Should all games be required to have an Easy Mode ?

Arcadeheroes · 08-11-2020 1:48pm #1

Very soon the next generation of consoles will release , and no matter how many years goes by the same narrative of topics are always brought up now and again from gamers/journalist alike that all games are required to be accesible as possible , because you know ... you have to cater to peoples needs who cant afford to overcome hurdles the developer throws at the player due to time restraints from work , college , friendships , relationships ...

Yet we all have to deal with this , and despite it all , many people have beaten games like The souls series , Sekiro , Cuphead , Super Meat Boy , Nioh (etc..)

It truly astounds me the amount of Self Entitlement from people that every game needs to fit into their list of demands and needs , despite 99% of games already cater to the mass audiences .

I have been reading from articles , that people are upset Demons Souls Remake will not have an Easy Mode and instead of people respecting the decisions from blue point games to not tamper with From Software game and keep it faithful as much possible to the Original, listening to them moan and whine really iirks me :mad:

When the difficulty of a game is part of the design , to demand to a dev to tamper with their art to suit them because they just want to walk to the ending and claim trophy bragging points is self entitlement nonsense and should stop .

With the rise of developers trying to fit in everyones demands from social media sites , games have lost all the immersiveness from its gameplay imho.
Its no longer an art form anymore , but rather a checklist to tick off everyones complaints.

rizzla · 08-11-2020 2:01pm

Yes and all games should have accessibility options.

I'm able bodied but I've banged the x button repeatedly in qte's to last a lifetime. So I loved the option in Spiderman and God of War to have the option to just press and hold.

johnny_ultimate · 08-11-2020 2:02pm

There should be no ‘mandatory’ easy mode, but developers should in an ideal world implement reasonable and robust accessibility options wherever possible.

Celeste remains the gold standard - a punishingly difficult game with no compromises for those who want it, with a dizzying range of adjustable options for those who don’t have the patience, interest, time or physical capacity to try something dozens and dozens of times. No vision compromised, nobody left behind. Would be a better world if more developers followed that example.

AnniePowwa · 08-11-2020 2:03pm

Yes they should, some people are there for the story and not the challenge

Varik · 08-11-2020 2:15pm

Within reason.

Different colour blind option, a epilepsy care mode.
Auto button mashing, hold to sprint, or toggles.

But no changing mechanic, no bowling ramps or gutter barriers.

newjaqcity · 08-11-2020 2:21pm

Arcadeheroes wrote: »

When the difficulty of a game is part of the design , to demand to a dev to tamper with their art to suit them because they just want to walk through the ending and claim trophy bragging points is self entitlement nonsense and should stop .

I don't know about making it mandatory but I don't think it's that much of a big deal for the developers to include a "easy mode" for casual players.

With regard to the "art" part of your argument - well I think I would not have seen a huge part of the design of God of War if I had opted for the most difficult mode. and as such I would not have sung it's praises to everybody who would listen!

I don't think the enjoyment of a game is diminished for hardcore gamers by casual gamers opting for an easier mode.

biggebruv · 08-11-2020 2:28pm

newjaqcity wrote: »

I don't know about making it mandatory but I don't think it's that much of a big deal for the developers to include a "easy mode" for casual players.

With regard to the "art" part of your argument - well I think I would not have seen a huge part of the design of God of War if I had opted for the most difficult mode. and as such I would not have sung it's praises to everybody who would listen!

I don't think the enjoyment of a game is diminished for hardcore gamers by casual gamers opting for an easier mode.

Hard games are a steep learning curve I can’t tell you how amazing it felt when I beat every boss in blood borne

I beat bosses easy in other games and move on it’s nothing and I forget it in 5 mins

But blood borne nearly every boss stuck with me because I spent ages trying to beat it

I don’t think there should be an easy mode no there’s plenty of games out there now that practically hold your hand through the experience there’s room for everything
For instance the souls games are too hard then there’s other games to play on easy instead
god of war
Darksiders etc

Arcadeheroes · 08-11-2020 2:35pm

Without trying to sound like a Gate-Kepper , I would very much love to learn peoples different takes on the subject. When I say accessibility I mean mostly in the case of the difficulty mode .

I have been gaming since the SNES/Megadrive era but also had a NES as a child . Why is there this feeling you have to finish a game ? there have been plenty of games over the years the bested me that I have never finished : SMT Luicfer Call , Shadowgate , Wings of Wor ...

But that never took away my love for these games , and its up to me to push through the ending if I so wished too .

If brolylegs can become the highest rank Chun Li player in the SF Community because his sheer love for the game , there is nothing holding anyone back from playing games and finishing them

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s1MYSgy4QMw

Or a girl on twitch who completed Darksouls 3 on a dance mat

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UxKsRf6R-vc

newjaqcity · 08-11-2020 2:36pm

biggebruv wrote: »

Hard games are a steep learning curve I can’t tell you how amazing it felt when I beat every boss in blood borne

Yes but what I'm saying is that your experience of mastering the game and the sense of achievement really shouldn't be diminished by somebody taking the easy route.

From the developers point of view having a broader audience is probably a good thing for potential sales.

newjaqcity · 08-11-2020 2:41pm

Arcadeheroes wrote: »

there is nothing holding anyone back from playing games and finishing them

Well the main thing holding people back, and I'm speaking for myself here, is time. And I would imagine that's true a lot of people who grew up with games from the olden days but now have jobs and families and other things that prevent them from sinking the amount of hours required into some of the harder games.

08-11-2020 2:43pm

Varik wrote: »

Within reason.

Different colour blind option, a epilepsy care mode.
Auto button mashing, hold to sprint, or toggles.

But no changing mechanic, no bowling ramps or gutter barriers.

Why not? You don't have to use them

Arcadeheroes · 08-11-2020 2:44pm

newjaqcity wrote: »

Yes but what I'm saying is that your experience of mastering the game and the sense of achievement really shouldn't be diminished by somebody taking the easy route.

From the developers point of view having a broader audience is probably a good thing for potential sales.

That way of thinking is never entirely sound , Square enix tried to take that approach with the avengers to try to reach to the widest demographic as possible which left a game with no identity with the most recognisable characters in modern pop culture and it failed for them.

Having an easy mode can hurt what is special about videogames . That thrill of always been on the edge and overcoming obstacles is what gives it its special feeling . A game like Cuphead , when remove the challenge is pales in comparison that playing it the way it was designed to be played .

you dont appreciate the devs design for bosses when you have infinite health to rely on , and in the head you scratch what everyone sees in the game you dont see .

you dont get immersion from easy games .

Arcadeheroes · 08-11-2020 2:50pm

newjaqcity wrote: »

Well the main thing holding people back, and I'm speaking for myself here, is time. And I would imagine that's true a lot of people who grew up with games from the olden days but now have jobs and families and other things that prevent them from sinking the amount of hours required into some of the harder games.

As I already mentioned , not having time is an excuse ( no meaning to attack you , not my intention )
We all have a certain amount of time in the day to play videogames , but its people patience thats at fault when they hit a wall .

I find that is more at fault with how easy games have become over the years , and how the industry is trying to blend in with being an interactive movie than a videogame .

The greatest thing about videogames is , there can be a marketplace for those type of games , but my argument will forever stand not every game needs to cater to everyones needs .

If someone does not want to play dark souls , they can play a Star wars fallen jedi. There are plenty of games to choose from

newjaqcity · 08-11-2020 2:56pm

Arcadeheroes wrote: »

That way of thinking is never entirely sound , Square enix tried to take that approach with the avengers to try to reach to the widest demographic as possible which left a game with no identity with the most recognisable characters in modern pop culture and it failed for them.

Having an easy mode can hurt what is special about videogames . That thrill of always been on the edge and overcoming obstacles is what gives it its special feeling . A game like Cuphead , when remove the challenge is pales in comparison that playing it the way it was designed to be played .

you dont appreciate the devs design for bosses when you have infinite health to rely on , and in the head you scratch what everyone sees in the game you dont see .

you dont get immersion from easy games .

I don't know anything about the Avengers games can't comment on that.

I'm fully in agreement with you above the level of engagement and achievement of a really challenging game and in terms of dumbing something down to appeal to a wider audience I am very much in agreement with you as far as movies go - where the experience is the same for everybody.

But games have the option of multiple audiences at multiple levels of difficulty so where we've been discussing things like the Souls games, Bloodborne etc I think a better comparison would be some of the driving games.

So in the Formula 1 games you have an option to go full manual, switch off all driver aids, increase the "intelligence" of the AI drivers , steering wheel and accessories etc etc for the pro players while still offering an arcade-like experience for the Sunday drivers who just want to bang wheels around the track for an hour or so.

In terms of skill level I don't think any of top players really care about the arcade mode when they are virtually racing with actual Formula 1 drivers.

Icyseanfitz · 08-11-2020 2:58pm

a game should be whatever the developers imagine it to be and not curtailed to suit everyone in my opinion

08-11-2020 2:58pm

AnniePowwa wrote: »

Yes they should, some people are there for the story and not the challenge

Watch a movie? What's the use for a *game* with no challenge?

Arcadeheroes · 08-11-2020 3:19pm

newjaqcity wrote: »

I don't know anything about the Avengers games can't comment on that.

I'm fully in agreement with you above the level of engagement and achievement of a really challenging game and in terms of dumbing something down to appeal to a wider audience I am very much in agreement with you as far as movies go - where the experience is the same for everybody.

But games have the option of multiple audiences at multiple levels of difficulty so where we've been discussing things like the Souls games, Bloodborne etc I think a better comparison would be some of the driving games.

So in the Formula 1 games you have an option to go full manual, switch off all driver aids, increase the "intelligence" of the AI drivers , steering wheel and accessories etc etc for the pro players while still offering an arcade-like experience for the Sunday drivers who just want to bang wheels around the track for an hour or so.

In terms of skill level I don't think any of top players really care about the arcade mode when they are virtually racing with actual Formula 1 drivers.

I think thats a fair comparison

But under Bloodborne design those Accessibility options are already put into place in its core design .
When you get hit you lost a small chunk of your health , and its you up to you do you want to risk going offensive to recover all your health by hitting the enemy , or do you want to play it safe and use a blood vial to heal .

It always respects the players choice and skill and never makes the player feel small and incapable of figuring things out for themselves .

I just think if we start to focus so heavily on trying to make sure a game can suit everyones needs , gaming can never grow and expand because you always have to make sure someone can finish it .

Varik · 08-11-2020 3:21pm

So can't speak for all Souls like games but the actual From made games aren't about being faster or having incredible reflexes they're about perseverance and observations. While you can get past some things by being quicker you probably weren't doing it right in the first place, this is the same for most of Froms games.

They aren't hardcore fighting games were you've a frame or 2 to figure out what the opponent's next move is, they telegraph them very visible and sometimes with giant flashing symbols.

Arcadeheroes wrote: »

That way of thinking is never entirely sound , Square enix tried to take that approach with the avengers to try to reach to the widest demographic as possible which left a game with no identity with the most recognisable characters in modern pop culture and it failed for them.

This is something you see plenty of with sequels, the same attempt to broaden the demographic completely removes what make it unique and eventually kills the franchise.

johnny_ultimate · 08-11-2020 3:24pm

I'd have once been inclined towards the 'don't compromise the art!' argument, before realising that actually the art isn't at all compromised by making a game more approachable to more people. I go back to Celeste. I played through a gruelling, intense and challenging platformer that was often dependent on split second timing. I reached the end, and was delighted with myself. That sense of achievement was in no way diminished by the knowledge I could have given myself an extra dash or slowed down time if I so wished. I was happy more people could experience such a brilliant game on their own terms.

I adore the Souls games, and have finished them all. Difficulty isn't all they have to offer by any stretch - they are majestic, decaying worlds to explore, with complex, nuanced narratives that often require visiting every corner of the sprawling maps. I thoroughly enjoy the challenge and have no interest in tweaking them, but if there was an option for people to move the various dials in a way that allowed them to get the most out of the game it'd have zero impact on my default experience, but a substantial positive one for them.

To put it quite simply: Giving games robust difficulty or accessibility options does not diminish the challenge for those who wish to play hard or punishing games 'as the designers intended'. It just allows more people to experience the other elements of a game which are usually worth experiencing beyond mere difficulty.

Particular kudos to Mark Brown for his superb work on this very topic. Difficulty and accessibility don't always go hand in hand, it goes without saying, but his look at the ways games can be more welcoming to more people are invaluable IMO, and no question helped sway my own views on the subject.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NInNVEHj_G4

gizmo · 08-11-2020 4:07pm

Should all games be required to have an Easy Mode?
Absolutely not. Advocating for such a requirement is lunacy.

Should developers strive to include variable difficult settings where possible in order to allow more people enjoy their work?
Absolutely. If developers can accomplish that without compromising on their vision for the game then of course they should be encouraged to do it.

I'm not sure the manner in which you've worded the title or your OP is going to help here, Arcadeheroes. I'd be amazed if anyone would argue in favour of the first point and I'd be curious to know what articles you've read elsewhere that make it.

To touch on a few games you mentioned in the context of the second argument with some back-of-the-napkin comments...

A reasonable option for the Souls series would be to do a balance pass on the enemies in-game, wherein their attack damage is reduced without changing their patterns. An unreasonable one would be to remove the mechanic whereby enemies in the area respawn when you use a bonfire.

Reducing the difficulty via the level design of Super Meat Boy to accommodate lower skill levels would wholly compromise the experience and most definitely wouldn't be considered reasonable. Adding mid-level checkpoints would be very much reasonable.

Cuphead already has an easy mode in all but name - Simple Mode.

nix · 08-11-2020 4:47pm

God no

Heck, im against anything other than one mode, easy/hard modes just break the game balance. If you wanna be lazy and experience the story by breezing through the game with zero effort then use cheats or watch someone play it on twitch, same thing..

I'm noticing an increasing trend with games coming out now with them being heavily padded, which is a result of most people playing the games on easy, breezing through them and then complaining they're too short :rolleyes:

It's a "game", it's should be a challenge.

Arcadeheroes · 08-11-2020 4:57pm

gizmo wrote: »

Should all games be required to have an Easy Mode?
Absolutely not. Advocating for such a requirement is lunacy.

Should developers strive to include variable difficult settings where possible in order to allow more people enjoy their work?
Absolutely. If developers can accomplish that without compromising on their vision for the game then of course they should be encouraged to do it.

I'm not sure the manner in which you've worded the title or your OP is going to help here, Arcadeheroes. I'd be amazed if anyone would argue in favour of the first point and I'd be curious to know what articles you've read elsewhere that make it.

To touch on a few games you mentioned in the context of the second argument with some back-of-the-napkin comments...

A reasonable option for the Souls series would be to do a balance pass on the enemies in-game, wherein their attack damage is reduced without changing their patterns. An unreasonable one would be to remove the mechanic whereby enemies in the area respawn when you use a bonfire.

Reducing the difficulty via the level design of Super Meat Boy to accommodate lower skill levels would wholly compromise the experience and most definitely wouldn't be considered reasonable. Adding mid-level checkpoints would be very much reasonable.

Cuphead already has an easy mode in all but name - Simple Mode.

Apologies for the wording of the title , my first original one was too wordy :pac:

The one that always comes to mind is the Sekiro one by forbes

https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidthier/2019/03/28/sekiro-shadows-dies-twice-needs-to-respect-its-players-and-add-an-easy-mode/?sh=545256616393

I am going to use FromSoft games as an example here , but I think if you tamper with the way the souls games and sekiro are designed you lose too much on what the games are truly meant to be.

Souls series theme is the ending cycle of death , it lasted so long in peoples memories for almost 12 years because it took the risk of trusting the player to get through areas and bosses on their own .

A comparison I want to bring up is from Mike Matel from
Cinemassacre (although this might open another can of worms) is the rewind feature in classic Nintendo classic games/ Capcom and Konami collection games that were released over the years with the Castlevania, Megaman , Nes remix games .

outside of the Mario series , Mega Man is my favourite platformer of all time especially Mega Man 1 -3 and Mega Man X

In the Mega Man Legacy games you can Spam the hell out of the rewind feature and complete the game .

Now if someone was playing Mega Man for the first time and using this rewind feature , can they truly enjoy the Mega Man series?, even if they were spamming the rewind feature till the very end of the game ?

It essentially becomes a very different game , and loses what makes it as great as a series at it is , cause its difficulty is designed with the gameplay .

Yes Cuphead has a simple mode , but people who play that mode compared to the way its supposed to be played , are two very different games and got two very different experiences finishing it .

There is so much to love about the design and effort that went into creating such different variety of bosses , I simply cant see people appreciating it playing on a easy mode which to me is insulting the devs hardwork they put creating such amazing different experiences of games .

08-11-2020 5:33pm

Icyseanfitz wrote: »

a game should be whatever the developers imagine it to be and not curtailed to suit everyone in my opinion

A game should cater to the consumer, whomever marketing (or game designer) decides that should be.

The people paying the bills call the shots, not the other way around

nix · 08-11-2020 5:57pm

Deleted User wrote: »

A game should cater to the consumer, whomever marketing (or game designer) decides that should be.

The people paying the bills call the shots, not the other way around

08-11-2020 6:01pm

[Deleted User] wrote: »

A game should cater to the consumer, whomever marketing (or game designer) decides that should be.

The people paying the bills call the shots, not the other way around

Great artists don't pander to the audience, they give them something they didn't know they wanted.

Greyfox · 08-11-2020 6:18pm

Arcadeheroes wrote: »

In the Mega Man Legacy games you can Spam the hell out of the rewind feature and complete the game .

Now if someone was playing Mega Man for the first time and using this rewind feature , can they truly enjoy the Mega Man series?, even if they were spamming the rewind feature till the very end of the game ?

It essentially becomes a very different game , and loses what makes it as great as a series at it is , cause its difficulty is designed with the gameplay .

The days of playing Mega man with no rewind are long gone as people are not going to have the patience these days due to their been too many other games to play. I played Uncharted 4 and Assassins Creed Oddessy on easy mode, I'm glad I did as I think both games are not good enough to play on normal mode. The problem with easy mode is the fact that it's shoved in your face before you have started the game rather than starting the game on normal and having something in the options that can help you but only if you actually need help.

Azza · 08-11-2020 6:20pm

I think easy difficulty modes should be available in all future games next generation...as a €9.99 DLC pack . Muhahahahahahahahahahhah...MUHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH. :pac:

nix · 08-11-2020 6:29pm

Greyfox wrote: »

Uncharted 4 and Assassins Creed Oddessy on easy mode,

They are both perfect examples of games that become broke as a result of multiple difficulties. If the devs only had to worry about one game mode, the game play would be more polished and fun.

Now dont get me wrong, when i say all game modes should be just one difficulty, i dont mean that difficulty should mostly be hard like say some people might look at Dark souls games, or as above mentioned the mega man like games of old, some games should be easier than others, but i strongly believe them being one difficulty would be better for all.

_CreeD_ · 08-11-2020 6:42pm

The difficulty level someone else plays on should have ZERO impact on your own sense of achievement, if it does impact you that speaks more to your own fragile ego and/or sense of importance than anything else. I look at gaming over the last few decades and on my scale they've already en-masse turned to easy mode. Console controllers limited options so games got slower, FOVs smaller, hitboxes larger and on anything involving aim with a console controller you have aim-assist/aim-botting. Don't think that because you finished a SoulsBorne that you are at the pinnacle of gaming skill and therefore can dictate that for any one else. From my PoV gaming has become easier over time to allow for more and more casual players, so what? It means more people enjoying a past time that when I started had you looked down on as a freak. I choose to play in ways to avoid the factors I've mentioned above if I can but I am glad that those who want or need them have them there. My choice is mine, theirs is theirs, and the more developers cater for this the better - required? No...strongly encouraged? Yes

Robert ninja · 08-11-2020 6:43pm

I don't think people realise the amount of work it can take it implement difficulty selections. If you're demanding every full feature game have a difficulty selection you could be bloating their budget by a nontrivial amount depending on the game. Some games like Demon's Souls incorporate ways to make the game easier or harder within the game itself rather than just a selection at the beginning. To change that would fundamentally alter the game.

A lot of difficulty selections can also go wrong. Harder difficulty settings may increase the severity of difficulty spikes the game might already suffer from and easy modes can teach bad habits that eventually, even on easy mode, begin to harshly punish the user for not understanding a core combat technique or strategy that the user would've learned earlier on a standard or hard difficulty. This can lead to incredible frustration later in the game when the user just wanted to coast through it. I saw this firsthand for a DMC4 stream (Human mode & all assistance inputs on) where the player didn't understand you could time special grab attacks on bosses and enemies until the final boss where he needed it. He outright said it spoiled the entire game up until then. He also didn't understand some dodging basics because he didn't need to for most of the game and because of that he got completely wrecked over and over towards the end. He left with a terrible impression of that game.

Arcadeheroes · 08-11-2020 7:05pm

_CreeD_ wrote: »

The difficulty level someone else plays on should have ZERO impact on your own sense of achievement, if it does impact you that speaks more to your own fragile ego and/or sense of importance than anything else. I look at gaming over the last few decades and on my scale they've already en-masse turned to easy mode. Console controllers limited options so games got slower, FOVs smaller, hitboxes larger and on anything involving aim with a console controller you have aim-assist/aim-botting. Don't think that because you finished a SoulsBorne that you are at the pinnacle of gaming skill and therefore can dictate that for any one else. From my PoV gaming has become easier over time to allow for more and more casual players, so what? It means more people enjoying a past time that when I started had you looked down on as a freak. I choose to play in ways to avoid the factors I've mentioned above if I can but I am glad that those who want or need them have them there. My choice is mine, theirs is theirs, and the more developers cater for this the better - required? No...strongly encouraged? Yes

If your comment is directed at me , you have completely missed the point I was trying to make

Greyfox · 08-11-2020 8:09pm

nix wrote: »

but i strongly believe them being one difficulty would be better for all.

Something has to be done for different skill levels though, particularly FP shooters. Games need to cater for someone playing games on hard for 20 years as well as someone new to games.

Azza · 08-11-2020 8:13pm

I mostly agree that their should be optional difficulty levels if that doesn't conflict with the game designers intent.

Take Doom Eternal. Its a challenging game with fantastic combat, but its got several difficult modes and an option to get damage reducing super amour if you die a few times. Regardless of the difficulty level you can play as the designers intended the game to played (though you likely won't if your playing on easy but you can if you want)

Something like Sekiro though, I think the designer intent was a challenging game where a core part of the experience is dying and learning from your mistakes and getting a little better each time and then gaining huge satisfaction when you eventually triumph. Its a core gameplay loop the designers intended and the game would be significantly diminished in my opinion if that wasn't there.

If its okay to not like challenging games, but I think in that case just say a game isn't for you and move along, there is a only a few game's like that, so you won't be missing out on too many.

Robert ninja · 08-11-2020 8:31pm

Greyfox wrote: »

Games need to cater for someone playing games on hard for 20 years as well as someone new to games.

But they don't. There's a thing called market demographic. Not every game has to cater to every taste, experience, skill, free time, age or sex.

The "solution" to a problem that doesn't exist isn't to change every game to be as wide appealing as possible. There has to be some agency on the consumer's part here. People who are casual gamers or have the reaction speed of a sloth tend not to get into hyper competitive or notoriously difficult games and rightly so - they're not the core demographic the game is designed for.

I don't expect games made for children to have an Ultra Nightmare mode and so people looking for an easy going experience shouldn't demand the likes of Sekiro to have an easy one either. Just choose a different game if it's too hard. That's easy considering there's a dizzying amount of choice these days.

johnny_ultimate · 08-11-2020 8:41pm

The key thing is that not everyone has the same level of skill or ability. There can be an assumption that ‘if I can beat it, everyone can’ which is simply not the case. People’s motor functions differ; experience with games differ; their abilities differ. It’s not just laziness or impatience - people can hit walls that are just a touch too high for them to overcome no matter how hard they try, and that can be very frustrating.

To me, an ideal ‘easy mode’ for a Souls game isn’t labelled as such. If you start the game the normal way, the game is exactly as the designers intended. But in a menu there are options for those who need it. There’s a clear disclaimer saying something like ‘the default is highly recommended, but here are some options for those who need them’. As gizmo suggested, it would be things like tweaks to damage levels or maybe a slightly more generous parry window. Things you wouldn’t ever need to worry about or be prompted about if you just wanted to play the game the normal way. Precisely how Pathologic 2 did it.

As I said, there was definitely a time I’d have been far more firmly in the ‘don’t mess with a designer’s intention’ camp. But after seeing games manage to be more welcoming without even slightly compromising their core challenge, it’s absolutely changed my mind. I love Souls games and don’t want their fundamental challenge to change - equally I’d be delighted if there were unobtrusive ways for more people to see those wonderful games through to their end.

Also: There’s a big difference between a fully realised game with completely optional difficulty settings (e.g. Celeste), and a half-baked, under-designed game that attempts to appeal to everyone and anyone without having a core vision at the centre of it (e.g. The Avengers or whatever).

_CreeD_ · 08-11-2020 9:25pm

Arcadeheroes wrote: »

If your comment is directed at me , you have completely missed the point I was trying to make

Not at any one directly, just at a tone that was building imho.

Heres Johnny · 08-11-2020 9:32pm

Should movies have a less complex storyline so everyone can follow?

Should puzzles be easier so everyone can solve?

Should school exams be easier so everyone can pass (well, they are nowadays but that's a different story)

Should games be easier so everyone can finish

Answer to all the above is no, they should be as the developer/driving force behind it intends it to be. User doesn't dictate in any of the above situations.

Jimson · 08-11-2020 9:34pm

Playing Bioshock infinite on PC at the moment, even on normal its way too easy. Had to stick it on Hard.

Potential-Monke · 08-11-2020 10:47pm

Speaking from my own experience, and most on here will know I'm not a fan of the From games, but rather than an easy mode, there are options that could be enabled to make it more accessible. My main gripe with those games was spending x amount of time going through an area, getting to the boss, getting 1 hit killed (because you don't know the patterns, etc) and having to go all the way back and fight through the same enemies in the same places again before getting there, and getting 1 hit killed again. That's my main gripe. If there was an option to have a restart just before the boss again, that would be extremely welcome to me, and I'd most likely push through the hard bosses then.

I know someone will come back and say "but you can find a nearer bonfire/checkpoint", but that's not always the case. It's the repetition that gets me, and not for the bosses, but the grunts en route. And it's not just From games, it's any game regardless of difficulty, if it makes you go through the same route with the same enemies in the same places doing the same things, it just gets tiring.

So not necessarily a reduced difficulty, but easier navigation and better checkpoints would make From games a bit more accessible. As for an easy mode, if it's possible to do it, it should be an option, and they can go the Wolfenstein or other game routes where it puts a childs hat and pacifier. As for games like Super Meat Boy, Hollow Knight, Dead Cells, etc, I don't know what could be added to them to make them more accessible, as they're literally built around quick reflexes.

Greyfox · 08-11-2020 11:00pm

Robert ninja wrote: »

But they don't. There's a thing called market demographic. Not every game has to cater to every taste, experience, skill, free time, age or sex.

Well if they want the game to sell well then it makes sense to try to cater to all skill levels.

Retr0gamer · 08-11-2020 11:15pm

But dark souls has an easy mode? It's called coop.

Retr0gamer · 08-11-2020 11:21pm

Potential-Monke wrote: »

Speaking from my own experience, and most on here will know I'm not a fan of the From games, but rather than an easy mode, there are options that could be enabled to make it more accessible. My main gripe with those games was spending x amount of time going through an area, getting to the boss, getting 1 hit killed (because you don't know the patterns, etc) and having to go all the way back and fight through the same enemies in the same places again before getting there, and getting 1 hit killed again. That's my main gripe. If there was an option to have a restart just before the boss again, that would be extremely welcome to me, and I'd most likely push through the hard bosses then.

I know someone will come back and say "but you can find a nearer bonfire/checkpoint", but that's not always the case. It's the repetition that gets me, and not for the bosses, but the grunts en route. And it's not just From games, it's any game regardless of difficulty, if it makes you go through the same route with the same enemies in the same places doing the same things, it just gets tiring.

So not necessarily a reduced difficulty, but easier navigation and better checkpoints would make From games a bit more accessible. As for an easy mode, if it's possible to do it, it should be an option, and they can go the Wolfenstein or other game routes where it puts a childs hat and pacifier. As for games like Super Meat Boy, Hollow Knight, Dead Cells, etc, I don't know what could be added to them to make them more accessible, as they're literally built around quick reflexes.

I think in this case if I resist the reflex to call you a disgusting casual maybe just these types of games aren't for you. The repeat, learn and get get better by building on the knowledge you gain from repeating each section is a very valid for of videogame design, it's how most old games work. However it might just not be for some one like you and I kind of think in that case if it's not clicking you should move on.

There might be pressure on you from people to experience the game telling you it's one of the greatest videogames of all time but if you aren't enjoying it then why force yourself. Plenty of other games to play that will suit you better. I doubt an easy mode is going to help you enjoy the game, especially when a massive part of the game experience is about over coming its challenges.

I might come across as aiming this at you but equally can aim this at myself. For instance Spiderman I recognise as a damn fine and well made game but the ubisoft style of game design just isn't for me so I move on to other games.

Potential-Monke · 09-11-2020 1:11am

Oh I agree, and we've argued debated this before. I've given plenty (imo) time for these games to click, but because of the repetition I know they're not for me. I'll still give them a go though, and have yet to try Sekiro (but not willing to spend more than €20 to find out). I'd give all of them a go if I got them for free!

But again, I think with a better checkpoint system, I would have lasted longer in all From games I've tried.

K.O.Kiki · 09-11-2020 1:35am

Easy modes are bad - if used as a "blunt instrument".

However: it is very hard to design a game in such a way that the player learns how it works.
Thus the tempting option for game designers/producers, stuck for dev time, is to simply change health/damage values to make clearing a challenge easier/harder.
This can have an adverse effect in that if the player keeps playing the game on Easy mode, they could arrive at a point where they are understanding the game's mechanics but are no longer experiencing a challenge; or vice-versa, by playing on Hard mode they are constantly running out of health/ammo (resources) because the game was balanced around "Normal".

The best way to approach "Easy" mode IMHO is to do it Resident Evil 4-style:
Never tell the player you're making it easy/give them the option to choose Easy mode - however if they keep dying, are missing shots or running low on ammo constantly, gradually ramp down the enemy AI / increase the chance of rewards so that they can learn the game.

Regarding From Software games:
People (including me!) make a simple mistake in them, which is they try to fight everything!
But that isn't the game.
You're really learning patterns & routes, and I think people simply don't put in the time to understand the games' flow.

The greatest thing about From Software's games are, once you've spent a decent amount of time in them, you actually understand the maps, learn how to navigate through mobs & around monsters.
Contrasting to open-world games (even GTA or The Witcher), you can tiptoe your way around a map intuitively - you never "follow the dotted line", eyes glued to a GPS in the corner of the screen.
Sure, you will die a lot - but a decent amount of your deaths are due to haste; not entering the flow, not learning the pattern.

I am still running through Monster Hunter World: Iceborne. I'm encountering new monsters.
Today, I met Barioth & it utterly wrecked me - I carted 3 times without really damaging it.
So I took a moment, and realised that I wasn't fighting it correctly - I was too hasty, didn't look at its patterns. I also neglected to use Armorskin & Immunizer, hastening my deaths.
And thus, the second time I fought it, I didn't cart once - I simply took it slower, waited for attacks to dodge, felt it out.

At the victory screen, I felt elated - I beat it because I learned the game, not because I said "hey, take it easy on me!"

quokula · 09-11-2020 1:55am

Anything with progression to an ending should have difficulty levels.

Something like Tetris or Civilization is fine because the challenge is the game and you get better and play it again and you don’t lose anything if you lose.

But to deny the player access to later content or the conclusion to the story in a product they’ve paid for, on the basis of motor skills, really goes against the kind of accessibility we should be trying to encourage in the modern world.

Personally if I die more than once or twice in a game I will usually turn the difficulty down. I play games for entertainment and relaxation, not to prove myself, and I don’t want to waste my time redoing the same thing repeatedly. While I’m sure mastering Sekiro or whatever is satisfying for many people, personally if I want to put in hard work learning a new skill I’ll focus on something with real world applications over something that will be lost when I move to the next game.

ozmo · 09-11-2020 2:05am

Really liked the visuals on Cuphead - but not enough for me to spend weeks learning off by heart the long attack sequences required to complete the game.

Waste of 20 quid.

gizmo · 09-11-2020 3:45am

Arcadeheroes wrote: »

Apologies for the wording of the title , my first original one was too wordy :pac:

The one that always comes to mind is the Sekiro one by forbes

https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidthier/2019/03/28/sekiro-shadows-dies-twice-needs-to-respect-its-players-and-add-an-easy-mode/?sh=545256616393

I am going to use FromSoft games as an example here , but I think if you tamper with the way the souls games and sekiro are designed you lose too much on what the games are truly meant to be.

Souls series theme is the ending cycle of death , it lasted so long in peoples memories for almost 12 years because it took the risk of trusting the player to get through areas and bosses on their own .

No worries at all, I had a feeling this was going to be the one referenced which is why I suggested the underlying argument should be geared more towards "should include" rather than "required to include".

The Souls example is a good one though as it allows the focus to be on what the aim of the easy mode could be. Take your average Souls player, they're going to have a particular skill level and a particular tolerance for deaths in-game through which they'll learn and get better. The type of player to which Easy Mode would probably appeal would be someone who would generally have lower levels across these variables. A reasonable easy mode implementation in Souls should aim to offer the same relative level of challenge to the latter as it does the former. Practically speaking, it shouldn't allow people to get through the game without dying, it should just allow them to get through it dying roughly the same number of times as a more skilled player. This would be accomplished by making whatever balance changes would be required in order to account for the points I mention above.

Not only is this important to preserve the theme of the series as you've described but also to ensure that any lessons which need to be learned along the way can still be taught.

Ian Hamilton touches on this in the tweet thread linked in the Forbes article, even invoking Miyazaki as he does so, I'd recommend checking it out.

Arcadeheroes wrote: »

Yes Cuphead has a simple mode , but people who play that mode compared to the way its supposed to be played , are two very different games and got two very different experiences finishing it .

There is so much to love about the design and effort that went into creating such different variety of bosses , I simply cant see people appreciating it playing on a easy mode which to me is insulting the devs hardwork they put creating such amazing different experiences of games .

See I'd consider that a prime example of a game where the developers made a reasonable effort to make the game more accessible without compromising on their vision or the experience for the more skilled players.

From the players perspective, what's important here is they still got to experience the game, albeit a curated one designed to allow for their relevant skill level. If given the choice between that and not really being able to engage in the game at all, I know which one I'd appreciate.

Retr0gamer · 09-11-2020 10:35am

The Phantom Pain wrote: »

I personally think a game where the make and break is tied only to its difficulty mode is a weak game to begin with and I reckon the reason FS don't add easier modes is because they're worried that people might find that out. I have not played Bloodborne or a Souls game because all I hear from its fans is about the difficulty. I never hear any praise for the story, characters, lore, level design. Nothing. All I hear from the gitgud type people is how difficult the games are and how badass they are for beating it. Each gameplay video I've seen looks boring, gloomy and janky with the exception of Sekiro where they at least made an effort to make it look somewhat stylistic.

Kind of have to disagree heavily with everything here. Just because a game is difficult doesn't mean it's a bad game. Quite the opposite.

There's a massive difference between difficult and challenging and frustration. Frustration comes from bad and unfair game design. Having a fair difficulty and challenge though, that's an art and one of the toughest things to get right with game design. From Software games fit into the later. They are really well designed and their challenge rather than frustration is testament to that. Many modern games are poorly designed and offer no challenge but overly compensate for that with crutches like recharging health and overly generous checkpoints.

As for Souls games offering nothing but difficulty, nothing could be further from the truth. Some of this can be levelled at the marketing of the games. Dark Souls prepare to die doubled down on promoting the difficulty but if difficulty was all these games offered they wouldn't be regarded as some of the best games of the last 15 years. They are excellently crafted and designed games, they are a masterclass is level design and enemy design. No story or lore? How come there are sop many youtubers that have based their entire career on exploring the lore and story of these games. The world design and atmosphere is incredible as well and the dark fantasy aesthetic has been praised. And as for the community being all git gud and elitist, the series has got a pretty great community that will help you through the game as they just want other people to experience and love the games they discovered and love.

The misconceptions people have about the game baffle me. The way they just totally dismiss it as if it being difficult is an insult to them. I think the marketing and the press are the biggest issue here, bleating on an on about how hard the games are. They make it seem like Souls games are just this big troll game where they do nothing but punish the player. It makes them sound something like 'I wanna be the guy' when really they are more an expansion on classic japanese action games like Castlevania, Megaman X or Super Metroid where the focus is on tight mechanics, level and encounter design.

K.O.Kiki · 09-11-2020 10:45am

It's like people intentionally confuse Dark Souls with I Wanna Be The Guy.

Retr0gamer · 09-11-2020 10:50am

The Phantom Pain wrote: »

I literally never said that.

It's in relation to this:

The Phantom Pain wrote: »

I personally think a game where the make and break is tied only to its difficulty mode is a weak game to begin with and I reckon the reason FS don't add easier modes is because they're worried that people might find that out.

Which I heavily disagree with. I'd be of the opinion that a game that can balance difficulty is in fact a example of great design, of which From Software are masters of.

Arcadeheroes · 09-11-2020 11:57am

The Phantom Pain wrote: »

No. What you said I said and what I actually said are two different things.

I said a game where high difficulty is the only thing it has to offer, to the point where without it all the other aspects fall apart, show weak game design. I specifically noted that the reason why FS games do not appeal to me is because story, lore, characters, level design seem to be an afterthought and this is proven by the fact that all I hear from the fans that hype the games up so much are how hard the bosses are.

I never said a game being difficult makes it inherently bad.

All those aspects of Souls games are far from being an afterthought , and you cannot make an assumption like that based on not playing the games nor listening to what other people who have played have said .

Level design , especially in Dark Souls is all connected from ringing the two bells , to anor Londo to New Londo , its one seemless world with each path you take is covered in Envoirment Lore , and the characters you meet , the items you pick up all tell the story how DS world came to be .

If everything was an afterthought the likes of VaatiVidya , Epic Name Bro and other youtubers who based their entire youtube channel on almost 10 years and still given story details about the game .

Silent Hill 2 you are told nothing aswell , nothing is ever explained to the player and its perhaps the best story ever written in a videogame that rivals the best of movies has to offer .

For people who play games for a story , dark souls offers it if you seek it. and for people who just want to play a game without Cutscenes getting in the way , Dark Souls offers that too .

Its a masterfully designed game .

Should all games be required to have an Easy Mode ?

Comments