The director should have reasons for the difficulty of the game. Celeste is a Perfect example. It’s hard but it lets you learn and allows you to try again easily even if what you are doing is hard. Hard games that punish you and make you walk for 20-30 mins just so you can learn a few new moves the boss does can be incredibly frustrating. Many people who play these games eventually look at videos online to help after multiple tries because just “getting there” is extremely time consuming. A lot of games have normalized looking things up and that is disappointing as someone who would rather figure it out on my own. But wasting 30 mins to be killed in 2-3 hits from multiple stage bosses is not enjoyable IMHO.
I think Kojima gets it. For a lot of players, esp. on the more cinematic games, the story is the main driver and the action is how it progresses. The games I’ve played that were ordeals are often the ones I’ve given up on. It’s the ones you can start on story mode with, enjoy the narrative and then re-play at the harder levels that I’ve stuck with.
I’ll keep saying it: I already have a job. I want to play a game to unwind.
Implementing a wide gamut of difficulty settings is also an accessibility feature, and allows people with certain physical or mental challenges the opportunity to enjoy your game firsthand. Why would you want to deny your audience this opportunity?
You don’t have to play difficult games. Not everything has to cater to a wide audience. Most of today’s re-boots and sequals were from stories that catered to a niche audience only to lose its appeal by going too mainstream…
Adding a difficulty slider is easy, doesn’t take much time, doesn’t change much about the experience, and allows more people to enjoy your media.
So leaving it out is lazy game development.
Niche audiences is fine, gatekeeping isn’t.
Adding a difficulty slider is easy
[CITATION NEEDED]
It seems pretty clear you don’t have any idea what you’re talking about from a game development standpoint. Difficulty is the entire driving mechanism behind gameplay and you can’t just add multiple versions of that trivially. Even Bethesda’s classic “bump up the health” stuff isn’t a trivial thing to implement. Just come on with this.
The Souls games are easy. They’re just easy in a way that makes you a part of the game/world. You don’t just click a button in the menu. You earn it by paying attention. The point is, every player comes out satisfied of having accomplished something. Either they directly defeated a challenge through brute force or they looked around and founds it’s weakness, or got stronger to overcome it. It makes it earned.
Sure, story games the story is maintained with an easier difficulty and that’s fine. However, games where the act of playing forms the story are made worse by this. I’m all for difficulty modes in games where it makes sense, but a lot of people would turn down the difficulty in a Souls game and end up with a boring experience, because they didn’t actually try to meet it at its level.
Just like paintings, there’s a place for slop that just looks pretty and things that engage you. If you go into a museum and complain that an artist challenged you, that’s on you, not them.
The Souls games are easy.
To you, maybe.
They’re specifically designed to have easy options for almost every fight. There are very few bosses where you actually need skill, and they’re mostly optional. If you’re paying attention, it’s normally pretty easy to find a pretty easy option to defeat most bosses. Sometimes the game tells you this, like jumping down on the head of the demon at the start of DS1. Usually it doesn’t directly, but there will be hints if you’re reading everything and looking at your environment.
You don’t have to just “git gud” and dodge everything while fighting. That’s an option, but not the only one. Most people hear “Souls games are hard” and they think this is the only option, and they don’t look for more. If this is you, then you were mislead. The community has ruined the game for so many people by acting like there’s a huge skill barrier that you need to overcome, instead of the reality where the game just wants you to pay attention to the world/lore.
Thank you for this post. It opened my mind to giving a souls game a try.
Sekiro was the one that made the genre click for me after trying and failing to get into DS and Bloodborne.
It is still my favorite game of all time, and now I really enjoy the other From Software games.
Sekiro
Sadly, not available for any of my devices. A reason to get myself an Xbox, I guess.
What devices do you have? It’s available on PC, and it looks like PS4 and Xbox One.
I do agree though, it’s probably the easiest to get into. The Shenobi tools are more explicit counters to certain enemy types, and exploration is fast and easy. It potentially has the highest skill level of any of the games, but that’s far from required, even for the optional bosses —only to show off or challenge runs.
And then there’s Yoko Taro, who instead opts for the emotional difficulty in his games
I’m all for easy difficulty options in games, but I’m never, ever going to use them. I just can’t motivate myself to play if I’m not accomplishing something.
Do you feel like you’re accomplishing something by playing a difficult game?
Personally I do not, and that’s fine. I play games to take a break from accomplishing things.
Absolutely, yes. Good video games have a reward structure that real life is lacking.
In real life, you just get fucked over and over with no rewards.
Some of us aren’t even have sex either, I just get no rewards.
I know a cheat for that! Try dating apps. The other dating apps. 😏
Reading this thread has re-confirmed that gatekeepers are a blight on humanity.
I will cheat in your sacred games and you can’t stop me. I’ll make my own rules. What are you gonna do about it, break into my house and steal my computer?
I don’t think you’re getting the point here. If you buy a game you can do whatever you want with it. Same goes with developers, it’s their creation and they can do whatever they want with it. It doesn’t have to please everyone.
“it’s my cafe, my creation, and I don’t like disabled ramps. I just want to make good food and I don’t have to please everyone”
Seems a bit unfair to me
This is a very bad and damaging take and undermines real accessibility options in games.
You are conflating two different things. The game is the food and the difficulty is a nuanced flavor that results from the individual ingredients. You are arguing that the flavor of the dish or the way it is prepared should be changed for everyone to suit your tastes.
Accessibility ramps are structural and in no way related to the food. I in no way want to be seen as arguing against accessibility because I am a strong believer in it myself. But accessibility comes in the form of color blind modes, subtitles, ability to change or rebind controls. Actual structural issues to the game that allow you to engage with it as it has been designed.
I do not suppose I will get through to people that have already taken up this position, but I cannot allow it to go unchallenged. Difficulty IS NOT (*necessarily) accessibility.
If you want to dislike a game: fine. If you want to critique a game: fine. If you want to say, “I think this game is bad”: fine. But do not try to conflate your own distaste with the difficulty level as some accessibility issue.
For a game where difficulty is based on reaction time then it is accessibility. Your whole page of arguments is based on that ableist assumption and doesn’t hold up.
Food and cafe is just an extreme example, you don’t have to discredit the idea based on the specifics of a cafe. It was supposed to make you think about the problem from the perspective of someone who feels excluded which you didn’t do. You just used to to further your agenda with emotive language like “bad and damaging”. It’s a little bit pathetic actually when all people are asking for is a slider
A game isn’t a public service. There are many games where part of the experience is that everyone has to go through the same or similar difficulty and the learning curve involved in that. If that isn’t something that you can manage then you don’t have to play it.
If anything, demo versions should be more readily available so that you don’t end up buying something you can’t return.
Who decided that only things that are public services need to be accessible? Why is everyone latched onto that like it’s a given.
If your a dev and you have x hits to kill thing x and you don’t put in a tiny bit of extra effort to multiply that by a difficulty slider “because of art” then I’m going to say you’re a bit of a dick.
Games are barely art anyway. Most are just a toy that you play with for a bit to waste some time
That’s not what people are saying, but the entitled attitude here makes it seem as if games are a mandatory interaction.
If you are a game dev and you decide that part of the experience of your game is the difficulty, so be it. Art was never and isn’t something that pleases everyone. You can call them a dick but you don’t have to engage in what they produce.
That is such bullshit. There is such large variety of games out there that still give meaningful experiences to players that calling all of them “barely art” is just wrong.
I wasn’t expecting this post to bring out this kind of animosity in people. Jesus fuckin’ christ.
Video games are not a public service, there is no such thing as a 100% universally enjoyed video game for a reason. It’s ok that there are different types of video games, folks, be them too hard or too easy for your tastes, it’s kind of stupid to throw these kinds of stones about it.
I mean, is every book supposed to be palatable to everyone? Are we all supposed to feel the exact same way about every piece of art? This is like being mad that Guardians of The Galaxy involved sci-fi and super heroes and wasn’t a WWII documentary because that’s what you’d have preferred to watch.
Games, like movies, are easily consumed but difficult to create. As a result, everyone and their grandma can critique them and publish on the Internet which only further self-selects for the highly opinionated to do so.
But not all opinions are equal. You can be well studied in your field and generally intelligent, but if you don’t have a relevant background in the humanities and the sciences, you can have complex reasoning but without having the depth, the breadth, and the relevance in the analysis.
Case in point the first replier. The analogy is fine and the deductive reasoning is self-consistent, but they didn’t show the relevance to game design. (Ie. Why must the author make the text size bigger for people who can’t enjoy smaller text, and why must the same apply to games.)
That’s why gamers seem to be notorious for having takes that miss the trees for the forest.
(I am aware that I’m very much at risk of committing this very error with my post.)
Exactly. Not all opinions are equal. If you suck at games, you shouldn’t even get an opinion, you should get a different hobby.
I’m not trying to disagreeing with you. But that’s the thing, being “good” at a game isn’t among the most important qualifications for insightful analysis which is why gamers tend to make poor takes.
The important qualifications are experience with analysis and formal knowledge in the arts, humanities, and some of the sciences. The YouTuber Noah Caldwell-Gervais is a good example. The guy sucks ass at twitch mechanics (ie. playing games) but he’s extremely well-read and has extensive knowledge on many domains so he makes insightful analysis.
Miyazaki doesn’t even play his own games and probably sucks just as much ass at twitch mechanics but he’s able to consistently direct amazing games because of his extensive knowledge and experience apart from playing well.
Some books are written in smaller text than others. Some people have difficulties reading small text. Some people argue the enjoyment of such books is based on the small text. Others disagree and want to be able to experience the book with larger text.
Get a magnifying glass then.
If s game is too hard, get good at it. If you don’t want to do that, then the game isn’t made for you. You’re not entitled to anything
Dumbass - “easy” mode is the magnifying glass.
Access to color blind mode, input changing, or speciallty is the magnifying glass/fony size change. Dumbing the text down to be more easily understood would be easy mode, dumbass.
Well said, nobody fucks about a book being written too complicated, they just roast readers who don’t understand it while they themself pretend that they understand, after reading interpretations.
Same with games that are hard in my opinion.
And there is a big difference between hard because designed hard, and hard because lazy programmed (stupid hitboxes, glitchy behaviour etc). But same goes for books: a book I would have written would not be hard to understand because it is designed like this, but because I am a confused neurodivergent/ADHS/autism who knows what guy writing my stuff all over the place with dump punctuation.
EDIT: I seem to have upset the try hards. I’m sorry, but playing the the same part of a game over and over again and then beating it doesn’t make you special or give you any real life accolades… It’s a fuckin’ game. People play games to relax.
Games are supposed to be fun. End of conversation. There shouldn’t be a game that some people can’t beat just because they have slower reaction times or have a disability that prevents them from playing something such as Dark Souls. Dark Souls is a great game, but dying to some of the lower level enemies because they kept hit stunning me isn’t fun or cool in the slightest. It’s just fucking annoying. I can’t even imagine what someone who has disabilities or slower reaction times would feel.
Also, quit fucking gatekeeping games people. Jesus.
Video games are art. Just like a movie can be sad or a painting can be distressing, video games are allowed to explore all kinds of emotions.
Sometimes a higher difficulty is part of the artist’s vision. They get to decide how they convey what they want to convey.
One of my favorite new games is UFO 50. It’s a collection of retro-style games where some of them are genuinely very difficult, and others are just do a great job of simulating difficulty. The difficulty drops off right around the time you start to get a handle on the mechanics, so it’s hard to tell if it’s the game getting easier or if you’re just getting better.
So, you believe that gatekeeping games is cool then? That’s so lame. “Gamers” are weird, man.
They are literally saying that games are allowed to be difficult. Do you think horror movies should have a scary slider?
Are… movies an interactive entertainment medium…?
Oh, right. No they’re not. So, that doesn’t really track.
If they’re fucking “allowed” to be difficult, then they’re “allowed” to be easier if the player WANTS that.
Why is interactivity a special trait for this discussion?
Because that’s the part that makes video games, video games.
Sure, it’s what makes them powerfully immersive. I’m asking why being interactive means they have to be the most accessible form of art.
