and not the subversion of the cover-shooter it was designed to be? I think difficulty issues are not just about the barrier of entry, but also about the barrier of enjoyment.
@Widey85 I have my "new dad" moments too haha. It makes me think of JPRGs, which is historically my favorite genre, but over the last few generations and as I get older and have more responsibilities can never settle into to play. Some games like Octopath Traveler, Bravely Default, and the Final Fantasy remasters have all these Quality Of Life tools (like speeding up battles and reducing the encounter rate) that change the experience enough to make those games more "new dad" friendly. Octopath uses items to actually "gameify" things like enemy encounter rate, and chunks it's story into discrete chapters that about 30-45 to get through. Octopath and Dragon Quest XI also have great "story so far..." recaps that help ease players back in who may have gone days or weeks between sessions — which helps solve the main reason I usually stop playing.
The more I think about our conversation, the more I see your POV. I really do think though that the difficulty slider is the laziest solution and if we really press the issue from an accessibility perspective while maintaining a respect for the integrity of artistic vision, that there are so many creative solutions to the difficulty problem if developers try.
@Ryu_Niiyama That's not true, not as the medium grows. There's games like 'Spiritfarer', 'The Last Of Us Part II', and 'Valiant Hearts' that are emotional wringers. 'The Longing' is practically a mediation on anti-fun, subverting expectations of reward systems in games.
I think gaming is a medium — it can be about anything, just like music, movies, books, art, podcasts, etc.
@FriendlyOctopus Ad hominem attack means I win, right? If you found out I was crushing it a life, learning new skills every day, would it make my argument better?
Honest question: do you think 'git gud' is appropriate advice for "real life"? There are people who think there should be an 'Easy Mode' for that too — that our societies should be structured to leave nobody behind, and those who think people should take more personal responsibility for their circumstances. It's the equality of opportunity vs. equality of outcome argument. I think there's a parallel here in this discussion about game difficulty, and just like "in real life" people are banging each other over the head with canned, rigid opinions without having thought through the consequences, and attributing motives and ad hominems to the other side to bolster their weak, myopic arguments. There's valid points on both sides if we can hear them, and I think the solution is a blend of the two. I had a great back and forth with @Widey85 that changed my perspective on some things and fortified my position on others — there is a value to discussing things and having different opinions. Why not join the discussion with something of substance rather than throw stones from outside of it?
Seeing as Dark Souls is one of the most influential games of the last decade, and rogue-likes/lites are the current hot genre, losers like me are being catered to just fine — so much so that it seems plenty of people want to lower the bar of entry to join in. I don't blame them! I just think that 'Easy Mode' is the absolute wrong way to do it.
If it was "just a video game" why would we even bother? It's an incredible and powerful medium that has enraptured, enriched, and entertained millions upon millions of people. To say it's "just a video game", then to call strangers on the internet names doesn't track. You're obviously passionate about games too.
@Widey85 Listen... I want whatever it takes for you to play and enjoy Elden Ring. I will Samwise Gamgee your Frodo-ass to the end of that game if I have to hahaha!!!
What do you use for a TV/Monitor? I have really, really bad reaction time and reflexes and trouble following fast moving objects — and certain games like fighting games are almost painful for me to play, so I got a 25" low-latency monitor and wired controllers and that little bit made a big difference for me. I'm still limited to certain characters and playstyles, but I'm wondering if a few milliseconds here and there in your setup could make certain games more accessible for you.
@Richnj I think the analogy falls apart because what I'm trying to say is that the destination itself has to have value intrinsically tied to the journey. It's an argument for "exclusivity", and against "what do you lose by me having an easy mode you don't have to use". That "shared experience" is not a global thing for all games — I'm particularly using Souls as the example here because it has a massive community that is essentially it's Easy Mode if you engage with it.
The inverse of this would be The Last Of Us, where, if you go on any forum and say you thought the gameplay was bad so you stopped playing, they will 9 times out of ten say you MUST play on the hardest mode without the seeing through walls and whatever else changes, or you don't get the intended experience. This is like there's a party where everyone celebrates how great the game is (and how much they hate the sequel — the "shared experience", but with a game like TLOU, you can honestly get there through a let's play because it is a sub-community that is running this game on ultra hardcore and playing the multiplayer. I think it's myriad difficulty options actually does leave people behind, but it is a game where the "journey" is really about the story, and not about actually having played it.
I'm not saying all of gaming should be a country club — far from it — but there are going to be those places where who gets to go there determines the worth of it, and I don't think we have to cancel those places because "exclusivity is bad". It's not when and where it's appropriate, and it's awful and even wrong where it isn't. I think "inclusivity" works the exact same way. We should be doing that on a case by case basis, which is really all I'm arguing for — with Dark Souls as the battleground — and arguing against using the platitudes as a cudgel to break down these so-called barriers when many of them are just time, patience, and a willingness to engage.
@Widey85 I would agree to that! I might have to draw the line at the "new dads" though;)
I think you've convinced me that difficulty in games should be being addressed as an accessibility issue, but I am also more resolute that a multiple difficulty toggle is the worst solution, unless it is a Beginner > Intermediate > Advanced presentation for games that it would suit.
@SplooshDmg Doom Eternal is a really interesting example because I do think that the people who couldn't gel with it (myself included) didn't want to play the game they made, but play Doom 2016, and no amount of guidance was going to change that. I do feel that I am missing out an a great experience because I don't have the mechanical chops to play and FPS at a level to then layer on all these systems (being a lefty I think is a handicap for console shooters without gyro), but at the same time I'm also really glad that there is this really high-level skill-based, ammo management "speed puzzle" game that couldn't have existed if it was afraid to leave people behind.
@SplooshDmg "I think there's something to be said that it's easy to become a poor student when you have a poor teacher"
Quote of the thread. And that's a big part of my issue with multiple difficulty options as a brute force solution. It's a terrible teacher, and unless you have a game where Beginner / Intermediate / Advanced is appropriate like a rhythm game or a Platinum style game, it's too obtuse.
Sekiro might be an interesting one because a lot of people felt it was the most difficult, but I think that's because it has the least paths through compared to other From games. There are no builds and fewer gimmicks, but I did find it was a very good teacher. It has skill-check bosses like Bloodborne and then, unlike BB which actually gets easier as you progress, Sekiro continues to check in some really cool ways. I don't think it's for everyone, but it's my favorite as I'm not a huge fan of the builds and esoteric stats in the Souls games.
I agree we should all be critical — it's great! Unfortunately some of these discussions already think they're solved and it's painful to try and cut through the nonsense slogans like 'git gud' and "games should be for everyone".
@Widey85 Maybe this analogy will capture all if it:
Let's say I'm a professional hockey player, and you're playing street hockey with your friends on the weekends, ostensibly we are participating in the same activity, but we're not playing the same game. If you were a professional ice sledge hockey player (parapalegic hockey), you are using accessibility tools to play something that is fundamentally the same game that I am playing.
The shared experience is everything around the game that is the foundation of that community. I am NOT saying that every game has this quality dependent on difficulty, but I believe Dark Souls (for example) does, and that is where I think having the "other door of entry" does dilute a very important part of the experience, which is the community. Like I mentioned in a post above — the community is there to help you up the mountain. It's almost why it's so reflexively dismissive of "Easy Mode". It's like you are refusing to engage with the many, many "easy modes" available through reading wikis or watching videos or requesting co-op sessions. It's actually really insulting when you think about it that way — "Easy Mode" is dismissive of the community.
@Richnj ...but you're going to work. Nothing about being there is dependent on how you get there. Read my post above please — I think it clarifies my mountain analogy and maybe that will make more sense.
@Widey85 I think we've come to a better understand since this ws posted, but I'll address them anyway:
Those with not enough time on their hands (but still want to enjoy the game everyone's raving about)
Those with motor function issues (autism, some disabilities, or other causes including getting older)
Those with less access to games growing up - I've noticed my brother who grew up with a games console has much better reactions than many of my friends my age that didn't (but are still better than me)
Those who play games to relax, not get frustrated
I think the ideas like GoT's parry timing window or the Psychonauts 2 "cheat codes" @SplooshDmg mentioned ... I think Celeste has a similar "assist mode", are both elegant solutions that do not require a user selected difficulty mode toggle.
I hate to think picking up the 'git gud' banner means I don't think all those groups of people shouldn't have games for them, or be left behind for those reasons. I was a HUGE fan of the Nintendo Wii philosophy, and chided those who thought it was "casual" and not "hardcore". Less buttons and putting certain functions to motion opened up hardcore experiences to so many people... while of course closing the door for others. Again, I think we can find options and inclusion in the broad banner of the hobby, just not always in individual games.
"I loved Game of Thrones and George RR Martin's stuff (that ending aside) so I'd love to play Elden Ring - but if as expected there's no difficulty options that's potentially a great story I'm not going to be able to enjoy apart from watching others play it"
Honestly — and this is coming from a place of tough love — I think if you think it's going to be worthwhile, you bang your head against that wall until you break through. I've seen people with severe handicaps play difficult games at an incredibly high level — BrolyLegs is just a human marvel — so think it's possible to overcome IF you think it's worth it. I don't think it's fair or reasonable to expect that for every game, but for say, something like Elden Ring, that is exactly the kind of shared experience I would love for you t be a part of. I think that's what I mean by "the mountain" analogy and the community. People will help you figure it out. There will be techniques and build and glitches and co-op and so many tools to get you through that game, and people more than happy to participate. And it's in that context that when people say no to that --they want "easy mode" — that I think they're really missing the point.
@SplooshDmg I love your points here, and I do think that "cheat mode" style options work a lot better than difficulty toggles and get around the issues of having multiple difficulty modes. Sekiro does this; a training mode which really helps come to grips with the central mechanic which would be painful to do in just the game proper.
@Widey85 I do think we're getting somewhere! I also think that there is a big difference between Easy / Normal / Hard vs. Beginner / Intermediate / Advanced. The second implies a path through the game by "gitting gudder". I could make the case that Dark Souls has the latter with NG, NG+, NG++, but that would be stretching it. Bayonetta should be structured Beginner / Intermediate / Advanced because that is the loop and path to mastery.
Games like TLOU are not really about mastery, so Easy / Normal / Hard is appropriate, but even here there is a problem. I could never get into the game and almost everyone insisted that you had to play on the hardest mode for proper immersion. That gets it around the 'git gud' meme easily enough, but to my mind it embodies precisely problem difficulty modes create. I'm playing a lesser game and failing to engage with because of how the difficulty is presented, and to answer @Shigurui , this is but one of the many ways difficulty options hurt games.
@Widey85 I think the mountain metaphor can apply to certain single-player games like the souls games and others that have a community like Dark Souls. We're talking about in terms of achievements and trophies which I really don't care about, but more having the same — or similar enough — experience to be able to relate to each other. What you described as your experience with GoT and the parry window is EXACTLY what I would say qualifies as a shared experience.
@Widey85 That's such a great option I didn't know about. I think that's great. I have really poor reflexes and reactions too.
"There was still stand-offs where I'd mistime it again and again, despite I thought having got the hang of it - but given the game has quick save and the window is made forgiving enough, I'm more angry at my reflexes / coordination than the game."
That's exactly where you want to be with a challenging game, and for me speaks to my point: if there's multiple difficulty options, I am always wondering when to blames the game or myself.
"Those kinds of options would still be too much for these "git gud" types though - and that kind of gatekeeping is just plain elitism (and no, "elite" players mostly don't care - they're self-assured enough of their own skill they don't need to gatekeep)"
I don't think that's fair to assume, and that's kind of my problems with this whole "gatekeeping" and "elitism" terminology being thrown around. I never "got good" (except maybe in Sekiro), I just persevered. Particularly with Souls games again, there's so many paths through that game that you can roll your own. Many people never learn to parry, or don't bother.
"I don’t want to share your journey. I want to play the game."
"o, you don't. You want to play an easier game.
"I don’t want to join you. You can still have a mountain for games called ‘completed it on Hard mode’ if you want."
I can tell.
"You just told others they aren’t welcome if they choose a different experience. That is elitism and gate keeping."
The full sentence, for context: That’s the value of exclusiveness in a nutshell. It’s not elitism, it’s not “gatekeeping”, it’s about preserving the integrity of the shared experience.
You made my point — it's a different experience. No, you are not welcome if you don't come through the front door.
"Because watching a video isn’t the same. I shouldn’t have to say that but here we are."
You're not engaging with the question, you're repeating it at me. What is the difference between watching and playing?
@electrolite77 It’s not nonsense. Put it different terms than “difficulty”. From Software does not want to create casual experiences. It leveraged difficulty to force players to be fully engaged or lose.
I don’t think we should be advocating developers to make casual experiences of their games if they don’t want to, and especially with this politically charged language where “inclusivity” is some sort of moral good by definition and “exclusivity” is morally wrong — that’s nonsense.
There’s a blind dude who players Killer Instinct (at a high level) by sound cues. You can solve for real inclusiveness with better accessibility. No difficulty lever required.
@electrolite77 That’s not what’s happening. I don’t think anybody doesn’t want everyone to be able to enjoy what they are enjoying.
The argument against “Easy Mode” is that the game itself is now no longer what people are enjoying. You’re not beating Dark Souls on Easy Mode and having shared my journey.
Dark Souls is the gold standard example of this. We both climbed that mountain and now we are brothers. That’s how it goes. We want EVERYONE to climb that mountain and join us. ‘Easy Mode’ is you wanting to take a lift, and that’s how you get there, you’re not welcome!
That’s the value of exclusiveness in a nutshell. It’s not elitism, it’s not “gatekeeping”, it’s about preserving the integrity of the shared experience.
Ask yourself, why can’t you just enjoy it by watching someone else play a game on YouTube (The Dark Souls of Easy Mode)? What is it really about, to have pressed the buttons yourself? THAT precise feeling is what is sacred about gaming and ought be given more respect in this conversation.
There is a game for everyone because not every game is for everyone.
@Widey85 Accessibility and Difficulty settings are definitely discrete categories. I think there are some exceptional options, like the Ghost of Tsushima one you mentioned, which cover both. That sounds awesome, and is a great way to not touch the difficulty of the game itself but on that higher abstraction level — really the technical side, which for argument’s sake we can consider the human body part of the hardware. I’m all about that. I’d put that in the category of a lag timer in rhythm and fighting games.
I think you have me wrong — I don’t want to play the game on Very Hard. I want to play it on the default setting — better yet, I don’t want the option at all. I am not a masochist and I think the only game I ever played on a high difficulty was Bayonetta and technically Souls games on New Game+, which I usually bail on and start New Game again if anything.
I think there are going to be places that I’m wrong, and places you’re wrong. I don’t want to get hung up on Souls because I think I am right beyond reproach here for that particular series and there’s probably places we can find more interesting disagreements if not common ground.
I really don’t care about bragging rights — and artistic vision, well, I absolutely do. I think “have it your way” works because for every Burger King there’s a place that has a higher standard that is core to what makes it special. It’s because not every game is made for everyone that we get to find those titles that feel like there were made just for us.
As far as why the compromise is bad, I think it erodes player trust to have difficulty options, I think there is a value to exclusivity we are not acknowledging or addressing correctly, I think difficulty and challenge are fundamental to what make a game a ‘game’.
Maybe we can look at it different if I ask it this way? If every possible obstacle that could keep you from playing a game at whatever you would comfortably call the equivalent of “normal” or “intended” scenario, would you still change the difficulty level?
@GrimR1vaL For some, for sure, but I don’t think difficulty is always (if ever) the correct lever to try and move. For me, just playing Dragon Quest XI on Switch with a great suspend feature and handheld mode solved all my issues without touching the difficulty. I think there’s way more places that can be done to solve problems, and Easy Mode is the laziest, brute forced, and ultimately least rewarding solution to any of those problems.
@UltimateOtaku91 That’s a bit dramatic, but like a said, there’s a value to exclusiveness that we’re not giving it’s due.
It also takes away from the trust in the developer, that the challenge is intentional and meaning. Control is my example here that I mentioned in another post. The difficulty in that game could be frustratingly terrible for technical reasons, and using the slider and getting through an encounter did not feel good at all.
@Widey85 So you DO what a straw man is! Nobody is saying we should put staircases between art and the disabled. That’s about accessibility and not difficulty.
In the painting metaphor, I think “challenge” is the brush the developer uses, and I think asking for difficulty options is like asking for every painting to have a cartoon version.
In the restaurant metaphor, I can explain how you are conflating accessibility with difficulty and express my point better. Again, I absolutely think that you should physically be able to get into any restaurant you want, I don’t think you should be allowed to ask for french fries and fish sticks if they’re not on the menu.
The conversation we should be having —in metaphor — is about food allergies. That’s really what the version of exclusion you’re talking about would look like, and what I would argue is that yes, we should be making sure everyone knows what ingredients are in the dishes, but as to wether substitutions can be made to dish or not should be completely up to the restaurant. You have a bad experience with a meal because you had them substitute ingredients may not be something they want to have any of part of, and rightfully so. Get something else you can have.
@SplooshDmg I think it’s super intentional. That’s why I respect it.
@Deadcow called out Control as an example... that’s my counter-example. I had so many BS frustrating encounters in or whatever that I would drop the difficulty down just to get through a bad one. The game was so much more difficult than any From Software game I played and for all the wrong reasons.
Because there was a slider, I don’t even know if I could have it should have gotten better at the game. Because of the easy checkpoints and the slider, combat, when it was hard, just felt like an annoying obstacle. The stakes felt so low, and I just felt dumb, inadequate, and annoyed.
It’s not just about “getting good”. It’s also, “is there something here that’s worth getting good at?”, and games with difficulty sliders have a very hard, if not impossible time conveying that.
I think there are good examples like Bayonetta and Doom Eternal, but now you’re talking about games that take 5 play through a to master. How is that respecting player time!?
I think you can make the case both ways, and we should be looking at it form both perspectives, i.e. “Easy Mode Souls” people don’t have the monopoly on respect for players, or even game difficulty as accessibility.
@UltimateOtaku91 I grind levels or save for equipment to get to take that extra hit from a boss. That’s the easy mode!
The death when the boss has one pixel is like a rite of passage — somehow I don’t think anybody has beaten one of those games without that happening. It’s brutally frustrating!
I think it’s a really a fundamental difference in how we see these games. I really think you look at it like a ride, and buying your game is your ticket, if not overtly, than just by how all the velvet rope AAA games have been made from Playstation 1 era up until Dark Souls sparked it’s design revolution.
@SplooshDmg You run form the bonfire to the boss! I don’t think any of those checkpoints every have a mandatory trash mob to kill.
I do think those checkpoint placements are key... really it’s the only punishment for losing if you think about it. It will be interesting how they’re placed in games once SSD is the standard and loading screens don’t act as that frustrating moment for you to either stew in and fall apart, or steel your self in resolve and renewed patience.
@Widey85 Accessibility options should get everyone to the same starting line, and I don’t think every game should absolutely be doing this, if not every platform at an OS level. We’re talking about controller options, color blind options, etc. Every game will have a different context for what difficulty means, but generally no, I don’t think anyone should get an easier ride once we have gotten to the same starting point.
Matchmaking is gatekeeping, so I don’t see where we disagree besides on terms. You don’t want no gatekeeping, you want better gatekeeping.
I’d even advocate for high level cheating and mods that exist above the game layer because that’s where you can actually make your “easy for you is normal for me” equivalence possible. That, plus accessibility at the lowest layer and there’s no reason to change the game at all.
I don’t think you know what a straw man is. I am accusing people of conflating terms and ideas to try and make their point by emotional appeal. I’m not strawmanning anybody’s argument.
@UltimateOtaku91 That’s certain Mario (and other “Super Guide” games like DKCR) titles, and we can argue how clunky or elegant the Super Guide is. They do punish using them as well by not giving unlocks or whatever. It’s not a free Easy Mode.
No, I don’t think Dark Souls should have a Super Guide. In fact, many From games have an anti-Super Guide mechanic where dying makes the game harder... it’s pretty brutal but it just shows their intentionality clear as day.
@LtSarge I don’t think that’s true. Options can ruin a lot of things. Have you ever eaten at a Subway?
Not to get all Jordan Peterson on it, but I think there are experiences where the joy and elation are intrinsically tied to the suffering and frustration. To break that link spoils it.
Challenge is at the absolute core of gaming, and really is the brush with which all systems and rules in a game are painted. Some games can use a light, watery touch that is very accessible to everyone, and some games go Jackson Pollock and make for a more challenging experience. ‘Options’ are like handing the audience the brush. These kind of experiences exist in other media, but nowhere does anyone advocate, for example, for all theater to be participatory theater. What makes games any different?
There are so many ways to have multiple difficulty levels without having options. Look at the entirety of the Mario series, for example.
‘Options‘, in the sense we are using the word, is bad design.
@GrimR1vaL What’s the problem with being left behind here?
Everything you’re saying makes perfect sense to me until the part where the game has to adjust to your lifestyle. I love JRPGs but they’re too long and don’t always pace themselves well for shorter play sessions, and I get lost if I can’t play for extended periods of time, which happens more often the older I get.
So I don’t play them anymore.
Now I enjoy roguelite games that can have a full-run in 30-90 minutes so each session feels like I accomplished (or at least concluded) something.
There is something for everyone in this hobby because not everything in this hobby is for everyone.
@UltimateOtaku91 That’s not a good reason. I want to learn French, computer programming, and lose ten pounds but I also don’t want to or can’t put in the time and effort.
The only difference I see between that and beating Dark Souls is the feeling of being entitled to it because you purchased the full game. It’s really a matter of perspective — is your payment an entry fee, or ownership of all content? I can buy a gym membership, but that doesn’t guarantee me the results. Why think a copy of Tekken 7 or EVE Online is any different?
Dark Souls and the like are more particular because the challenge is so fundamental to the experience, and to strip it out is creating something entirely different. I don’t think that tracks to every game, but in general, difficulty should be a black box that developers tune to feedback into every system of their game and users should only be able to affect it with in-game “meta” tools, i.e. Dark Souls magic, Super Mario Sunshine’s FLUDD, grinding in RPGs, etc.
I hate that this position sounds so confrontational — I would like to understand where you would take issue with these points.
Conflating “elitism” with “elite” is the first mistake, and sneaking these new political terms in to redefine concepts is a bit silly.
A professional sport league is elite. It is not “elitism” that you can’t play in it.
There’s nothing wrong with “gatekeeping” per se. It’s the reason why people are being left behind that matters. Is it a skill check? Is it a paywall? Is it an “accessibility” issue? These are good and important discussions to have, and to paint with a big brush saying all gatekeeping is bad is ridiculous and counter-productive.
There’s something to be said for exclusivity. Broadly speaking, gaming should be for everyone, but that doesn’t mean each game should be. No, there should not be an easy mode in Dark Souls for those who don’t want to put the effort in. There should be spaces for elite players to enjoy games at higher level than others. “Smurfing” sucks, why should we accept the inverse version? Accessibility should only bring you to the same starting line as other players. From there on, either get good enough to enjoy yourself or play something else.
@TimG13 “Not sure what people were expecting, to be honest...”
Purple dildos.
I’ve never played the series — the free copy of Saints Row 3 I just nabbed on Epic Games Store will be my introduction — but the identity of the series from the outside is just that.
I was neutral on the reboot, but the more I read into the complaints and developer comments, I completely understand their point of view. The game looks more like Watch Dogs 2 by way of Fortnite than a Saint’s Row game, and the developers seem to have contempt for it’s diehard fans. I don’t think “woke” is the right way to frame it at all, but it’s definitely looks like they’re trying launch a “metaverse” style brand off the backs of the fans they’re a little too happy to be leaving behind.
@LightningLeader What about it is “woke”? To me it’s just the trend of how youth is portrayed in the media. We’re the Burger King Kids Club “woke”? Was Saved By The Bell “woke”?
We’ve had a dry period for what a generational “characterization” would look like in media. The 90s and 00’s had a vibe, and the 10’s were like this vacuum of Disney/Nickelodeon type kids and this moment now is that translated into teens and 20 some things.
Lame? Sure. But there’s no real politics (outside of Disney becoming something like a “Deep Media”) here as far as I can tell.
I’m honestly asking if you’re seeing something I’m not seeing.
*and I’m not going to shut you down, dismiss you, or berate you if we don’t agree — good grief at some of these commenters!!!
@elpardo1984 It’s sad that a female protagonist means “woke” to some contingency. What a stupid dilemma we’ve put ourselves in for no good reason at all!
I’ll join the haters bandwagon if they remove the purple dildos.
@Kilamanjaro I’m gunna give a shot with Monster Train and Slay the Spire on tablet. StS on smartphones is great, and Monster Train has no mobile version so a tablet might be the best option.
Comments 148
Re: Xbox Says ‘Gatekeeping And Elitism’ Have No Place In Gaming
@lokozar
"1 - Please elaborate."
If we’re looking at difficulty as a problem — which could be from a design perspective or an accessibility perspective —A user selected difficulty mode is only one option. Why is it the poorest solution? It’s opaque — it’s not always clear what is different, and more often than not is is something lazy like changing the damage taken and received. As @SplooshDmg pointed out, often the problem with difficulty is the game doing a poor job of teaching the player, and this kind of ‘Easy Mode’ does nothing to teach the player the rules or ways to engage the game properly.
A great counter-example is Mario… really all Nintendo games. I don’t think anyone is going to argue that Nintendo had made some of — if not the most — accessible games for decades. I don’t think any of them have ever had an option to select difficulty, but rather through organic design and accessibility options provide multiple paths through their games, save Mario Kart 8 which has genre appropriate “courses”.
"2 - Why do you think you could decide that for other people?"
I don’t. I think developers can decide their audience, thus decide for their audience.
"3 - If developers add several difficulty levels, that is part of their vision for the game. Otherwise they wouldn’t. There is also no real reason to not make that a part of your vision."
There’s no reason to think that’s true. For some games, sure. But plenty of others, too many, are made by committee — there’s little “vision” that can trump profitability.
"4 - Demanding to play a game at a certain difficulty level is paternizing."
It’s literally the opposite of patronizing.
"5 - That’s for the individual player to decide. The alternative could be a game, that isn’t being played. Which somehow defeats the purpose."
Why? Why should the player be able to decide here? You don’t get to choose your level of participation and entitlement to content with any other media. You're attitude goes beyond media or even entertainment — you're treating gaming like it's dining.
"6 - Difficulty levels do not equal genres, art styles and the like."
I don’t know what you mean by this. If you're saying you can't define your genre or style by difficulty, don't tell From Software or the plethora of rogue-likes.
"Again: If you don’t want to play easy mode, you don’t have to. You’re not affected by the choice of others."
This simply isn’t true. Even just having to ignore something isn’t cost-free — ask someone on a diet to just ignore the dessert that doesn't affect them if they don't eat it — but to say that having designers forced to do anything to please any group of gamers doesn't affect everyone is myopic and naïve. This is an empty, false statement designed to guilt people who disagree.
Re: Xbox Says ‘Gatekeeping And Elitism’ Have No Place In Gaming
@Zochmenos Absolutely, and well said. After talking with some cool people on here, I do think there is a case to be made for busting open some part of the "gate" in terms of accessibility — I think we should all be able to get to some kind of similar starting line — but I totally agree with your perspective that there are some that are trying to sneak through that opening for reasons that should not be given too much water by the industry.
Re: Xbox Says ‘Gatekeeping And Elitism’ Have No Place In Gaming
@mousieone "Which is why I didn’t try to engage you; what’s the point."
Well, why not? I've disagreed with both @SplooshDmg and @Widey85, and through conversation I saw their point of view and they changed my mind about some things, and I hope I might have shown them a different perspective too. If you have "good, valid reasons", I'd love to hear them! I am very confident in my positions, but I'm not 100% firm on my stance about anything.
I love the sphere analogy, and my feeling is the best thing we can do is let our tigers and tigresses out, if only to pop those bubbles! I think you're selecting the 'Easy Mode' of conversation, where we let the internet-at-large pre-digest all the arguments for us, and all the assumptions about the people who have the ideas we don't agree with, and we dismiss them.
I'd love to hear your points, and why you think I'm fundamentally wrong... I think the fundamentals are the best part of my argument;) Worst case scenario, we agree to disagree (which I currently do not agree to) and maybe sharpen our own points, and best case, we kick some ideas around, hopefully learn about about a different perspective, and abate any cosmic entities tempted to throw us on an island.
Re: Xbox Says ‘Gatekeeping And Elitism’ Have No Place In Gaming
@lokozar There’s plenty of reasons to be against an easy mode without it being "...because it makes me feel less [elite]”.
1) “Easy mode“ is one of many solutions to difficulty problems, and in many cases the worst choice.
2) “Easy mode” is no guarantee of fun. If it’s fun to win, but not fun to play, we should ask ourselves why that is on a case by case basis. I think there’s something to be said for “bad game, good entertainment” (Witcher 3) and ”good game, bad entertainment” (Dark Souls) categories in video games.
3) Integrity of developer vision. Certain games have difficulty that is integral to other elements of it’s design. Zelda BOTW’s weapon degradation is a good example of a frustrating system on it’s surface that holds so many other reward systems up on examination. From Software games are entirely underpinned by their difficulty. Every system and mechanic falls apart without it.
4) “Easy mode” is patronizing, especially for those with outside-of-game challenges that should be addressed by accessibility issues (which can be difficulty-related, but also can be possibly solved by less brute force methods).
5) Is the price of a game for a ticket or a tour? I don’t think video games are like other entertainment media in the sense that you are entitled to all the “content” just by having paid the price for it. That’s literally the “game” part. I think it’s up to the developer to decide that and balance their game a round it.
6). It’s ok to leave people behind. Not everything is for everyone. I believe that it is because not every game is made for everyone that the hobby can be so broad. Gaming is for everyone, games don’t have to be.
Consider television. When there were 3 networks over antenna with no “gatekeeping”, content was pretty poor. It made people more similar rather than appealed to more people broadly. No that there are multiple distributions such as cable, streaming, etc. we’ve had multiple “Golden Ages” of content. Nobody would argue that The Sopranos should be made accessible to everyone, yet that show paved the way for better storytelling for everyone across all demographics and entry points in the medium — every “watcher” of television reaped a benefit.
Re: Xbox Says ‘Gatekeeping And Elitism’ Have No Place In Gaming
@Zochmenos That's an interesting part of the meme that's not be addressed well by these "think pieces" ( though I think we cut through on here alright considering it's a comment section ).
The meme exists in other places: "play better tennis", "don't get hit" in Smash Bros., etc. It really is a cheeky reaction to the request for a shortcut that also contains this kind of Socratic wisdom of being purposely frustrated into asking better questions.
Re: Xbox Says ‘Gatekeeping And Elitism’ Have No Place In Gaming
@mousieone "I simply don’t believe anyone has the right to tell anyone else how they should or should not play a video game."
I think the developer does.
Re: Xbox Says ‘Gatekeeping And Elitism’ Have No Place In Gaming
@Shigurui I think Bayonetta does a very good job for the most part with it's difficulty, particularly because it is designed to be played multiple times and it grades you per encounter and Easy Mode, items, etc. are not "free".
It not only manages to have those accessible modes, but is completely transparent about how it wants to be played... "git gud", or get Enzo trophies.
It doesn't lessen the game for me at all.... I'm pretty sure I used Bayonetta as an example of a difficulty mode toggle done right. I agree with you about Bayonetta but to say "more games should be like this"... like it how? I think it works for Bayo, and most Platinum games because they are so highly replayable and have that arcade/skill-based DNA in their design. A good counter-example is Nier: Automata which is long and has multiple endings (not very replayable) plus a clever (and easily breakable) system to mitigate difficulty with the chips... what the point of a multiple difficulty toggle here? It's hard to say what is Platinum legacy design and what is Taro trolling players, but I think it's a good counter-example for why difficulty and challenge should be addressed per game thoughtfully, not as a standardized presentation games need to force themselves to follow.
My only issue with the difficultly presentation overall are the items you mentioned... if you're playing to improve and get the best scores, they're beyond useless and the whole item system just seems poorly implemented and at odds with game besides having "shinys" to pick up.
Bayonetta is one of many games where a significant portion the "cash value" punishment for failure is the long loading screen. It's going to be interesting (as Demon's Souls PS5 players can probably attest to) if and how developers account for this going forward, and how we look at "punishing" games from the past when we can play them on devices where the loading screen is essentially disappeared from the loop.
Without the loading screens, Bayonetta is practically Celeste and items seem even more pointless.
Re: Xbox Says ‘Gatekeeping And Elitism’ Have No Place In Gaming
@NEStalgia I totally disagree about your Souls take but I might be in the minority. There's plenty of games that are difficult for difficulty's sake, but for me From games are just so absolutely demanding of your attention that it steeps every moment in consequence, which feeds into every other part of the game. You're always making interesting and consequential decisions — more than most games. What I love the most is the exploration — exemplified by the fact that I can to this day tell you how to get to any point in Lordran in vivid detail, and even where many enemies are. It's as real of a place as I've been to. Without the stakes grounding you there, making you pay attention to every step and piece of terrain, it would just be a Zelda map.
Sekiro is my favorite From game and I didn't beat the final boss either time I played through it — if there's nothing left to see or explore, I lose a lot of motivation to finish the game.
I disagree with your take on the arcade too. There's something very special about the arcade gameplay loop that a high score is only a part of. They're traditionally skill-based games, so you're not wasting your time playing them — you're literally getting a better value for your money the better you get.
Every game boils down to doing the same thing over and over. The difference is that in the arcade idiom, the progress is internalized in the player.
Re: Xbox Says ‘Gatekeeping And Elitism’ Have No Place In Gaming
@SplooshDmg Thanks I really appreciate it!
It's really interesting to think about it from the other end like that... beating DOOM Eternal is definitely an accomplishment, and even moreso for the all the personal reasons you mentioned. That game chewed me up and spit me out, and you're right that I just didn't have the mental attitude to hang with it. I got incredibly frustrated trying to remember all the buttons, all the weaknesses, cycling the weapons, and managing the ammo. It's was like juggling chainsaws and I couldn't hack it. And yet, I get through these From games like a cold knife through butter because it just jives with my mentality — not because I'm skilled. If you saw me play, at least when the series was new, you'd never understand why I liked it. I demoed Demon's Souls when I used to work at a video game store and could take used stuff home... I honestly spent 30 hours in Boletaria 1-1, not even reaching the Phalanx. I couldn't get enough. I brought everything back and bought a PS3 slim and that copy my next paycheck. I think it was because however hard it was, it always felt fair.
I've also had beating certain games as a kind of confidence builder, in the sense that no matter how frustrated I may get with a task, there is something at the other side of it I can get through to — somehow.
I have a friend, a young lady who got a Switch a few months ago and swears she terrible at games — having grown up with a brother who's pretty hardcore with the hobby. She blasted through Ori, and some other eShop Metroidvania and I'm scratching my head... Ori is not an easy game for me! There's tons of games that I feel stranded on an island of difficulty where nobody else seems to be. I breezed through Hollow Knight because for whatever reason everything just felt like it was exactly where I thought it should it be, like the developer and I were of the same mind. I never got lost, I never got too stuck on a boss battle, and that experience felt unique among fans. On the other hand, I couldn't 100% Yoshi's Wooly World. The logic didn't click and it was a frustrating exercise trying to find everything in the levels.
I guess all this is to say that when we talk about difficulty, it's not a universal concept — and more to my point, it's definitely not something that can just have a slider slapped on it to be adjusted. Sometimes it's something much deeper that we don't understand exactly why something feels challenging in a good way, or easy in a bad way, or fair or unfair or anything like that.
You say you don't have confidence, but I wouldn't be able to tell people BPD... that takes courage. I really like you're approach and attitude about gaming as well. @John117 had a really interesting idea about curating games based on how their difficulty is suited to different kinds of players. I know that color-blind people have great resources, but I think it would be really cool to have a site or resource that tracks difficulty and accessibility across all of the different issues we have, named or not, or at least to start thinking about things in less generic terms so we're not putting ourselves on the 1-10 slider scale along with difficulty options when there's a lot more uniqueness and nuance in both.
Re: Xbox Says ‘Gatekeeping And Elitism’ Have No Place In Gaming
@mousieone Everything you’re saying makes sense on the level of the narrative, but if you dig in (after a hundred plus comments), it’s not that simple. There’s trade-offs here that are not obvious, and dealing in narratives only obfuscates they issues.
It’s ridiculous to think that people who don’t want ‘Easy Mode’ in games also don’t want accessibility issues addressed (which could be difficulty), just like it’s ridiculous (and insulting) to think that people with accessibility issues don’t want a challenging game.
I think we’ve done a pretty good job for a comment section for getting past the placard slogans and canned defenses into some of the nuances of the issue of difficulty and coming up with some interesting takes and suggestions.
Re: Xbox Says ‘Gatekeeping And Elitism’ Have No Place In Gaming
@GamingFan4Lyf I agree with a lot of this. The punishment in Souls games is really more psychological than anything. Needless deaths in other games feel like you wasted a lot more time because they literally discard all game data since your last save point. Because the clock never stops in From games — you never go load an old save — you don’t erase time spent the way other games do, so I can actually be seen as more generous.
Re: Xbox Says ‘Gatekeeping And Elitism’ Have No Place In Gaming
@SplooshDmg My pleasure! It's a really important concept I think when talking about difficulty in games. How many titles just do a terrible job teaching players how to play, with tutorial dumps in the beginning — like an afterthought — and never bother with the lessons from Super Mario Bros 1-1 to organically teach with in-game scenarios? From Software is guilty of being too obtuse (though they're getting better), and Doom Eternal is arguably over-tutorialized, pausing gameplay every few minutes for multiple reasons.
Platinum Games have good examples too. I think they do a great job of making games that have a high-skill and low-skill path through them that are both enjoyable, but if you watch a high-level playthrough of say, Vanquish, you could wonder how you were ever expected to learn how to play that way with the tools you were given in the game. How many people played it like a Gears of War clone, and not the subversion of the cover-shooter it was designed to be? I think difficulty issues are not just about the barrier of entry, but also about the barrier of enjoyment.
Re: Xbox Says ‘Gatekeeping And Elitism’ Have No Place In Gaming
@Widey85 I have my "new dad" moments too haha. It makes me think of JPRGs, which is historically my favorite genre, but over the last few generations and as I get older and have more responsibilities can never settle into to play.
Some games like Octopath Traveler, Bravely Default, and the Final Fantasy remasters have all these Quality Of Life tools (like speeding up battles and reducing the encounter rate) that change the experience enough to make those games more "new dad" friendly. Octopath uses items to actually "gameify" things like enemy encounter rate, and chunks it's story into discrete chapters that about 30-45 to get through. Octopath and Dragon Quest XI also have great "story so far..." recaps that help ease players back in who may have gone days or weeks between sessions — which helps solve the main reason I usually stop playing.
The more I think about our conversation, the more I see your POV. I really do think though that the difficulty slider is the laziest solution and if we really press the issue from an accessibility perspective while maintaining a respect for the integrity of artistic vision, that there are so many creative solutions to the difficulty problem if developers try.
Re: Xbox Says ‘Gatekeeping And Elitism’ Have No Place In Gaming
@Ryu_Niiyama That's not true, not as the medium grows. There's games like 'Spiritfarer', 'The Last Of Us Part II', and 'Valiant Hearts' that are emotional wringers. 'The Longing' is practically a mediation on anti-fun, subverting expectations of reward systems in games.
I think gaming is a medium — it can be about anything, just like music, movies, books, art, podcasts, etc.
@FriendlyOctopus Ad hominem attack means I win, right? If you found out I was crushing it a life, learning new skills every day, would it make my argument better?
Honest question: do you think 'git gud' is appropriate advice for "real life"? There are people who think there should be an 'Easy Mode' for that too — that our societies should be structured to leave nobody behind, and those who think people should take more personal responsibility for their circumstances. It's the equality of opportunity vs. equality of outcome argument. I think there's a parallel here in this discussion about game difficulty, and just like "in real life" people are banging each other over the head with canned, rigid opinions without having thought through the consequences, and attributing motives and ad hominems to the other side to bolster their weak, myopic arguments. There's valid points on both sides if we can hear them, and I think the solution is a blend of the two. I had a great back and forth with @Widey85 that changed my perspective on some things and fortified my position on others — there is a value to discussing things and having different opinions. Why not join the discussion with something of substance rather than throw stones from outside of it?
Seeing as Dark Souls is one of the most influential games of the last decade, and rogue-likes/lites are the current hot genre, losers like me are being catered to just fine — so much so that it seems plenty of people want to lower the bar of entry to join in. I don't blame them! I just think that 'Easy Mode' is the absolute wrong way to do it.
If it was "just a video game" why would we even bother? It's an incredible and powerful medium that has enraptured, enriched, and entertained millions upon millions of people. To say it's "just a video game", then to call strangers on the internet names doesn't track. You're obviously passionate about games too.
Re: Xbox Says ‘Gatekeeping And Elitism’ Have No Place In Gaming
@Widey85 Listen... I want whatever it takes for you to play and enjoy Elden Ring. I will Samwise Gamgee your Frodo-ass to the end of that game if I have to hahaha!!!
What do you use for a TV/Monitor? I have really, really bad reaction time and reflexes and trouble following fast moving objects — and certain games like fighting games are almost painful for me to play, so I got a 25" low-latency monitor and wired controllers and that little bit made a big difference for me. I'm still limited to certain characters and playstyles, but I'm wondering if a few milliseconds here and there in your setup could make certain games more accessible for you.
Re: Xbox Says ‘Gatekeeping And Elitism’ Have No Place In Gaming
@Richnj I think the analogy falls apart because what I'm trying to say is that the destination itself has to have value intrinsically tied to the journey. It's an argument for "exclusivity", and against "what do you lose by me having an easy mode you don't have to use". That "shared experience" is not a global thing for all games — I'm particularly using Souls as the example here because it has a massive community that is essentially it's Easy Mode if you engage with it.
The inverse of this would be The Last Of Us, where, if you go on any forum and say you thought the gameplay was bad so you stopped playing, they will 9 times out of ten say you MUST play on the hardest mode without the seeing through walls and whatever else changes, or you don't get the intended experience.
This is like there's a party where everyone celebrates how great the game is (and how much they hate the sequel — the "shared experience", but with a game like TLOU, you can honestly get there through a let's play because it is a sub-community that is running this game on ultra hardcore and playing the multiplayer. I think it's myriad difficulty options actually does leave people behind, but it is a game where the "journey" is really about the story, and not about actually having played it.
I'm not saying all of gaming should be a country club — far from it — but there are going to be those places where who gets to go there determines the worth of it, and I don't think we have to cancel those places because "exclusivity is bad". It's not when and where it's appropriate, and it's awful and even wrong where it isn't. I think "inclusivity" works the exact same way. We should be doing that on a case by case basis, which is really all I'm arguing for — with Dark Souls as the battleground — and arguing against using the platitudes as a cudgel to break down these so-called barriers when many of them are just time, patience, and a willingness to engage.
Re: Xbox Says ‘Gatekeeping And Elitism’ Have No Place In Gaming
@Widey85 I would agree to that! I might have to draw the line at the "new dads" though;)
I think you've convinced me that difficulty in games should be being addressed as an accessibility issue, but I am also more resolute that a multiple difficulty toggle is the worst solution, unless it is a Beginner > Intermediate > Advanced presentation for games that it would suit.
Re: Xbox Says ‘Gatekeeping And Elitism’ Have No Place In Gaming
@SplooshDmg Doom Eternal is a really interesting example because I do think that the people who couldn't gel with it (myself included) didn't want to play the game they made, but play Doom 2016, and no amount of guidance was going to change that.
I do feel that I am missing out an a great experience because I don't have the mechanical chops to play and FPS at a level to then layer on all these systems (being a lefty I think is a handicap for console shooters without gyro), but at the same time I'm also really glad that there is this really high-level skill-based, ammo management "speed puzzle" game that couldn't have existed if it was afraid to leave people behind.
Re: Xbox Says ‘Gatekeeping And Elitism’ Have No Place In Gaming
@SplooshDmg "I think there's something to be said that it's easy to become a poor student when you have a poor teacher"
Quote of the thread. And that's a big part of my issue with multiple difficulty options as a brute force solution. It's a terrible teacher, and unless you have a game where Beginner / Intermediate / Advanced is appropriate like a rhythm game or a Platinum style game, it's too obtuse.
Sekiro might be an interesting one because a lot of people felt it was the most difficult, but I think that's because it has the least paths through compared to other From games. There are no builds and fewer gimmicks, but I did find it was a very good teacher. It has skill-check bosses like Bloodborne and then, unlike BB which actually gets easier as you progress, Sekiro continues to check in some really cool ways. I don't think it's for everyone, but it's my favorite as I'm not a huge fan of the builds and esoteric stats in the Souls games.
I agree we should all be critical — it's great! Unfortunately some of these discussions already think they're solved and it's painful to try and cut through the nonsense slogans like 'git gud' and "games should be for everyone".
Re: Xbox Says ‘Gatekeeping And Elitism’ Have No Place In Gaming
@Widey85 Maybe this analogy will capture all if it:
Let's say I'm a professional hockey player, and you're playing street hockey with your friends on the weekends, ostensibly we are participating in the same activity, but we're not playing the same game. If you were a professional ice sledge hockey player (parapalegic hockey), you are using accessibility tools to play something that is fundamentally the same game that I am playing.
The shared experience is everything around the game that is the foundation of that community. I am NOT saying that every game has this quality dependent on difficulty, but I believe Dark Souls (for example) does, and that is where I think having the "other door of entry" does dilute a very important part of the experience, which is the community. Like I mentioned in a post above — the community is there to help you up the mountain. It's almost why it's so reflexively dismissive of "Easy Mode". It's like you are refusing to engage with the many, many "easy modes" available through reading wikis or watching videos or requesting co-op sessions. It's actually really insulting when you think about it that way — "Easy Mode" is dismissive of the community.
EDIT Meant for @Richnj
Re: Xbox Says ‘Gatekeeping And Elitism’ Have No Place In Gaming
@Richnj ...but you're going to work. Nothing about being there is dependent on how you get there. Read my post above please — I think it clarifies my mountain analogy and maybe that will make more sense.
Re: Xbox Says ‘Gatekeeping And Elitism’ Have No Place In Gaming
@Widey85 I think we've come to a better understand since this ws posted, but I'll address them anyway:
I think the ideas like GoT's parry timing window or the Psychonauts 2 "cheat codes" @SplooshDmg mentioned ... I think Celeste has a similar "assist mode", are both elegant solutions that do not require a user selected difficulty mode toggle.
I hate to think picking up the 'git gud' banner means I don't think all those groups of people shouldn't have games for them, or be left behind for those reasons. I was a HUGE fan of the Nintendo Wii philosophy, and chided those who thought it was "casual" and not "hardcore". Less buttons and putting certain functions to motion opened up hardcore experiences to so many people... while of course closing the door for others. Again, I think we can find options and inclusion in the broad banner of the hobby, just not always in individual games.
"I loved Game of Thrones and George RR Martin's stuff (that ending aside) so I'd love to play Elden Ring - but if as expected there's no difficulty options that's potentially a great story I'm not going to be able to enjoy apart from watching others play it"
Honestly — and this is coming from a place of tough love — I think if you think it's going to be worthwhile, you bang your head against that wall until you break through. I've seen people with severe handicaps play difficult games at an incredibly high level — BrolyLegs is just a human marvel — so think it's possible to overcome IF you think it's worth it. I don't think it's fair or reasonable to expect that for every game, but for say, something like Elden Ring, that is exactly the kind of shared experience I would love for you t be a part of. I think that's what I mean by "the mountain" analogy and the community. People will help you figure it out. There will be techniques and build and glitches and co-op and so many tools to get you through that game, and people more than happy to participate. And it's in that context that when people say no to that --they want "easy mode" — that I think they're really missing the point.
Re: Xbox Says ‘Gatekeeping And Elitism’ Have No Place In Gaming
@SplooshDmg I love your points here, and I do think that "cheat mode" style options work a lot better than difficulty toggles and get around the issues of having multiple difficulty modes. Sekiro does this; a training mode which really helps come to grips with the central mechanic which would be painful to do in just the game proper.
Re: Xbox Says ‘Gatekeeping And Elitism’ Have No Place In Gaming
@Widey85 I do think we're getting somewhere! I also think that there is a big difference between Easy / Normal / Hard vs. Beginner / Intermediate / Advanced. The second implies a path through the game by "gitting gudder". I could make the case that Dark Souls has the latter with NG, NG+, NG++, but that would be stretching it. Bayonetta should be structured Beginner / Intermediate / Advanced because that is the loop and path to mastery.
Games like TLOU are not really about mastery, so Easy / Normal / Hard is appropriate, but even here there is a problem. I could never get into the game and almost everyone insisted that you had to play on the hardest mode for proper immersion. That gets it around the 'git gud' meme easily enough, but to my mind it embodies precisely problem difficulty modes create. I'm playing a lesser game and failing to engage with because of how the difficulty is presented, and to answer @Shigurui , this is but one of the many ways difficulty options hurt games.
Re: Xbox Says ‘Gatekeeping And Elitism’ Have No Place In Gaming
@Widey85 I think the mountain metaphor can apply to certain single-player games like the souls games and others that have a community like Dark Souls.
We're talking about in terms of achievements and trophies which I really don't care about, but more having the same — or similar enough — experience to be able to relate to each other. What you described as your experience with GoT and the parry window is EXACTLY what I would say qualifies as a shared experience.
Re: Xbox Says ‘Gatekeeping And Elitism’ Have No Place In Gaming
@Widey85 That's such a great option I didn't know about. I think that's great. I have really poor reflexes and reactions too.
"There was still stand-offs where I'd mistime it again and again, despite I thought having got the hang of it - but given the game has quick save and the window is made forgiving enough, I'm more angry at my reflexes / coordination than the game."
That's exactly where you want to be with a challenging game, and for me speaks to my point: if there's multiple difficulty options, I am always wondering when to blames the game or myself.
"Those kinds of options would still be too much for these "git gud" types though - and that kind of gatekeeping is just plain elitism (and no, "elite" players mostly don't care - they're self-assured enough of their own skill they don't need to gatekeep)"
I don't think that's fair to assume, and that's kind of my problems with this whole "gatekeeping" and "elitism" terminology being thrown around. I never "got good" (except maybe in Sekiro), I just persevered. Particularly with Souls games again, there's so many paths through that game that you can roll your own. Many people never learn to parry, or don't bother.
Re: Xbox Says ‘Gatekeeping And Elitism’ Have No Place In Gaming
"I don’t want to share your journey. I want to play the game."
"o, you don't. You want to play an easier game.
"I don’t want to join you. You can still have a mountain for games called ‘completed it on Hard mode’ if you want."
I can tell.
"You just told others they aren’t welcome if they choose a different experience. That is elitism and gate keeping."
The full sentence, for context: That’s the value of exclusiveness in a nutshell. It’s not elitism, it’s not “gatekeeping”, it’s about preserving the integrity of the shared experience.
You made my point — it's a different experience. No, you are not welcome if you don't come through the front door.
"Because watching a video isn’t the same. I shouldn’t have to say that but here we are."
You're not engaging with the question, you're repeating it at me. What is the difference between watching and playing?
Re: Xbox Says ‘Gatekeeping And Elitism’ Have No Place In Gaming
@electrolite77 It’s not nonsense. Put it different terms than “difficulty”. From Software does not want to create casual experiences. It leveraged difficulty to force players to be fully engaged or lose.
I don’t think we should be advocating developers to make casual experiences of their games if they don’t want to, and especially with this politically charged language where “inclusivity” is some sort of moral good by definition and “exclusivity” is morally wrong — that’s nonsense.
There’s a blind dude who players Killer Instinct (at a high level) by sound cues. You can solve for real inclusiveness with better accessibility. No difficulty lever required.
Re: Xbox Says ‘Gatekeeping And Elitism’ Have No Place In Gaming
@electrolite77 That’s not what’s happening. I don’t think anybody doesn’t want everyone to be able to enjoy what they are enjoying.
The argument against “Easy Mode” is that the game itself is now no longer what people are enjoying. You’re not beating Dark Souls on Easy Mode and having shared my journey.
Dark Souls is the gold standard example of this. We both climbed that mountain and now we are brothers. That’s how it goes. We want EVERYONE to climb that mountain and join us. ‘Easy Mode’ is you wanting to take a lift, and that’s how you get there, you’re not welcome!
That’s the value of exclusiveness in a nutshell. It’s not elitism, it’s not “gatekeeping”, it’s about preserving the integrity of the shared experience.
Ask yourself, why can’t you just enjoy it by watching someone else play a game on YouTube (The Dark Souls of Easy Mode)? What is it really about, to have pressed the buttons yourself? THAT precise feeling is what is sacred about gaming and ought be given more respect in this conversation.
There is a game for everyone because not every game is for everyone.
Re: Xbox Says ‘Gatekeeping And Elitism’ Have No Place In Gaming
@Shigurui “It hurts nobody”.
This meme needs to stop!
If this is your argument ‘for’, get a better reason. It hurts everybody.
Re: Xbox Says ‘Gatekeeping And Elitism’ Have No Place In Gaming
@Widey85 Accessibility and Difficulty settings are definitely discrete categories. I think there are some exceptional options, like the Ghost of Tsushima one you mentioned, which cover both. That sounds awesome, and is a great way to not touch the difficulty of the game itself but on that higher abstraction level — really the technical side, which for argument’s sake we can consider the human body part of the hardware. I’m all about that. I’d put that in the category of a lag timer in rhythm and fighting games.
I think you have me wrong — I don’t want to play the game on Very Hard. I want to play it on the default setting — better yet, I don’t want the option at all. I am not a masochist and I think the only game I ever played on a high difficulty was Bayonetta and technically Souls games on New Game+, which I usually bail on and start New Game again if anything.
I think there are going to be places that I’m wrong, and places you’re wrong. I don’t want to get hung up on Souls because I think I am right beyond reproach here for that particular series and there’s probably places we can find more interesting disagreements if not common ground.
I really don’t care about bragging rights — and artistic vision, well, I absolutely do. I think “have it your way” works because for every Burger King there’s a place that has a higher standard that is core to what makes it special. It’s because not every game is made for everyone that we get to find those titles that feel like there were made just for us.
As far as why the compromise is bad, I think it erodes player trust to have difficulty options, I think there is a value to exclusivity we are not acknowledging or addressing correctly, I think difficulty and challenge are fundamental to what make a game a ‘game’.
Maybe we can look at it different if I ask it this way? If every possible obstacle that could keep you from playing a game at whatever you would comfortably call the equivalent of “normal” or “intended” scenario, would you still change the difficulty level?
Re: Xbox Says ‘Gatekeeping And Elitism’ Have No Place In Gaming
@GrimR1vaL For some, for sure, but I don’t think difficulty is always (if ever) the correct lever to try and move. For me, just playing Dragon Quest XI on Switch with a great suspend feature and handheld mode solved all my issues without touching the difficulty. I think there’s way more places that can be done to solve problems, and Easy Mode is the laziest, brute forced, and ultimately least rewarding solution to any of those problems.
Re: Xbox Says ‘Gatekeeping And Elitism’ Have No Place In Gaming
@UltimateOtaku91 That’s a bit dramatic, but like a said, there’s a value to exclusiveness that we’re not giving it’s due.
It also takes away from the trust in the developer, that the challenge is intentional and meaning. Control is my example here that I mentioned in another post. The difficulty in that game could be frustratingly terrible for technical reasons, and using the slider and getting through an encounter did not feel good at all.
Re: Xbox Says ‘Gatekeeping And Elitism’ Have No Place In Gaming
@Widey85 So you DO what a straw man is! Nobody is saying we should put staircases between art and the disabled. That’s about accessibility and not difficulty.
In the painting metaphor, I think “challenge” is the brush the developer uses, and I think asking for difficulty options is like asking for every painting to have a cartoon version.
In the restaurant metaphor, I can explain how you are conflating accessibility with difficulty and express my point better. Again, I absolutely think that you should physically be able to get into any restaurant you want, I don’t think you should be allowed to ask for french fries and fish sticks if they’re not on the menu.
The conversation we should be having —in metaphor — is about food allergies. That’s really what the version of exclusion you’re talking about would look like, and what I would argue is that yes, we should be making sure everyone knows what ingredients are in the dishes, but as to wether substitutions can be made to dish or not should be completely up to the restaurant. You have a bad experience with a meal because you had them substitute ingredients may not be something they want to have any of part of, and rightfully so. Get something else you can have.
Re: Xbox Says ‘Gatekeeping And Elitism’ Have No Place In Gaming
@SplooshDmg I think it’s super intentional. That’s why I respect it.
@Deadcow called out Control as an example... that’s my counter-example. I had so many BS frustrating encounters in or whatever that I would drop the difficulty down just to get through a bad one. The game was so much more difficult than any From Software game I played and for all the wrong reasons.
Because there was a slider, I don’t even know if I could have it should have gotten better at the game. Because of the easy checkpoints and the slider, combat, when it was hard, just felt like an annoying obstacle. The stakes felt so low, and I just felt dumb, inadequate, and annoyed.
It’s not just about “getting good”. It’s also, “is there something here that’s worth getting good at?”, and games with difficulty sliders have a very hard, if not impossible time conveying that.
I think there are good examples like Bayonetta and Doom Eternal, but now you’re talking about games that take 5 play through a to master. How is that respecting player time!?
I think you can make the case both ways, and we should be looking at it form both perspectives, i.e. “Easy Mode Souls” people don’t have the monopoly on respect for players, or even game difficulty as accessibility.
Re: Xbox Says ‘Gatekeeping And Elitism’ Have No Place In Gaming
@UltimateOtaku91 I grind levels or save for equipment to get to take that extra hit from a boss. That’s the easy mode!
The death when the boss has one pixel is like a rite of passage — somehow I don’t think anybody has beaten one of those games without that happening. It’s brutally frustrating!
I think it’s a really a fundamental difference in how we see these games. I really think you look at it like a ride, and buying your game is your ticket, if not overtly, than just by how all the velvet rope AAA games have been made from Playstation 1 era up until Dark Souls sparked it’s design revolution.
Re: Xbox Says ‘Gatekeeping And Elitism’ Have No Place In Gaming
@SplooshDmg You run form the bonfire to the boss! I don’t think any of those checkpoints every have a mandatory trash mob to kill.
I do think those checkpoint placements are key... really it’s the only punishment for losing if you think about it. It will be interesting how they’re placed in games once SSD is the standard and loading screens don’t act as that frustrating moment for you to either stew in and fall apart, or steel your self in resolve and renewed patience.
Re: Xbox Says ‘Gatekeeping And Elitism’ Have No Place In Gaming
@Widey85 Accessibility options should get everyone to the same starting line, and I don’t think every game should absolutely be doing this, if not every platform at an OS level. We’re talking about controller options, color blind options, etc.
Every game will have a different context for what difficulty means, but generally no, I don’t think anyone should get an easier ride once we have gotten to the same starting point.
Matchmaking is gatekeeping, so I don’t see where we disagree besides on terms. You don’t want no gatekeeping, you want better gatekeeping.
I’d even advocate for high level cheating and mods that exist above the game layer because that’s where you can actually make your “easy for you is normal for me” equivalence possible. That, plus accessibility at the lowest layer and there’s no reason to change the game at all.
I don’t think you know what a straw man is. I am accusing people of conflating terms and ideas to try and make their point by emotional appeal. I’m not strawmanning anybody’s argument.
Re: Xbox Says ‘Gatekeeping And Elitism’ Have No Place In Gaming
@UltimateOtaku91 That’s certain Mario (and other “Super Guide” games like DKCR) titles, and we can argue how clunky or elegant the Super Guide is. They do punish using them as well by not giving unlocks or whatever. It’s not a free Easy Mode.
No, I don’t think Dark Souls should have a Super Guide. In fact, many From games have an anti-Super Guide mechanic where dying makes the game harder... it’s pretty brutal but it just shows their intentionality clear as day.
Re: Xbox Says ‘Gatekeeping And Elitism’ Have No Place In Gaming
@CrazyJF It’s not about me losing anything. It’s about you losing the point of the whole enterprise.
Edit: I lose the ability to share the experience with others without qualification. I lose the exclusiveness of the experience, which is valuable.
Re: Xbox Says ‘Gatekeeping And Elitism’ Have No Place In Gaming
@LtSarge I don’t think that’s true. Options can ruin a lot of things. Have you ever eaten at a Subway?
Not to get all Jordan Peterson on it, but I think there are experiences where the joy and elation are intrinsically tied to the suffering and frustration. To break that link spoils it.
Challenge is at the absolute core of gaming, and really is the brush with which all systems and rules in a game are painted. Some games can use a light, watery touch that is very accessible to everyone, and some games go Jackson Pollock and make for a more challenging experience. ‘Options’ are like handing the audience the brush. These kind of experiences exist in other media, but nowhere does anyone advocate, for example, for all theater to be participatory theater. What makes games any different?
There are so many ways to have multiple difficulty levels without having options. Look at the entirety of the Mario series, for example.
‘Options‘, in the sense we are using the word, is bad design.
Re: Xbox Says ‘Gatekeeping And Elitism’ Have No Place In Gaming
@GrimR1vaL What’s the problem with being left behind here?
Everything you’re saying makes perfect sense to me until the part where the game has to adjust to your lifestyle. I love JRPGs but they’re too long and don’t always pace themselves well for shorter play sessions, and I get lost if I can’t play for extended periods of time, which happens more often the older I get.
So I don’t play them anymore.
Now I enjoy roguelite games that can have a full-run in 30-90 minutes so each session feels like I accomplished (or at least concluded) something.
There is something for everyone in this hobby because not everything in this hobby is for everyone.
Re: Xbox Says ‘Gatekeeping And Elitism’ Have No Place In Gaming
@UltimateOtaku91 That’s not a good reason. I want to learn French, computer programming, and lose ten pounds but I also don’t want to or can’t put in the time and effort.
The only difference I see between that and beating Dark Souls is the feeling of being entitled to it because you purchased the full game. It’s really a matter of perspective — is your payment an entry fee, or ownership of all content? I can buy a gym membership, but that doesn’t guarantee me the results. Why think a copy of Tekken 7 or EVE Online is any different?
Dark Souls and the like are more particular because the challenge is so fundamental to the experience, and to strip it out is creating something entirely different. I don’t think that tracks to every game, but in general, difficulty should be a black box that developers tune to feedback into every system of their game and users should only be able to affect it with in-game “meta” tools, i.e. Dark Souls magic, Super Mario Sunshine’s FLUDD, grinding in RPGs, etc.
I hate that this position sounds so confrontational — I would like to understand where you would take issue with these points.
Re: Xbox Says ‘Gatekeeping And Elitism’ Have No Place In Gaming
I completely disagree.
Conflating “elitism” with “elite” is the first mistake, and sneaking these new political terms in to redefine concepts is a bit silly.
A professional sport league is elite. It is not “elitism” that you can’t play in it.
There’s nothing wrong with “gatekeeping” per se. It’s the reason why people are being left behind that matters. Is it a skill check? Is it a paywall? Is it an “accessibility” issue? These are good and important discussions to have, and to paint with a big brush saying all gatekeeping is bad is ridiculous and counter-productive.
There’s something to be said for exclusivity. Broadly speaking, gaming should be for everyone, but that doesn’t mean each game should be. No, there should not be an easy mode in Dark Souls for those who don’t want to put the effort in. There should be spaces for elite players to enjoy games at higher level than others. “Smurfing” sucks, why should we accept the inverse version? Accessibility should only bring you to the same starting line as other players. From there on, either get good enough to enjoy yourself or play something else.
Re: Video: Saints Row Drops A More Extensive Trailer Following Fan Backlash
@TimG13 “Not sure what people were expecting, to be honest...”
Purple dildos.
I’ve never played the series — the free copy of Saints Row 3 I just nabbed on Epic Games Store will be my introduction — but the identity of the series from the outside is just that.
I was neutral on the reboot, but the more I read into the complaints and developer comments, I completely understand their point of view. The game looks more like Watch Dogs 2 by way of Fortnite than a Saint’s Row game, and the developers seem to have contempt for it’s diehard fans. I don’t think “woke” is the right way to frame it at all, but it’s definitely looks like they’re trying launch a “metaverse” style brand off the backs of the fans they’re a little too happy to be leaving behind.
Re: Saints Row Team: We Aren't Backing Down, But We Understand The 'Knee Jerk' Reaction
@NEStalgia haha for sure. But you know what I mean... provincial left-right politics.
Re: UFL Is A Brand-New Console Football Game With Massive Ambitions
I really love what their saying — I hope they can nail it.
Sports games have taken an awful turn and need a hero! Fair-to-play... great marketing!
Re: Saints Row Team: We Aren't Backing Down, But We Understand The 'Knee Jerk' Reaction
@LightningLeader What about it is “woke”? To me it’s just the trend of how youth is portrayed in the media. We’re the Burger King Kids Club “woke”? Was Saved By The Bell “woke”?
We’ve had a dry period for what a generational “characterization” would look like in media. The 90s and 00’s had a vibe, and the 10’s were like this vacuum of Disney/Nickelodeon type kids and this moment now is that translated into teens and 20 some things.
Lame? Sure. But there’s no real politics (outside of Disney becoming something like a “Deep Media”) here as far as I can tell.
I’m honestly asking if you’re seeing something I’m not seeing.
*and I’m not going to shut you down, dismiss you, or berate you if we don’t agree — good grief at some of these commenters!!!
Re: Saints Row Team: We Aren't Backing Down, But We Understand The 'Knee Jerk' Reaction
@elpardo1984 It’s sad that a female protagonist means “woke” to some contingency. What a stupid dilemma we’ve put ourselves in for no good reason at all!
I’ll join the haters bandwagon if they remove the purple dildos.
Re: All Games With Touch Controls On Xbox Game Pass
@Kilamanjaro I’m gunna give a shot with Monster Train and Slay the Spire on tablet. StS on smartphones is great, and Monster Train has no mobile version so a tablet might be the best option.