• jjjalljs@ttrpg.network
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    9 months ago

    I really don’t think that’s a productive use of “gatekeeping”.

    Do you apply this to other mediums? There are books and movies that are difficult to follow, but no one demands that authors and publishers release a simpler edition. Video games seem to be an exception.

    Accessibility like “let me remap the controls” or “give me subtitles” is a whole different beast from “let me be invulnerable”. Treating those as the same is strange to me.

    I’m not particularly against difficulty options. I didn’t have the patience to finish Nine Sols without turning the difficulty down. I wouldnt have felt “gate kept” if I just had to put the game down without finishing it.

    • wia@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      9 months ago

      How is it not gatekeeping?

      You’re saying some people shouldn’t get to play a game where difficulty options are an easy solution.

      A book or a movie isn’t an equivalent comparison. Not too mention there ARE simplified versions of popular books or abridged versions and movie guides and so on anyway.

      Almost all the time this is brought up it’s for single player games. Why do you care if I need a bit more health to get through it? How does that take anyone away from you? I assure you nothing will be lost by allowing people to play it with double the health, or without a arbitrary grinding mechanic that inflates the games length, or whatever really.

      No one is asking for the subject matter to be dumbed down, or for the story to be shallow or transparent.

      Why should someone not get to play through a game because they insisted their hand and can’t dodge anymore?