7 ms·

Why lock away content that someone purchased just because they aren't talented enough to beat your arbitrary tests? If you wanna play normal mode just do that,

Why lock away content that someone purchased just because they aren't talented enough to beat your arbitrary tests? If you wanna play normal mode just do that, I don't see why options are ever a bad thing.

rgoulter 8y ago
Completing a sudoku on software which gives instant correct/incorrect feedback on digits isn't as fun as puzzling it out together. Part of the fun of sudoku is going through the mechanics, fairly. I've heard the Souls/Bourne games described as "tough but fair". For some games, the idea is that the fun comes from beating challenges from the design of the game mechanics. Similarly, there's fun to be had from Role Playing Games by not having magical foreknowledge about consequences. Saving, and loading to see how each choice plays out means the dynamic is "how can I get the best?" rather than "what would this person do?".
- kruczek 8y ago
  > Saving, and loading to see how each choice plays out means the dynamic is "how can I get the best?" rather than "what would this person do?". I agree this changes the dynamic of a game. On the other hand, is it a bad thing? If someone is more interested in "getting the best" rather than finding out "what would this person do", then why should they be denied such freedom?
- mrguyorama 8y ago
  >Completing a sudoku on software which gives instant correct/incorrect feedback on digits isn't as fun as puzzling it out together. Part of the fun of sudoku is going through the mechanics, fairly. That is entirely your subjective opinion. I would likely still have fun playing sudoku where my guesses had instant feedback
- thatoneuser 8y ago
  OK you've given me some opinions about why you personally wouldn't use easy mode. What if someone else wants to? Why can't you just push the down arrow and go to normal mode and let the people who want easy mode have an option? Why the gatekeeping?
  - waste_monk 8y ago
    1) As mentioned in other comments, it would result in significant work to add an easy mode, and the testing required to ensure the game is still balanced on easy would cost (hourly wage of a tester * 40 hours or however long it takes to beat the game * however many test playthroughs to get reasonable coverage) - you could easily get to six figures in cost to add the easy mode. 2) The artistic vision of the games is to be difficult. Why should the developers compromise that for people who are explicitly not in their target audience anyway? 3) As the article says, beating one of these games is somewhat of an exclusive club - difficulty gatekeeping is necessary to preserve that. I haven't yet seen a valid argument for adding easy mode - they all are based around the assumption that easy should be there, and has been taken away. I don't buy disability as a reason to add it, considering a quadriplegic man has beaten Sekiro, and the other arguments I've seen are things like "I don't have the time anymore to beat games on full difficulty" which I don't find compelling - the market is full of titles which cater for that.
    - thatoneuser 8y ago
      You're saying this like someone's holding the game company at gunpoint and demanding an easy mode. This has always only been about it being ok for a dev to add it if they want. Why are you fighting their choice to do that? And... You don't think disability is a valid reason to add an easy mode? I hope you see some of the raw shit life has to offer then because that's a message that can only come from a place of very privileged contempt.
      - waste_monk 8y ago
        >This has always only been about it being ok for a dev to add it if they want. Why are you fighting their choice to do that? The software companies can do whatever they want. I'm defending From Software's choice not to add an easy mode, despite pressure from individuals and gaming media to do so. >You don't think disability is a valid reason to add an easy mode? In this specific case (Sekiro, as per the article), if the game is able to be completed on standard difficulty by someone who is quadriplegic then clearly the difficulty is fine. I have no problem with disability related changes such as colour-blindness accommodations that do not change the difficulty of the game.
LocalH 8y ago
Why play a video game if you just want to watch a movie?
- Konnstann 8y ago
  I will literally do that for video games I don't care to play, watch the cutscene movie on youtube.
- thatoneuser 8y ago
  Because there are a lot of people who haven't spent the years we have gaming and want to be able to beat modern games?
  - RandomInteger4 8y ago
    You don't need to spend years gaming to beat a game. Gaming skill doesn't work like that. You practice the specific game you want to play. Spend a few hours and voila, you learn. It's literally that simple. The problem is that games journalists don't want to play games. They want to get paid to write, and they were only able to get a job writing about video games. That's literally the only reason this is a topic. That and the fact that journalists as an industry have sussed out ways to increase monetization, and one such way that is particularly effective is the "rage bait" method, whereby you infuriate, or "nerd snipe" a particular demographic that feels invested in defending something to the point of sharing the thing they feel is attacking them.
RandomInteger4 8y ago
What do you define as "content"? Given the position you're taking,I take it you don't consider game mechanics, difficulty, and the satisfaction of overcoming a challenge as "content"? If you want a book, then buy a book. If you want a movie, then watch a movie. If you want to overcome a challenge, then accept that failure is a possibility and thus won't be allowed to enjoy the reward. Failure in these games is accepting specifically because the downside doesn't affect us in a meaningful way. We won't get hurt. We won't lose money. The failure itself is part of the game.

rgoulter 8y ago

Completing a sudoku on software which gives instant correct/incorrect feedback on digits isn't as fun as puzzling it out together. Part of the fun of sudoku is going through the mechanics, fairly. I've heard the Souls/Bourne games described as "tough but fair". For some games, the idea is that the fun comes from beating challenges from the design of the game mechanics. Similarly, there's fun to be had from Role Playing Games by not having magical foreknowledge about consequences. Saving, and loading to see how each choice plays out means the dynamic is "how can I get the best?" rather than "what would this person do?".

kruczek 8y ago
> Saving, and loading to see how each choice plays out means the dynamic is "how can I get the best?" rather than "what would this person do?". I agree this changes the dynamic of a game. On the other hand, is it a bad thing? If someone is more interested in "getting the best" rather than finding out "what would this person do", then why should they be denied such freedom?
mrguyorama 8y ago
>Completing a sudoku on software which gives instant correct/incorrect feedback on digits isn't as fun as puzzling it out together. Part of the fun of sudoku is going through the mechanics, fairly. That is entirely your subjective opinion. I would likely still have fun playing sudoku where my guesses had instant feedback
thatoneuser 8y ago
OK you've given me some opinions about why you personally wouldn't use easy mode. What if someone else wants to? Why can't you just push the down arrow and go to normal mode and let the people who want easy mode have an option? Why the gatekeeping?
- waste_monk 8y ago
  1) As mentioned in other comments, it would result in significant work to add an easy mode, and the testing required to ensure the game is still balanced on easy would cost (hourly wage of a tester * 40 hours or however long it takes to beat the game * however many test playthroughs to get reasonable coverage) - you could easily get to six figures in cost to add the easy mode. 2) The artistic vision of the games is to be difficult. Why should the developers compromise that for people who are explicitly not in their target audience anyway? 3) As the article says, beating one of these games is somewhat of an exclusive club - difficulty gatekeeping is necessary to preserve that. I haven't yet seen a valid argument for adding easy mode - they all are based around the assumption that easy should be there, and has been taken away. I don't buy disability as a reason to add it, considering a quadriplegic man has beaten Sekiro, and the other arguments I've seen are things like "I don't have the time anymore to beat games on full difficulty" which I don't find compelling - the market is full of titles which cater for that.
  - thatoneuser 8y ago
    You're saying this like someone's holding the game company at gunpoint and demanding an easy mode. This has always only been about it being ok for a dev to add it if they want. Why are you fighting their choice to do that? And... You don't think disability is a valid reason to add an easy mode? I hope you see some of the raw shit life has to offer then because that's a message that can only come from a place of very privileged contempt.
    - waste_monk 8y ago
      >This has always only been about it being ok for a dev to add it if they want. Why are you fighting their choice to do that? The software companies can do whatever they want. I'm defending From Software's choice not to add an easy mode, despite pressure from individuals and gaming media to do so. >You don't think disability is a valid reason to add an easy mode? In this specific case (Sekiro, as per the article), if the game is able to be completed on standard difficulty by someone who is quadriplegic then clearly the difficulty is fine. I have no problem with disability related changes such as colour-blindness accommodations that do not change the difficulty of the game.

LocalH 8y ago

Why play a video game if you just want to watch a movie?

Konnstann 8y ago
I will literally do that for video games I don't care to play, watch the cutscene movie on youtube.
thatoneuser 8y ago
Because there are a lot of people who haven't spent the years we have gaming and want to be able to beat modern games?
- RandomInteger4 8y ago
  You don't need to spend years gaming to beat a game. Gaming skill doesn't work like that. You practice the specific game you want to play. Spend a few hours and voila, you learn. It's literally that simple. The problem is that games journalists don't want to play games. They want to get paid to write, and they were only able to get a job writing about video games. That's literally the only reason this is a topic. That and the fact that journalists as an industry have sussed out ways to increase monetization, and one such way that is particularly effective is the "rage bait" method, whereby you infuriate, or "nerd snipe" a particular demographic that feels invested in defending something to the point of sharing the thing they feel is attacking them.

RandomInteger4 8y ago

What do you define as "content"? Given the position you're taking,I take it you don't consider game mechanics, difficulty, and the satisfaction of overcoming a challenge as "content"? If you want a book, then buy a book. If you want a movie, then watch a movie. If you want to overcome a challenge, then accept that failure is a possibility and thus won't be allowed to enjoy the reward. Failure in these games is accepting specifically because the downside doesn't affect us in a meaningful way. We won't get hurt. We won't lose money. The failure itself is part of the game.