‘Unskippable gameplay’ is the new ‘unskippable cutscenes’

[Eumi]

Well this is a thread by a developer sharing their thoughts and asking people what they think. I don't think there's any demands here. And demand is rather peculiar choice for words, is that same as a suggesting, wishing and asking? I wish all games had more options for the player to tailor it to better suit them, like with options to skip certain content and mechanics. Not a demand, just something I'd like to see the industry move even more forwards to. I don't think I'm in any position to demand anything from developers, the publisher might be.

Click to shrink...

I mean, I don't think there's any outrage here either, just people disagreeing. But you seemed perfectly comfortable talking about supposed outrage.

Semantics isn't really the point. The point is the discussion on whether or not all games should follow the same game design philosophy no matter what.

And I just can't see any decent arguments that they should. If they did, certain game experiences I've had would have never happened, because limiting player options can itself be part of game design. Right now, games are free to experiment however they want. Spider-Man could put in those fun puzzles because they knew they could also put in an option to skip them, meaning they didn't have to worry too much about the drastic shift in gameplay. Undertale was able to "beat" me, to prove its point in the most poignant way possible, because it didn't compromise on its difficulty. So many different games do so many different things, I've had so many unique and interesting experiences, that I just can't understand why anyone would want to limit that creativity unless they just selfishly want all games to cater to their specific wants.

 

[test_account]

Every game I've been a developer on has had some debug options to hop between parts of content. Presenting this in a tidy way is much harder, however.

Click to shrink...

I understand. Yeah, it should be technically possible to skip sections. Adding auto play might also require a fair amount of work as well? I've never developed a game, so i'm not sure how this works :)

Games releases are always at odds with the perception of value, and convincing players that difficult, tedious or unenjoyable content is valuable.

Click to shrink...

Its true that content and value is an important thing. Not just for games, but for purchaseable items in general. Theres also cases where games have a certain budget and/or time limit (regarding developement cycle), which might result in certain gameplay aspects being streched out (not enough time and money to work on even more content/mechanics). However, theres no exact key answer to what difficult, tedious and unenjoyable content is. This is a completely subective thing. Some people have played Tetris for years and still enjoy it, others might have been bored with it after an hour, just to take a random example.

Maybe i'm misunderstanding what you're saying, but i read it as you're saying that developers deliberately put content in their games that they personally find unenjoyable. There might be some cases of this, but i dont think this is the rule when talking about game developers in general. Have you done such thing in the games you've been working on for example?

Many games do also offer difficulty levels, and some also let you change this on the fly while playing the game. Playing on an easier difficulty level usually means that you can beat the game faster. Many games also let you skip any cutscenes, which also makes the game shorter. Wouldnt it be less of this as well if developers in general wanted their games to be longer in that regards?

EDIT: I agree that some games could benefit from skipping things. Like if you've tried the same mission X-amount of times and cant finish it. Wouldnt really hurt to have an option like that. This would also just give you an option to skip it however. I mean, all the content is still available in the game, and it would be your own choice to play it or not. Would people complain about lack of content in a game if they chose to skip certain parts of it? Or if not complaining, feel that the game wasnt worth the money because it was too short due to skipping parts of it? I dont know, so i'm not sure this is the main reason why developers dont include more skipable parts in their games.

 

[Waggles]

Sekiro. One of the final bosses where you have to beat a weaker version of previous enemy before even getting to the boss to learn his moveset.

Honestly, if I was playing on console, I would've just quit then and there. Luckily I was able to use the slowdown mod to beat the thing on steam.

 

[Deleted member 4037]

I always find advocating to not play the game to be odd. Its all a part of the game, if you dont like it, you dont like it.

 

[Deleted member 33533]

I thought this was gonna be about forced-walk-and-talk sections in games.

Stealth sections in non-stealth games and Hacking minigames

Click to shrink...

I feel like this just results in "make the parts in games I don't like skippable." In that case, why put in anything that deviates from the most basic gameplay loop in a game? Or any level that might have a different gimmick or design quirk? People like and dislike different things (I happen to like stealth in non stealth games), so do we just make every thing in a game skippable? Why even play the game then?

 

[OutofMana]

Like stealth sections in a non stealth games? Or are we talking about slow walking character exposition "gameplay" from point A to point B? I think those kind of fit your description. Idk, I guess it varies from player to player but some of that stuff doesn't translate as being fun. The option to skip it like a cutscene would hurt the experience I think. If the auto pilot option exists then maybe that part of the game might as well be just a cutscene.

 

[TSM]

There are games that cater to this kind of mindset. There are games made for just about anyone. "Every game should do this" is a terrible concept and would only dilute the diversity of games being created. The vast majority of games were not created to be enjoyable for me to play and I do not begrudge their existence just as they are. Content tourism is a terrible reason to homogenize the experiences of games being created going forward.

 

[Kthulhu]

Ultimately I think it's up to you the designer. I tend to criticize game difficulty on a game by game basis, as it's too nuanced a subject to make broad generalizations about.

Personally I feel if a mechanic is bad then it probably shouldn't be in the game. For example: instead of say Capcom putting a skip button at the boss rush in DMC4, they just don't put that in cuz it's a bad section.

 

[Gelf]

I always thought many of these sections were just loading screens in disguise. Like the new god of war. The game takes over and you are just talking, but it seems to me like its more of a loading screen than anything else. Doesnt mean all sections like this in all games are for loading. but i do think thats whats going on in gow, for example.

Click to shrink...

If it is just to hide loading I'd prefer a blank screen that takes as long as it takes. Otherwise In a multiplatform game that would mean your forcing all players to go at the pace of the slowest loading system. You could have it installed on an SSD on PC and still have to sit through that sequence despite the next section having loaded instantly. In fact even if with exclusives like GOW it still applies as enchanced backwards compatiblity may shorten those load times on future platforms.

 

[kubev]

I agree to some extent that game play segments that diverge significantly from the main game play loop should be skippable. That said, I have a pretty good idea as to what my threshold is for what'll make me outright drop a game, and I think the new DOOM sticks out as a pretty good example of a game that allowed me to "skip" the segments I didn't enjoy. Specifically, I tried the first challenge that I came to, and I finished it, but I realized that I'd probably drop the game if I kept doing those (assuming that the difficulty level of the challenges continued to climb), so I simply didn't enter the challenges anymore, instead opting to play just the main portions of the game. I ended up really enjoying the game, and I felt accomplished because I was at least able to conquer the "main" path that the game presented to me.

Developers should certainly have the freedom to make anything they do or don't want players skipping skippable, but I don't think it fits all types of games, unless the game is heavy on story in a way that makes the story the most important part of the game. The Souls games are all about conquering difficult challenges. Sure, there are some interesting creatures in there to see, but I don't think those creatures are as interesting without the challenge that goes along with them.

 

[BeaconofTruth]

It is fine if the dev allows you to skip it, but the notion that it should be a universal rule is nonsense.

Games have plenty of intention of being a skill test, the player should handle it. There is absolutely nothing wrong with making the player earn it. The larger problem is games try to shoe horn in a set of gameplay mechanics/sequences that aren't the core mechanics of the game.

DMC5 gets it right. No bullshit gimmick nonsense, create sequences that are the thing you bought the game for in the first place.

Unskippable cutscenes are a completely different short coming.

 

[udivision]

We ended up making a couple of mini-games skippable after getting feedback from people who got stuck on them.
It's interesting, a mini-game will require learning how it works and sometimes mastery of it, but for the rest of the game (it was an RPG) doing the same thing over will at least raise your artificial numbers enough to eventually out-number the boss that was giving you trouble.

 

[Budi]

I mean, I don't think there's any outrage here either, just people disagreeing. But you seemed perfectly comfortable talking about supposed outrage.

Semantics isn't really the point. The point is the discussion on whether or not all games should follow the same game design philosophy no matter what.

And I just can't see any decent arguments that they should. If they did, certain game experiences I've had would have never happened, because limiting player options can itself be part of game design. Right now, games are free to experiment however they want. Spider-Man could put in those fun puzzles because they knew they could also put in an option to skip them, meaning they didn't have to worry too much about the drastic shift in gameplay. Undertale was able to "beat" me, to prove its point in the most poignant way possible, because it didn't compromise on its difficulty. So many different games do so many different things, I've had so many unique and interesting experiences, that I just can't understand why anyone would want to limit that creativity unless they just selfishly want all games to cater to their specific wants.

Click to shrink...

Sure I did do that, it's because the thread just instantly reminded me of Bioware's Jennifer Hepler wishing for skipping combat (fast forward) options in 2006/2007 already. The reactions were nasty, including death threats towards her children and calling her cancer. Of course nobody here at Era specifically acts like that, or atleast doesn't write that filth here. And the discussion has often been rather toxic after that too, anytime similar things are brought up. There's the "real gamer" subset of gamers, who you must know exists. Who thinks there's something wrong with people enjoying games differently or different things in games than they do. You can often meet them in "walking simulator" discussions too, or other games like Uncharted with heavy narrative and cinematic focus.

 

[DevilMayGuy]

Sounds like some super whiney bullshit to me.

 

[Antrax]

That sounds stupid. If you respect videogames as an art medium, respect the developer's intent and efforts.

Click to shrink...

Eh art is made to be critiqued. Devs can have their intent, and people can call them out on it and say their intent is bad. I certainly think that's the case with stealth in non-stealth games. I've personally never met someone who likes those levels, and I feel comfortable saying the ability to skip them makes the game better.

I get what you mean. I think whenever this is brought up I think back to one of the CoD games, at this point it's impossible for me to remember which one it was exactly- I think it was Advanced Warfare- but the point is it was the first (and maybe only?) one that allowed you to play any level from the campaign straight away, basically making any level skippable/optional should players be frustrated by it and want to skip it. And it was controversial, even though the director or whoever it was justifying it in an interview I remember had solid reason its inclusion. I remember him saying, how only a fraction of a fraction of players will ever see a CoD campaign through to the end, even the good ones, so why lock the ending away and have it only be truly available though YouTube? At least have the option to skip to the end should players want that due to time or just general frustrations with the game. I don't see a problem with it either.


It's obviously not applicable for *every* game, but yeah I can agree that for level based games it's something to consider at least. Chances are at least 1 level is gonna suck, so why lock the rest of the game away behind it?

Click to shrink...

Yeah, this is the answer imo. Back in the day, I actually loved the X2: Wolverine Revenge game. But only after using the cheat code to unlock all levels because the 2nd or 3rd one was a god-awful stealth section that may have even been bugged. I never beat that level. But I fucking loved the rest of the game, so I talk it up with praise. All because I could skip the one bad level.

 

[laxu]

Ultimately I think it's up to you the designer. I tend to criticize game difficulty on a game by game basis, as it's too nuanced a subject to make broad generalizations about.

Personally I feel if a mechanic is bad then it probably shouldn't be in the game. For example: instead of say Capcom putting a skip button at the boss rush in DMC4, they just don't put that in cuz it's a bad section.

Click to shrink...

I agree. If a segment of gameplay is there to just make the game longer (without providing anything new) then it should not be there. A boss rush mode is fine as a separate challenge section that is not mandatory but a boss rush section to pad the length and challenge just means you maybe don't have enough meaningful content.

I can understand wanting to skip sections of games that are a clear deparature of the main gameplay loop. For example I would not like if I was forced to play and win some of the minigames in Yakuza to get through the main story. But since they are optional I can choose to play as much or as little of them as I want. I don't mind if developers provide a skip option if the player fails the challenge enough times or offer to change the difficulty level.

I do think games should be challenging because overcoming those challenges is part of the fun but you can miss the right difficulty, either making the game too easy or a section way too difficult for the majority of players. If a section is difficult then retrying it should be as effortless as possible. Difficulty itself should be based on the player making a mistake instead of getting bad RNG or one hit kills from an enemy. From Software's games for example are a prime example of being fair but also quickly punishing the player for mistakes, yet they don't require 100% perfect execution either.

 

[DrArchon]

I mean, that's not something that should be skippable. That's something that shouldn't be there in the first place.

Click to shrink...

My view exactly.

If there's something in a game that no one (or almost no one) wants to deal with then the solution isn't to have the game play itself. It's to make the game better by not having that bit.

And for things that are too difficult for some people to get past, accessibility options that still let people play but help them out are better than just taking the controls away from them and having the game be like "Fine, I'll do it myself" imo.

 

[Wumbo64]

There are certainly examples of things that should be skippable in games. Ultimately, I think the solution is to take your QA and play testers seriously when they frequently report certain sections as drags. Also, developers should be creating infrastructure in their software and engines to naturally be able to skip sequences anyway, so don't be afraid to offer that feature to the player.

Games are unique as a medium since they almost always actively resist the audience from completing them. If you are watching a film at home, you can fast forward and rewind. If you are reading a book, you can just read what you like or reread a chapter.

This is why I miss games with a level select.

I always wish more RPG games had a "skip long-winded tutorial" option when replaying. The idea that every Bethesda game doesn't at least generate a fixed auto save at their "you get one last chance reroll" screen is awful. Similarly, stuff like Borderlands should have a redesigned New Game Plus option that skips dialog and exposition you have clearly heard before as it is a game meant to be replayed considerably.

Figuring out what a lot of people don't want to play is relatively easy nowadays, between in-engine data farming and achievements stats. Part of ongoing support for these games post-release should clearly be reworking content that people demonstrably dislike. Whether that be removing it, reworking it, or simply allowing you to skip it. Although, I think this should only be for stuff that raise serious red flags, not material trivial internet commentators complain about.

 

[jimboton]

I don't think you should live permanently afraid someone somewhere is going to drop your game OP. I doubt anything worth playing has ever been made with that mindset.

 

[impact]

Stealth sections in non-stealth games and Hacking minigames

Click to shrink...

How about we just ask devs to stop putting shitty things like this in games rather than making it so the game will play itself

 

[Deleted member 52442]

this is only slightly related but while playing Warcraft 3, once Arthas became a death knight i turned on hacks and considered myself to be roleplaying with his descent

 

[Corporal]

Hah, first reflex upon encountering this thread: "Bah, humbug. Back in my days, the games were by default hard as bones, but also equipped with them fancy cheat codes. If you wanted extra stuff, or skip levels, or make things easier, or listen to all the music, you just mashed some buttons and presto. The extra super lazy ones bought a cheat device and entered some codes. Nowadays, these young'uns, I swear, all about them DLCs and IAPs for their online only digitally distributed whatchamacallits, what a sorry waste, the lot of them. Never played a "Nintendo hard" game in their life." (etc pp).

 

[giraffereyn]

I don't like how often we assume that the first experience is the best and only experience. It's actually super frustrating that so many in this thread have some moral compulsion to protect people from alternate experiences that don't conform to how they've have been able to enjoy games all their life. It's downright ableist.

 

[treasureyez]

OP, you could do a much better job here of framing exactly what you believe the problems are and providing at least one suggested solution. You're framing this as a user experience and design problem, but not really elaborating on how that's so. Mostly it seems like a personal grievance with some games you've played.

I will say that that I always find the comparisons to books or movies very unfitting. You can't just flatten all forms of media and treat them the same. And at any rate, the process of playing a game, learning its systems and overcoming its challenges is much more similar to comprehending media than simply completing watching/reading it.

 

[cLOUDo]

Autopilot gameplay
Easy mode
Skipeable cinematics

Better not played the game at all

 

[Aske]

Ya, I would love to see this type of option for games with really laborious sections. Bayonetta jumps to mind with that awful shoot 'em up section. But adding options like that is also an open admission that they made undesirable sections in their game.

Click to shrink...

I just skimmed the last couple of pages...is no one talking about how the new Mortal Kombat literally does this exact thing?

Tons of unlockables are gated behind badly designed, unfun single player modes and grinding. But don't worry! NRS includes a toggle that lets the AI take over and fight for you! If only you didn't have to press X at the end of every fight, you could just leave the game running for hours, racking up unlocks and currency. This is what people with turbo switches on their controllers are doing.

Sad state of affairs, tbh.

(The video was sublime!)

 

[Mzo]

You should make the game you want to make with the options you want to include. Make stuff for you, and people will align with your tastes. Someone will always not like it. Someone will always complain. You can't please everybody, but you can make a boring product by trying to.

This kind of question is the difference between making something unique like Katamari Damacy or shaving off every rough edge and making as smooth an experience as possible, like Uncharted 4.

 

[SeasickCrocadile]

Where is the fun if you can skip a part of the game? Nothing can replace the feeling of finally finishing a game part what seemed impossible for a long time.
There is nothing bad about being stuck on a game part and if your attention span is so short that you quit forever the game than its your own fault.
And no, not having enough time is no excuse. If you decide to play a game finish it or don't but don't blame the game or its design for your own decisions.

Click to shrink...

Thank you. I feel like I'm taking crazy pills arguing with a generation raised on cookie clicker.

Now if the argument is developers should remove grinding from a game, well again that's developers choice but I avoid games with pointless grind to artificially extend gameplay length behind a monotonous task

 

[King Alamat]

Mafia III would be a vastly improved game if there was an option to skip to the story missions.

 

[CrunchyFrog]

also,just bring back cheat codes instead of autopilot.

Click to shrink...

Hear hear. I wish games could go back to a time where they just let you have fun with it, and cheat codes were the epitome of that ideal. Nothing wrong with having a creative vision for a game that not everyone will be able to experience as intended, but give players the tools to run wild and the game itself will be all the more rich for it. I remember my friend and I coming up with our own little game in THPS4 I think it was in the tokyo level, There was this weird glitch that happened on these round planters when you did turbo speed and infinite grinding cheats and we did this like head to head jousting thing that was pretty fun. Put in moon physics, put in infinite jumps, put in max ammo, put in no clip. You can still put in a distinction between those who beat it as intended and those who beat it with help, maybe gate off part of the ending or turn off some progression mechanism or just withhold achievements or something. With cheats like these though you could have your community come up with all kinds of new challenges or content that you probably never would have thought on your own.

 

[Deleted member 1190]

I'm against this idea quite a bit, for couple of reasons.

First, I strongly believe that not every game has to be for every player. It's okay to not like a game, or to put a game down and not finish it. Easy modes, autopilot, every section of your game be skip-able, etc, if you need these to enjoy a game, then you were clearly not the intended audience and you should just accept that and move on. Go watch a damn youtube lets play or a twitch streamer play through the game if you want to see the rest of it. Let devs create the game they want to create without having to compromise whatever vision they had for it.

Also, if autopilot or fully skip-able gameplay became common place, I fear that would just end up with some devs ultimately feeling like it's okay if they leave a sub-par section of the game in because they know players can just skip it. That's a slippery slope that I would rather we not even start walking towards.

Edit: For clarity, talking about first playthroughs here. If you beat a game then having a chapter select of sorts is great for going back and visiting some sections you really liked that you want to check out again. Half-life does this, for example.

 

[Bleu]

if you want autopilot go watch netflix.

 

[Didyme]

Yoko Taro let us buy trophies with in-game money. I hope next time he will bring back cheat codes.

 

[Budi]

Mafia III would be a vastly improved game if there was an option to skip to the story missions.

Click to shrink...

Absolutely agreed, the game is so damn great besides the forced repetitive grind. I'm so bummed that they never even patched the requirements for progressing in the story to be less. Now of course I'm not a game developer, but I can't imagine it would had been very difficult to do or taken much of resources. But would have helped with maybe the biggest criticism the game got. I would do a second playthrough with the DLC if I could just skip the grind.

 

[Ant_17]

Games should already have this

Click to shrink...

They do, at least on mobile games.

 

[Tarot Deck]

All games with horribly long "walk and talk" segments should let you skip those, imo.

Click to shrink...

Realllyy hate those.

It's an unskipable cutscene pretending to be a gameplay.

 

[zombiejames]

- How would you feel if all games had a 'autopilot' mode which allowed the game to play itself for a while?

Click to shrink...

Might as well save your money and watch a Youtube playthrough at that point.

 

[convo]

Just saving yourself the money by watching the magic that are internet videos to not bother with any hardships emotional or financial is the way to go if you don't wanna care.

 

[Solaris]

The only thing I really hate is forced walking segments while characters just blurt out endless exposition

Looking at you, Sony

 

[Captain of Outer Space]

I'm always annoyed when mobile games and their ports to consoles/PC have such heavy-handed tutorials that limit what you can do, even check the options, until you've completed arbitrary goals to make sure you know how their, likely, clone works even if you've played that game or others like it before. More games need a "I know what I'm doing, so turn off these tutorials" option for people that don't need them.

 

[Bit_Reactor]

Removing tedious padding or filler from a game? Sure.

Putting in an autopilot feature? Watch it on Youtube.

I feel like there's a new "games should do this" thread every month and it's almost always something that there's already solutions for available.

I feel the effort spent wanting to skip parts of games would be better spent providing feedback to devs on why that section doesn't work for you, but as stated by others in the thread I have no idea where this stops. Do we stop making anything outside of a simplistic core gameplay loop simply because some people are bothered by it?

When offered two choices though I'd much rather have "walking and talking" where I get to control my character and interact with the (interactive) medium versus passively watching games try to be movies.

 

[Metal B]

Whats the point of a game, if you can just skip the gameplay. Here it would go bold and just say: "No, play the game you bought!". Games aren't stories, the road is the point of the games and not the destinations. I am totally fine to help the players in game. Give them the opportunity to get help item, hints, alternative paths or an easy modi (if difficulty isn't the experience itself).
Games have the unqiue experience for people to learn, get better and overcome a challenge. If you don't want that, thats okay, there are very good interactive stories out there.

 

[Matarick]

Let me say something contraversal. In a GaaS game where you can have multiple characters but have a campaign and/or quest lines to do end game activities; when you unlock every end game activity in one character, all other characters should access that activity as well. I do not want to beat a long ass campaign two more times so I can help out my friends to do a raid or complete a Forge in Destiny 2. Also, allow cross class transmoging or "infusion" between characters so you can do all of the end game activities if you already reached the end game in one character. I understand some content is time gated, but at least unlock the gates when your first character has already done the content.

As an example on how Destiny 1 was more accomidating in Rise of Iron was that I was able to level up my Warlock to do the Wrath of the Machine raid, by infusing gear from my other characters, before touching the Rise of Iron campaign for the third time.

Anthem got some things wrong but the one thing I loved about it is that there is only one character campaign but you unlock the Javelins throughout gameplay.

 

[ArkhamFantasy]

How about we just ask devs to stop putting shitty things like this in games rather than making it so the game will play itself

Click to shrink...

They can be a nice change of pace for alot of players.

 

[SindbadtheSailor]

Two things. First, having the ability to skip through parts on replays, not on the original playthrough seems like a perfect balance. You experience everything the first time but on subsequent tries, you get what you want out of it. Uncharted 4 for example, being able to skip the young Nate parts on story mode would be great. I know they have chapter mode but it's not seamless.

Secondly, new game plus modes where every upgrade, item and ability carry over. I know more games are doing this now but it should be standard. Jak II was probably one of the best in this regard; get enough precursor orbs and you can unlock infinite health and ammo on any difficulty. That actually made me want to not only collect enough orbs, but also replay the game for fun.

 

[SuperSunBro]

I think video games ideally should keep the player engaged and entertained to want to continue play even is they are slightly beyond the skill or comfort level of the player.

Does "autopilot" mean the game shows a solution that the player cannot figure out, or act fast enough to overcome? Games that play themselves do exist but the only ones I know about are FTW mobile games that are basically about grinding and require no meaningful input from the player; the items you grind for are the objective not the game experience itself.

I am not aware of any action games that can play by itself but it would be really interesting to see if games can play themselves and teach the player how to be better at the game. Right now the options for a stuck player to deal with an action problem is to read guides and watch videos, practice reflexes and get fast enough, or just avoid it alltogether.

Bravely Default is an RPG where you can switch off enemy encounters if you feel that you dont want or need to fight random enemies. In ths way, the player can choose to interact with enemies at all. This saves alot of time if the player is exploring in dungeons or just wants to get to a particular event.

 

[DarKaoZ]

Design a better game instead

Click to shrink...

This is the solution

 

[Mass Effect]

This was my immediate thought before fully understanding what the thread was going to be about.

God Of War has some fun action, but holy shit is that game tedious to get through because of all the pointless filler parts. Hard enough to get through once, and all the forced walking and talking makes the game 100% unreplayable

Click to shrink...

If it's something like those walking talking dialogue non cutscene cutscenes, then they should be skippable just like all cutscenes should. Maybe add a summary feature like some mobile games do when you skip. That way you can still get the idea of what happened.

Click to shrink...

Interestingly enough, Gears of War solved this problem over 10 years ago.

Unfortunately, a lot of the slow walking dialogue sections are used to mask loading, so they couldn't be skipped in that scenario.

 

[Deleted member 7051]

How would you feel if all games had a 'autopilot' mode which allowed the game to play itself for a while?

Click to shrink...

Why would you want to give people an excuse not to play the game? If you want someone to play the game for you, go watch a Let's Play on YouTube or something.

I mean, I was watching my dad play Days Gone and it has a way to just skip entire gameplay segments if they're too hard for you. I don't even really agree with that on the basis that games are meant to become more challenging as you progress and you're meant to get more capable over time.

He always cleared those segments himself after a few tries, too, so it was just unnecessary hand holding that if anything makes you feel embarrassed because the game is basically saying "you suck at this so you just wanna move on?"

Games are meant to be played, I think. The vast majority of people are always going to quit games before they finish them anyway and adding a way to skip gameplay isn't going to change that because they obviously aren't enjoying themselves.

If you're playing a game and it's too hard, just play on a lower difficulty. More accessibility options are great and I'm a huge fan of how Spiderman, for example, lets you turn off QTEs, but skipping gameplay segments isn't an accessibility issue it's an attention span issue. If you get bored of a game and stop playing it because you can't beat a boss, that's entirely on you.

 

[SpinierBlakeD]

I've definitely stopped playing games that I've enjoyed because I hit a section I just couldn't bring myself to play. I'd love the ability to skip undesirable parts of a game.