It would screw up a lot of gameplay and make it less rewarding. Take it from Myazaki: “Had we taken that approach, I don’t think the game would have done what it did, because the sense of achievement that players gain from overcoming these hurdles is such a fundamental part of the experience. Turning down difficulty would strip the game of that joy, which, in my eyes, would break the game itself.” Your right that it’s physically possible, but that defeats the point of the game.
It wouldn’t screw up the gameplay. It might make it less rewarding, but to who? The people who choose to play on an easier difficulty because of their abilities? Probably not.
If the point of a game is to be difficult and require the player to push outside of their comfort zone and outside of their abilities then what’s the point of making it easier. The nice part about not having a difficulty slider is that there’s no button to make a fight easier, you need to work to it. Difficulty settings are good for the majority of games, but most from games benefit off forcing you to suffer.
The way that this discussion always comes down to souls games, and they always get brought up in discussions about difficult and acessibility, highlights exactly what you’re talking about. You’re supposed to lose a whole lot of times before you win, and I think a lot of people who use souls games as an example of an “unfair” game either don’t understand that or refuse to understand that.
Plus, like. Summoning. You can summon two players to back you up. You might still die a lot, but if you’re able to use the game inputs, the controller, you can most likely beat the game with allies to help you out. I think a lot of folks think souls games are single player. Maybe because that’s how streamers play them? Idk.
Also, it’s never Sekiro that get’s brought up, with Sekiro having no Jolly Cooperation and likely being the most challenging of the Souls games.
Plus, like. Summoning. You can summon two players to back you up. You might still die a lot, but if you’re able to use the game inputs, the controller, you can most likely beat the game with allies to help you out.
This so much, plus I think a lot of people underestimate just how good getting summoned is
When playing as a summon in another player’s game you lose nothing when you die but you still get souls/runes from any enemies who die, that’s huge
You can just sit at the bonfire in your game where it’s safe and keep helping other players, getting more souls/runes with no risk of losing anything and maybe even learning the attack patterns of the enemies and the layout of the level along the way
I think a lot of folks think souls games are single player. Maybe because that’s how streamers play them? Idk.
Exactly and it’s a real waste because the co-op is one of the best parts of the game
I think a lot of streamers have bought into the hype that the games are all about difficulty and engaging in the co-op will lessen the experience when I find the opposite is true
The idea that co-op trivializes the game is pretty harmful to the community too, most of the actual tough bosses in the base game of Elden Ring are clearly designed with co-op in mind (Godfrey slamming the entire arena) and in some cases arguably get harder in co-op (Melania and the Fire Giant)
Also, it’s never Sekiro that get’s brought up, with Sekiro having no Jolly Cooperation and likely being the most challenging of the Souls games.
Yeah Armored Core too
I love Armored Core 6 but I only beat the real final boss due to pure dumb luck after like 50 tries and I don’t think I’ll ever beat it again, can’t even get an F or D ranking in the mission replay because I can’t beat it again
Also, it’s never Sekiro that get’s brought up, with Sekiro having no Jolly Cooperation and likely being the most challenging of the Souls games.
There’s a reason it’s the only Fromsoft soulslike I haven’t beat. I’ve been stuck on one of the fights with the main antagonist with the lightning sword for months. And Sekiro doesn’t have a normal leveling system, so you can’t just grind and over level to get past.
The problem with this idea is that it assumes everyone has the exact same capabilities. The game might be completely off the table for some players and I think that would be a real shame because it’s an excellent game.
It doesn’t assume everyone has the same capabilities. If you aren’t capable of beating a boss in er, you find more areas to explore, more sidequests to do and over level yourself and your weapons. It’s going to be harder, albeit more rewarding. Other fs games are different and don’t have the same fail to progress model and with those it becomes a lot harder if you don’t have the capabilities.
There are people that wouldn’t be able to beat it even if they took advantage of all those things. It also means you get two different experiences depending on your abilities. One of them can be a well paced challenging game and the other is a grindy slog that always feels unfair.
I don’t think soulslikes are a game type you will enjoy. Trying and failing to beat the same boss twenty times before you eek out a victory with 1hp left is the normal and expected course of gameplay. It is the core gameplay loop. If you don’t find joy in that then this is not your genre in the same way that people who don’t enjoy jumping on platforms should skip platformers and people who dislike shooting people should probably not invest time in fps games.
Cool story. I played and enjoyed Elden Ring. I don’t think it’s a crazy idea for the people who physically can’t play the game as it is to have the same experience I had.
These arguments always boil down to “it’s not for you” or “get good”. Adding a difficulty option to the game should not be this controversial. The fact the developers considered variable difficulty so much in the design of the game shows that it’s not meritless, but turn that same idea into an accessibility option in the settings and people just vehemently disagree for some reason.
There are some people who can’t beat Celeste, what’s your point? Also I wouldn’t call exploration and finding minibosses grinding. If that’s what grinding means to you than maybe the game just might not be made for you.
The first point is fair, you can’t reasonably expect any one game to be beatable by every single person. But the resistance from the devs seems more philosophical than pragmatic. Difficulty options are often requested, and to their credit it’s something the developers considered a lot more with Elden Ring, why they won’t just add some optional difficulty settings seems bizarre.
As for grinding, no, that’s not what I consider grinding. But you definitely can hit a wall in Elden Ring where you’ve done all the content you can find but still can’t progress anywhere. And running around the map is only interesting for so long. Go to youtube, there’s plenty of ‘best farming location’ videos. Elden Ring can be grindy if you just don’t meet their arbitrary skill level.
Our goal involves creating a compelling progression path for all of our players. There’s a lot of content at launch with even more coming via live service, and we’ll continuously adjust our progression mechanics to give players a sense of accomplishment as they explore all of Battlefront 2
Our goal involves creating a compelling progression path for all of our players. There’s a lot of content at launch with even more coming via live service, and we’ll continuously adjust our progression mechanics to give players a sense of accomplishment as they explore all of Battlefront 2
No because the motivation to make that decision and the solution to the problem are entirely different. With forcing people to buy DLCs the motivation is to make more profit off existing customers and the solution to cut down on the playtime required is giving money to the developers. It’s a pay to progress. Whereas with fromsoft games, the decision to not include difficulty options is an artistic one, not a financial one designed around splitting the game into pieces and requiring users to play to progress. (You could argue all artistic decisions in games are also financial ones because the art in question must market itself by it’s content but that doesn’t make these two scenarios any more similar). Games not providing a easy route through due to artistic decisions and games splitting themselves into segments to maximize profit are not really comparable decisions.
Not really because you not being able to play the game makes fromsoft less money than you being able to beat it. If you could beat it, there’s a chance you might buy the DLC, whereas not being able to complete the game discourages you buying another fromsoft game in the future. This is why elden ring has some level of “easy mode” through co-op summoning, mimic tears and over leveling.
It would screw up a lot of gameplay and make it less rewarding. Take it from Myazaki: “Had we taken that approach, I don’t think the game would have done what it did, because the sense of achievement that players gain from overcoming these hurdles is such a fundamental part of the experience. Turning down difficulty would strip the game of that joy, which, in my eyes, would break the game itself.” Your right that it’s physically possible, but that defeats the point of the game.
It wouldn’t screw up the gameplay. It might make it less rewarding, but to who? The people who choose to play on an easier difficulty because of their abilities? Probably not.
If the point of a game is to be difficult and require the player to push outside of their comfort zone and outside of their abilities then what’s the point of making it easier. The nice part about not having a difficulty slider is that there’s no button to make a fight easier, you need to work to it. Difficulty settings are good for the majority of games, but most from games benefit off forcing you to suffer.
The way that this discussion always comes down to souls games, and they always get brought up in discussions about difficult and acessibility, highlights exactly what you’re talking about. You’re supposed to lose a whole lot of times before you win, and I think a lot of people who use souls games as an example of an “unfair” game either don’t understand that or refuse to understand that.
Plus, like. Summoning. You can summon two players to back you up. You might still die a lot, but if you’re able to use the game inputs, the controller, you can most likely beat the game with allies to help you out. I think a lot of folks think souls games are single player. Maybe because that’s how streamers play them? Idk.
Also, it’s never Sekiro that get’s brought up, with Sekiro having no Jolly Cooperation and likely being the most challenging of the Souls games.
This so much, plus I think a lot of people underestimate just how good getting summoned is
When playing as a summon in another player’s game you lose nothing when you die but you still get souls/runes from any enemies who die, that’s huge
You can just sit at the bonfire in your game where it’s safe and keep helping other players, getting more souls/runes with no risk of losing anything and maybe even learning the attack patterns of the enemies and the layout of the level along the way
Exactly and it’s a real waste because the co-op is one of the best parts of the game
I think a lot of streamers have bought into the hype that the games are all about difficulty and engaging in the co-op will lessen the experience when I find the opposite is true
The idea that co-op trivializes the game is pretty harmful to the community too, most of the actual tough bosses in the base game of Elden Ring are clearly designed with co-op in mind (Godfrey slamming the entire arena) and in some cases arguably get harder in co-op (Melania and the Fire Giant)
Yeah Armored Core too
I love Armored Core 6 but I only beat the real final boss due to pure dumb luck after like 50 tries and I don’t think I’ll ever beat it again, can’t even get an F or D ranking in the mission replay because I can’t beat it again
God AC6 is so fucking hard. I straight up game up and went back to Elden Ring.
There’s a reason it’s the only Fromsoft soulslike I haven’t beat. I’ve been stuck on one of the fights with the main antagonist with the lightning sword for months. And Sekiro doesn’t have a normal leveling system, so you can’t just grind and over level to get past.
The problem with this idea is that it assumes everyone has the exact same capabilities. The game might be completely off the table for some players and I think that would be a real shame because it’s an excellent game.
It doesn’t assume everyone has the same capabilities. If you aren’t capable of beating a boss in er, you find more areas to explore, more sidequests to do and over level yourself and your weapons. It’s going to be harder, albeit more rewarding. Other fs games are different and don’t have the same fail to progress model and with those it becomes a lot harder if you don’t have the capabilities.
There are people that wouldn’t be able to beat it even if they took advantage of all those things. It also means you get two different experiences depending on your abilities. One of them can be a well paced challenging game and the other is a grindy slog that always feels unfair.
I don’t think soulslikes are a game type you will enjoy. Trying and failing to beat the same boss twenty times before you eek out a victory with 1hp left is the normal and expected course of gameplay. It is the core gameplay loop. If you don’t find joy in that then this is not your genre in the same way that people who don’t enjoy jumping on platforms should skip platformers and people who dislike shooting people should probably not invest time in fps games.
Cool story. I played and enjoyed Elden Ring. I don’t think it’s a crazy idea for the people who physically can’t play the game as it is to have the same experience I had.
These arguments always boil down to “it’s not for you” or “get good”. Adding a difficulty option to the game should not be this controversial. The fact the developers considered variable difficulty so much in the design of the game shows that it’s not meritless, but turn that same idea into an accessibility option in the settings and people just vehemently disagree for some reason.
What kind of accessibility options would you add, were you given a team of developers and tasked with doing so?
Removed by mod
deleted by creator
There are some people who can’t beat Celeste, what’s your point? Also I wouldn’t call exploration and finding minibosses grinding. If that’s what grinding means to you than maybe the game just might not be made for you.
The first point is fair, you can’t reasonably expect any one game to be beatable by every single person. But the resistance from the devs seems more philosophical than pragmatic. Difficulty options are often requested, and to their credit it’s something the developers considered a lot more with Elden Ring, why they won’t just add some optional difficulty settings seems bizarre.
As for grinding, no, that’s not what I consider grinding. But you definitely can hit a wall in Elden Ring where you’ve done all the content you can find but still can’t progress anywhere. And running around the map is only interesting for so long. Go to youtube, there’s plenty of ‘best farming location’ videos. Elden Ring can be grindy if you just don’t meet their arbitrary skill level.
deleted by creator
Our goal involves creating a compelling progression path for all of our players. There’s a lot of content at launch with even more coming via live service, and we’ll continuously adjust our progression mechanics to give players a sense of accomplishment as they explore all of Battlefront 2
What?
Our goal involves creating a compelling progression path for all of our players. There’s a lot of content at launch with even more coming via live service, and we’ll continuously adjust our progression mechanics to give players a sense of accomplishment as they explore all of Battlefront 2
That was about paid dlcs.
Yes, because not including difficulty settings is the exact same as extorting money out of consumers.
deleted by creator
No because the motivation to make that decision and the solution to the problem are entirely different. With forcing people to buy DLCs the motivation is to make more profit off existing customers and the solution to cut down on the playtime required is giving money to the developers. It’s a pay to progress. Whereas with fromsoft games, the decision to not include difficulty options is an artistic one, not a financial one designed around splitting the game into pieces and requiring users to play to progress. (You could argue all artistic decisions in games are also financial ones because the art in question must market itself by it’s content but that doesn’t make these two scenarios any more similar). Games not providing a easy route through due to artistic decisions and games splitting themselves into segments to maximize profit are not really comparable decisions.
deleted by creator
Not really because you not being able to play the game makes fromsoft less money than you being able to beat it. If you could beat it, there’s a chance you might buy the DLC, whereas not being able to complete the game discourages you buying another fromsoft game in the future. This is why elden ring has some level of “easy mode” through co-op summoning, mimic tears and over leveling.