Developer's/creator's choice: a gatekeeping excuse to keep easy modes out of games.

[take_marsh]

Note: I consider difficulty settings as an accessibility option (whether you're disabled or inexperienced with some video games).

I do not suffer from a physical or significant mental disability. I used accessibility options for The Last of Us 2. I used them and they are fucking fantastic, enhancing my experience of the game. I see why these settings are so important in assisting those with disabilities, but they also helped me get more joy out the game than if they hadn't been included. On top of the easiest difficulty, I had an incredible time. First game sucked to play from beginning to end. I hated it.

This isn't to hide behind disabled persons as a reason for accessibility/easy mode options. I will admit that I want them for myself as much as others.

Being against any type of accessibility options (easy mode included) simply because someone like me will use them means you're just an asshole. "Artistic vision" defenders are also assholes, because why are you defending someone against...wait- people who want to play the developer's game? Does that really make sense?

Maybe it's been mentioned, but we should all look at TLOU2 for its incredible approach to accessibility. Both in terms of being accessible for able bodied and people with disabilities.

It should be industry standard imo.

Click to shrink...

Fuck yeah it should.

 

[Rendering...]

Agreed, I think keeping easy modes out of games is idiotic. What's to stop someone from modding a game, or watching a Let's Play instead of buying and playing a title that essentially locks them out?

I'm all for the The Last of Us Pt. II's approach of not just including a range of difficulties, but going all out with accessibility settings that players can tweak to their liking. It's an outright superior approach to game design IMO.

If it goes against a developer's creative vision to include ways to ease the difficulty, then they can suck it up and do it anyway, and add a huge splash screen that strongly urges the player to use the recommended settings for the developer's intended experience. They could even break your balls with a couple of confirmation windows that say "Are you sure?" And then, "Are you really sure?"

If you can do truly heinous shit like disable the music for Final Fantasy VII Remake on a first playthrough, then why not give players free rein over their whole experience? They're going to do what they want to do anyway.

 

[subpar spatula]

It's always so weird that From games inspire such vocal pushback against the idea of having more options. Say BluePoint adds an easy mode to the remake of Demon's Souls. What is the worst to come of that? Afraid that Miyazaki is going to cry? Or are players annoyed that they will have to tolerate other people saying "I beat Demon's Souls, it was so much fun" without being able to counter "Yeah but on easy mode, right? So did you really beat Demon's Souls like I did?"

Click to shrink...

It's because a lot of people really do not want to accept that Souls is a game to overcome. That is literally the point. Live, die, repeat. That is it. We can tell people this is how the game was designed and meant to be because it was made to be a big challenge for players. That challenge is what made the series so revered. Taking that away makes it all meaningless. Like, it's basically going after the wrong target. Souls is meant to be hard for almost everyone.

 

[Dogui]

Because it's the fans who come into these threads trying to stifle the discussion and being dismissive (or even to troll), not the creator. "it's developers vision deal with it", "play something else", "it's not for you", "watch it from Youtube", "just git gud". If Miyazaki or any other developer wants to come to this thread, I'll gladly challenge their vision directly.

Click to shrink...

I mean, if you engage in a discussion with someone that says something like "Just git gud", what outcome you'd expect?

Why people that want something to change are waiting for the creators themselves to post in the forums they use?

A group of people want to play Souls games in a more accessible way, the push is either on From Software, or on any other dev that may find a interesting niche in people with this specific need.

The thing with creators is that, if there's the target to sell 3 million copies and there's 3 million people that agrees with not having an easy mode, they won't see it as necessary. It can be seen as dumb since an easy mode would get more people, but who knows how hard it is to balance the game, in a way it is worth it. In the end it's all on the dev.

 

[Zeroth]

It's because a lot of people really do not want to accept that Souls is a game to overcome. That is literally the point. Live, die, repeat. That is it. We can tell people this is how the game was designed and meant to be because it was made to be a big challenge for players. That challenge is what made the series so revered. Taking that away makes it all meaningless. Like, it's basically going after the wrong target. Souls is meant to be hard for almost everyone.

Click to shrink...

I have mixed feelings about this kind of position. An easy mode doesn't take away the accomplishment of finishing a game on the hardest difficulty (Halo comes to mind as an example of a game where you could play the campaign normally or go for super challenging modes), so it's not like you're invalidating the success of players who play these games.

Furthermore, the games have a lot of solid elements that ensure that it's not just about dying, but learning from it. The threshold for that can vary from person to person, and I personally see little harm in having accessibility options.

 

[RROCKMAN]

Souls could add difficulty modes but they should also take a note from BOTW and include a small non-intrusive trasparent water mark on the screen at all times so people know what mode you are playing at a glance


People who want easy modes can do whatever people on normal and hard can do what ever

And no one can BS their way through beating the game without having to do a pain in the ass photoshop job.


This should satisfy all parties

 

[Budi]

Anyone remember backlash against Spiderman auto-complete QTE:s and skip puzzles options?

I mean, if you engage in a discussion with someone that says something like "Just git gud", what outcome you'd expect?

Why people that want something to change are waiting for the creators themselves to post in the forums they use?

A group of people want to play Souls games in a more accessible way, the push is either on From Software, or on any other dev that may find a interesting niche in people with this specific need.

Click to shrink...

It's not really about engaging with them, just that people tend to pop in to drop their dismissive one line take and then be done with it. And it gets frustrating to see over and over again. You can't imagine my blood pressure every time when someone comes in with "watch it from Youtube". As that doesn't make much sense at all. When people want to experience the exploration themselves in example, without the burden of too difficult combat encounters. We can't control the Youtuber who shared the vid. It only shows how little people actually spend thinking about the issue, when they're mistaken that it's the solution.

 

[RadzPrower]

Being against any type of accessibility options (easy mode included) simply because someone like me will use them means you're just an asshole. "Artistic vision" defenders are also assholes, because why are you defending someone against...wait- people who want to play the developer's game? Does that really make sense?

Click to shrink...

There's a difference between being against easy mode in general and saying a developer has the right to make their own choices. I'm perfectly fine with easy games and games with easy modes. Use 'em all you want, just don't go around asking someone to change something that's fundamental to their game.

With a game that's even narratively built around the idea of live, die, repeat, that is quite literally the point of the game. It would be like going into a JRPG and going, "this game should be a FPS".

 

[subpar spatula]

I have mixed feelings about this kind of position. An easy mode doesn't take away the accomplishment of finishing a game on the hardest difficulty (Halo comes to mind as an example of a game where you could play the campaign normally or go for super challenging modes), so it's not like you're invalidating the success of players who play these games.

Furthermore, the games have a lot of solid elements that ensure that it's not just about dying, but learning from it. The threshold for that can vary from person to person, and I personally see little harm in having accessibility options.

Click to shrink...

Yeah, it won't cheapen it on a personal level but if a game that is meant to be difficult for everyone then has another mode that trivializes that difficulty then it there is no accomplishment anywhere. And Souls wants beating it to be an accomplishment.

 

[MeepMerp]

Not every game is for every person and you can't please everybody.

 

[Timu]

Not every game is for every person and you can't please everybody.

Click to shrink...

This is true, I'm not into music games at all really.

 

[Sephzilla]

Not every game is meant to appease every person and if a developer wants to make a game have a certain difficulty barrier that's their choice. Some of the arguments against "creative vision" here don't really hold up at all when you apply the same mindset to other forms of media. Why aren't we yelling at Christopher Nolan for not including a cut of The Dark Knight where Morgan Freeman explains to the audience the political undertones of Batman's sonar technology in order to make sure the audience isn't lost as to why this is causing a rift between Fox and Batman?

 

[Dogui]

Anyone remember backlash against Spiderman skip QTE:s and skip puzzles options?

It's not really about engaging with them, just that people tend to pop in to drop their dismissive one line take and then be done with it. And it gets frustrating to see over and over again. You can't imagine my blood pressure every time when someone comes in with "watch it from Youtube". As that doesn't make much sense at all. When people want to experience the exploration themselves in example, without the burden of too difficult combat encounters. We can't control the Youtuber who shared the vid. It only shows how little people actually spend thinking about the issue, when they're mistaken that it's the solution.

Click to shrink...

Well, i can't disagree with you there.

I think the worst thing in this discussion is that we can't really say it isn't the dev's vision, either way.

I don't really think niche games needs to be for everyone if there's enough accessible games in the market. But with the Souls series it's a lot more problematic because it turned out a lot more mainstream than it was designed to be.

If your game is one of the hyped new console highlights, you obviously should make it a lot more accessible than it is. That i agree 100%.

 

[Budi]

Not every game is for every person and you can't please everybody.

Click to shrink...

The intent is to allow those who are indeed interested in the specific game, to play it succesfully. It's not about making everyone interested in the said game. If someone thinks "this game isn't for me" then it's not. But if someone thinks "I'd love this game, but I can't play it", then I wish the obstacles would be lowered or removed.

 

[PKrockin]

It's because a lot of people really do not want to accept that Souls is a game to overcome. That is literally the point. Live, die, repeat. That is it. We can tell people this is how the game was designed and meant to be because it was made to be a big challenge for players. That challenge is what made the series so revered. Taking that away makes it all meaningless. Like, it's basically going after the wrong target. Souls is meant to be hard for almost everyone.

Click to shrink...

That easy mode option is what allows people who suck at games to actually have the intended experience without finding it completely prohibitively difficult. I don't know how good at games you are, but I don't find Dark Souls to be all that much of a challenge, because there is a huge disparity in the skill level different players in the world have when playing third person action adventure games.

If we're going to not give players options because some will use them to create an inoptimal but to them a preferable playing experience, then we should be telling devs never to include a brightness slider because some players will use it to see better in dark areas than intended.

 

[subpar spatula]

That easy mode option is what allows people who suck at games to actually have the intended experience without finding it completely prohibitively difficult. I don't know how good at games you are, but I don't find Dark Souls to be all that much of a challenge, because there is a huge disparity in the skill level different players in the world have when playing third person action adventure games.

If we're going to not give players options because some will use them to create an inoptimal but to them a preferable playing experience, then we should be telling devs never to include a brightness slider because some players will use it to see better in dark areas than intended.

Click to shrink...

The intended play experience is to die a lot and literally learn from your mistakes. You cannot do that if everything is easier and you never die.

 

[Kaguya]

3. People dogpile easy games - this happens a lot. People complaining games are too easy, too hand holding. So what? It's the creator's vision. And even more: people harass some developers so much they end up adding new, sometimes very balanced, hard modes. Again, nobody respects Creator's vision when it comes to easy games.

Click to shrink...

We've seen more dogpiling on From Software games not having an easy mode, just this year, than 30 years of people complaining about Kirby games being too easy, how did this even made that list lol.

As for 1 and 2, people also mod games to be easier, harder and have nude characters, what does any of this have to do with creator's vision?

 

[Budi]

The intended play experience is to die a lot and literally learn from your mistakes. You cannot do that if everything is easier and you never die.

Click to shrink...

You (maybe not you cause you're pro) definitely can die a lot, even with lowered difficulties. I doubt you and me had the exact same death count in Ori and the Blind Forest in example (if you've played it). Our struggles are different, same with all the other people. Someone beats the game while playing with a guitar hero controller, someone not even with a regular one. People are so incredibly varied. We're not carbon copies of each other you know.

 

[PKrockin]

The intended play experience is to die a lot and literally learn from your mistakes. You cannot do that if everything is easier and you never die.

Click to shrink...

If you're bad at action adventure games, you will die a lot and literally learn from your mistakes on easy mode. You will have the intended experience.

 

[PBalfredo]

It's because a lot of people really do not want to accept that Souls is a game to overcome. That is literally the point. Live, die, repeat. That is it. We can tell people this is how the game was designed and meant to be because it was made to be a big challenge for players. That challenge is what made the series so revered. Taking that away makes it all meaningless. Like, it's basically going after the wrong target. Souls is meant to be hard for almost everyone.

Click to shrink...

Dang, all the art, music, lore, worldbuilding, story and setpieces of the souls games are completely worthless without the challenge? Wow, way to drag souls so hard.

Seriously, it's such a narrow way to view the merit of the game. Sure it's a way to experience the game, maybe even the intended way, but the only way? And so what if someone wants to experience souls as a tourist? As long as they're having fun who cares? Lots of players enjoy games in ways the developers never intended.

 

[Doctor_Thomas]

There's absolutely no downside to difficulty options in games.

Hell, let's give the Souls games harder modes for people who find the games too easy.

I play most games on normal difficulty because I feel like it strikes a good balance, unless the game actively recommends I go to hard mode (like the inFamous games recommended to me) and I have a great experience.

My experience with the Souls games isn't entirely positive as a result of the difficulty. I'm bad at those games, I die a lot and sometimes don't feel like I make much progress at all , but I enjoy the atmosphere, the enemy designs, the world... and I feel like I get to see very little of it. It's actually putting me off buying Demon's Souls on PS5 (but I'll likely relent anyway)

 

[Budi]

Dang, all the art, music, lore, worldbuilding, story and setpieces of the souls games are completely worthless without the challenge? Wow, way to drag souls so hard.

Seriously, it's such a narrow way to view the merit of the game. Sure it's a way to experience the game, maybe even the intended way, but the only way? And so what if someone wants to experience souls as a tourist? As long as they're having fun who cares? Lots of players enjoy games in ways the developers never intended.

Click to shrink...

This too. I don't know how people are willing to sell the games so short, just for a sake of an argument.

 

[Ruisu]

The intended play experience is to die a lot and literally learn from your mistakes. You cannot do that if everything is easier and you never die.

Click to shrink...

Having an easy mode doesn't mean you would never die in Souls though. It's perfectly possible to still have to learn the game while dying less and it would let more people appreciate the game with a lower frustration barrier of entry.

 

[Budi]

I'll drop these to the thread for additional perspective. Halfcoordinated is a person with hemiparesis, doing one-handed speedruns. Is this the exact same as your experience playing Sekiro subpar spatula? This is how you both played? Same struggles and all that jazz.

 

[take_marsh]

There's a difference between being against easy mode in general and saying a developer has the right to make their own choices. I'm perfectly fine with easy games and games with easy modes. Use 'em all you want, just don't go around asking someone to change something that's fundamental to their game.

With a game that's even narratively built around the idea of live, die, repeat, that is quite literally the point of the game. It would be like going into a JRPG and going, "this game should be a FPS".

Click to shrink...

Sounds like a re-framing of the argument about the "artistic vision". You feel your intent is valid and good, but the outcome is bad and unnecessary. And I never said anything about people "generally" being against easy mode. They're defending this idea of an "artistic vision" which is not compromised by non-mandatory options.

A game built "narratively" around live/die/repeat is not harmed by these options. That's a ridiculous analogy you've created. No, adding these options does not violate the genre of a game like Dark Souls. This is a fantasy where people feel the efforts of them and the devs will be invalidated because there's an option of a "shortcut". People will still die in Dark Souls when they turn on an option to, say, provide a few more I-frames. You will still die, because you chose not to use this option.

I'll fix your analogy: It's like going into an JRPG and saying, "Instead of this boss battle being 45 minutes long, I have the option to make this 15 minutes long".

 

[Timu]

I play most games on normal difficulty because I feel like it strikes a good balance, unless the game actively recommends I go to hard mode (like the inFamous games recommended to me) and I have a great experience.

Click to shrink...

I would say that playing Gen 6 and older games on Normal is perfectly fine since, well, quite a bit of those games are kind of difficult even on Normal. Gen 7 and Gen 8 games I would rely on one step up from Normal like Hard since Normal can be too easy for various games but for many games Normal is still fine. There are obvious exceptions where it's better to play on Normal than Hard though for Gen 7 and 8 games. Also, depending on the genre too, like I would mainly play shmups on Normal while trying to do many FPS games on Hard.

 

[StereoVSN]

This is why I only play the games where I think I may need to mod/cheat on PC. Like Dark Souls .... :P.

 

[Niosai]

I think a big gripe I have is the people who say "it's not for you" are also a lot of the same people who say "git gud" and that becomes toxic quickly. I didn't like Bloodborne. I thought the game was very janky, and one of my best friends said that I must just be bad at games. "It's a masterpiece, you just need to git gud, etc"

I liked the tone and setting but I hated the way it played. Had it been a little less difficult, I would've pushed through. But I didn't. And now I look back at the game and personally don't understand how everyone called such a clunky, janky game their game of the generation.

Of course, then it rolls back around to "it's not for you."

But it is! The tone and setting were amazing! I loved the way it looked! Yeah, I could just watch a playthrough, but that's not how I wanted to experience it. Just put in a difficulty setting. Make it entirely optional, bury it in 50 menus deep, I don't care. I wonder how many others gave up on the game for the very same reasons I did.

 

[collige]

Click to shrink...

The presentation part is what I feel is trickiest here because it needs to essentially tell the player HOW hard the intended difficulty is before they can make an informed decision about which assists they need. One option could be to only enable the assists after the player has failed enough times like in some Mario games, but it certainly seems like that would amplify the othering factor.

I'll fix your analogy: It's like going into an JRPG and saying, "Instead of this boss battle being 45 minutes long, I have the option to make this 15 minutes long".

Click to shrink...

Do you think a 45 minute boss fight can be part of the artistic vision?

 

[Doctor_Thomas]

I would say that playing Gen 6 and older games on Normal is perfectly fine since, well, quite a bit of those games are kind of difficult even on Normal. Gen 7 and Gen 8 games I would rely on one step up from Normal like Hard since Normal can be too easy for various games but for many games Normal is still fine. There are obvious exceptions where it's better to play on Normal than Hard though for Gen 7 and 8 games. Also, depending on the genre too, like I would mainly play shmups on Normal while trying to do many FPS games on Hard.

Click to shrink...

I think that's fair. I think the genre can definitely influence it and having options is good in any case.

 

[Kyrona]

I've played and platinumed a large percentage of the souls series. Literally just throw in an alter you can pray to at the start of the game to 'ease your suffering' and have it enter you into a covenant with a ring that gives 50% damage reduction. People will still be bad, still die a lot, but they will have more time to learn how to deal with the bullshit before they die. Making the learning experience easier by keeping people alive long enough to learn what they need to do is all that is really needed.

 

[Timu]

I think that's fair. I think the genre can definitely influence it and having options is good in any case.

Click to shrink...

This is true for many genres, like I can handle several action type games on harder settings, but for some reason other types of genres I have to do on Normal.

 

[Deleted member 2317]

Not everything is gatekeeping, jesus christ.

Click to shrink...

How dare you gatekeep this very thread.

Click to shrink...

 

[HBK]

Difficulty is a complex matter. Much more complex than it may seem at first glance, if only because everyone has their own skillsets and tuning difficulty levels is hard as hell.

I don't think I see a single valid argument against difficulty settings in general. Having easy modes should be a no-brainer. Yet many games lose a lot of their interest at too low difficulty settings (strategy games are a prime example of that). So even an easy mode should have a semblance of difficulty IMO. Which begs the question of people who would just want to plow through the game with no friction at all.

I get the feeling, but I also have a hard time coming to terms with the idea that "everyone needs to be able to enjoy everything". I mean, it sounds nice in theory, and yes having a "super easy" mode or whatever you wanna call it won't take away the experience or people playing on "hard" or whatever. But is it really doing a service to those players that they're able to experience the game in a way that's obviously not intended?

"Why not?" may seem like a good counterpoint, but I feel like ... how should I put this ... it leans weirdly into hyper-consumerism and entitlement: "I pay, therefore I have the right to have the game I want". Not everyone is supposed to watch every movie, listen to every album, or play every game. Accessibility is paramount and difficulty settings are a good thing to help people with varying skill levels enjoy the game. But you're not supposed to play every game that catches your eye. And while allowing people to enjoy the game is good, I'm don't see how it could be healthy if it crosses the line of promoting compulsive behavior: "go buy the game, you'll enjoy it even if it wasn't made for you!"

Yeah, messy ramblings, I know. That's the best I can provide right now and I'm not sure if it's possible to go much further than that on the matter. Games should be as accessible as possible, but there will always be a limit at how accessible you can make it without twisting it into something unrecognizable.

 

[Deleted member 5621]

How dare you gatekeep this very thread.

Click to shrink...

 

[Budi]

The presentation part is what I feel is trickiest here because it needs to essentially tell the player HOW hard the intended difficulty is before they can make an informed decision about which assists they need. One option could be to only enable the assists after the player has failed enough times like in some Mario games, but it certainly seems like that would amplify the othering factor.

Click to shrink...

I think they could be pretty specific, tell exactly what changes. Like if there's damage reduction or extra XP, then tell by how much on average. If enemy behaviour is altered mention it, of course listing every enemy change could be difficult if there's a lot it, but then just tell that some attack patterns have been adjusted for increased reaction time in example. So I don't mean full patch notes type of deal, though I wouldn't mind this being available either.

Or give the player further control than just picking from three different presets, let them fine tune exact different areas they need assistance with. Like I think many games let you choose the level of aim assist (which makes the game easier), then the onus isn't on the developer to make all the preset settings balanced. Or do this in addition to the presets. The presets can be named similar to Witcher "Just the story", "Story and Sword", "Blood and Broken Bones" and "Death March", instead of something possibly condecending like "Can I play daddy?". The intended setting, could be simply called as the default.

 

[ScoobsJoestar]

Out of all the arguments that people have try to make about why games shouldn't have a easy mode, this one makes the least sense. Like, how does the fact that someone played the game on easy take away from you playing on ultra-nightmare-permadeath mode, or whatever. Playing DOOM on nightmare is no less of an accomplishment just because I played through the game on easy. I'm not trying to call either of you out, or start a fight, I'm just genuinely curious as to why.

Click to shrink...

I know you say you're not trying to call me out, I'm just a little wary since you cut out the part of my post where I explained why when quoting me lol but assuming you really do mean this in good faith and that I just didn't explain well enough:

For me, choices change how I approach a game. For example, Last of Us 1's ending would not have hit me as hard if it was optional, even if I had never picked it. With games, I find great pleasure in getting past tough sections so I can get past the next part. When a game gives me the option to not do that, even if I never pick it, it changes the framing of the experience from "I'm working hard to get to the next bit of the game" to "I'm doing this because...I...want to, I guess? No real reason making me do it." And when I do beat the boss, even without changing difficulties, instead of popping off and being like "FUCK YEAH FUCK OFF MARTYR LOGARIUS YOU FUCKING THING" it's "Eh, I'm done now I guess. Didn't really need to put myself through this. But I did I guess." In addition, I really like when a game has a single difficulty so I don't stop to go "Is...this too easy? Is it too hard? What is the best balanced difficulty?" which legitimately detracts from my experience at times.

For example, I played Fallen Order and the difficulty selection made me a lot less invested in learning how the game worked. I beat it to the end and enjoyed it a lot, but I think I would have enjoyed it a lot more if I wasn't tinkering with difficulty settings or worse - playing throughout the whole thing wondering "Is this the right setting?" which honestly just deflates the whole thing for me.

This is a personal thing rather than a movement for the design - as I mentioned in my original post, I specifically support easy modes because accessibility is more important than me enjoying a game or not. It has nothing to do with other people playing the game on easy mode, just the way I personally enjoy games. And I can't stress this enough before someone accuses me of not caring about people with disabilities(which annoys me because I'm one of those people) I support difficulty selection because I think other people being able to play the game at all is more important than whether I enjoy it or not, and even if a game stops being enjoyable for me I can always find a game I enjoy if I look hard enough so it's not a big deal.

I love something like Slay the Spire for not having difficulties selectable (well, unless you count the ascensions which...I don't think they should count?) but given the nature of the game I don't think difficulty is really an accessibility concern there.

 

[Deleted member 18944]

Not every game is for every person and you can't please everybody.

Click to shrink...

How many times are we going to read this frankly trash, drive by-esque take that simply dismisses the entire conversation.

 

[KamenRiderEra]

I don't mind more accessibilities in games, but often a game with multiple difficulty levels are ridiculously unbalanced. Normal mode should be soulslike challenging. Then, from there, other options could be added, even the easiest and wide accessibility.

 

[take_marsh]

Do you think a 45 minute boss fight can be part of the artistic vision?

Click to shrink...

That's a decent question. It can be part of the artistic vision, much like that hours and hours long wait to finish the most recent SUPERHOT game. It's easy to argue as being unreasonable.

But what does one player, going through 45 minutes of this boss fight, do for the "artistic vision" more than someone going through the same boss fight in 15 minutes? Is there harm in putting some checkpoints throughout this 45 minute boss fight? Is "artistic vision" a test of endurance and patience, simply a lengthy barrier from continuing or finishing a story?

 

[Deleted member 20831]

Hades has a mode called (God Mode) which increase damage resistance of upto 80%.
Does this make Hades more accessible?

To apply this to Souls game, would also need to be coupled with slow/stop motion quick time events and extremely large time window for traps and animation recovery on enemies.

Edit: The stop motion quick time option actually sounds like a good idea, imagine having it as a toggle button in the menu for parry. When ever the enemies can be parried, the game world slow downs and pauses until you want to parry (or do another action to skip parry and slowly increase the game world speed to normal).

 

[Budi]

Hades has a mode called (God Mode) which increase damage resistance of upto 80%.
Does this make Hades more accessible?

To apply this to Souls game, would also need to be coupled with slow/stop motion quick time events and extremely large time window for traps and animation recovery on enemies.

Click to shrink...

It's a difficulty toggle, yes it makes it more accessible. As seen from the tweet, it's so more people get to experience the story and still exciting combat themselves. Glad to hear the game has something like this implemented. I wonder what it cost them.

 

[laoni]

Easy/Assist mode is a blessing as a current accessibility option. Let's encourage the adoption of more.

And not just for the visual/hearing disabilities. Historically, easy/assist modes, cheat codes and nodding games to be easier on the PC side have been used by disabled gamers to brute force accessibility. Especially for those that have motor/motor processing/mobility issues, these options have...

www.resetera.com

Looks like I have to relink my thread about how difficulty options are used as accessibility options for disabled gamers, because disability covers a much broader spectrum than vision or hearing impaired.

 

[Budi]

Easy/Assist mode is a blessing as a current accessibility option. Let's encourage the adoption of more.

And not just for the visual/hearing disabilities. Historically, easy/assist modes, cheat codes and nodding games to be easier on the PC side have been used by disabled gamers to brute force accessibility. Especially for those that have motor/motor processing/mobility issues, these options have...

www.resetera.com

Looks like I have to relink my thread about how difficulty options are used as accessibility options for disabled gamers, because disability covers a much broader spectrum than vision or hearing impaired.

Click to shrink...

Thanks for sharing this! I had missed the thread, I'll read through it. I also had missed the Control update, which is super cool. It helps me to recommend it to people who would be really interested without the somewhat high difficulty.

 

[KamenRiderEra]

I must add that I find it weird that requests of accessibilities options fall on niche games, like souls for example. (Ok, not so niche, but not COD level at all). Like, the most popular games are multiplayer behemoths like Fortnite, COD Warzone, Pubg, .

I just think there are more chances that a player with disability want to play these popular games than Bloodborne for example. So, is online competitive games gatekeeping?

 

[Timu]

I don't mind more accessibilities in games, but often a game with multiple difficulty levels are ridiculously unbalanced. Normal mode should be soulslike challenging. Then, from there, other options could be added, even the easiest and wide accessibility.

Click to shrink...

Some games just don't do that well at all sadly. I have to stick to Normal in that case.

 

[Feep]

Remember, you can never criticize literally anything in games ever because the developers made it that way and it was their vision

Detailed, thoughtful reviews? Idiots, the developers intended it that way

 

[En-ou]

I don't want that sort of stuff gone completely, but I do wish it was something you could opt out of so it just never showed up.

Is that not largely a movie at that point though? Would you charge the full price for an experience like that? Could you offer the equivalent of the YouTube cutscene "movie" videos for direct purchase?

Click to shrink...

You'd be surprised.
Lots of gamers here just really are interested more in the virtual checkbox and completing it in X number or hours. If they die once or have to backtrack 2 steps the game is wasting their time...

 

[laoni]

Hades has a mode called (God Mode) which increase damage resistance of upto 80%.
Does this make Hades more accessible?

To apply this to Souls game, would also need to be coupled with slow/stop motion quick time events and extremely large time window for traps and animation recovery on enemies.

Edit: The stop motion quick time option actually sounds like a good idea, imagine having it as a toggle button in the menu for parry. When ever the enemies can be parried, the game world slow downs and pauses until you want to parry (or do another action to skip parry and slowly increase the game world speed to normal).

Click to shrink...

Hi! Physical and spacial/motor processing disabilities here, and yeah, Hades' God Mode has really helped me actually play, alongside remapping controls to be more accessible for me. I'm still having a crapton of fun, I'm still dying if my boons are shit and getting the adrenaline pumping in really tough rooms. I think if I were to make one change to it for myself, it would be a clear reducing your resistance by 2%, because you do get permanently stronger as you go on, and I still want those exhilarating moments, I worry a little bit as I get more Titan Blood and upgrades, that that will be less because the Godhood is fixed. But, I can also shut Godhood off and play without it too if I ever get to that point!

 

[Budi]

I just think there are more chances that a player with disability want to play these popular games than Bloodborne for example. So, is online competitive games gatekeeping?

Click to shrink...

I think most, not all, competitive games have skillbased matchmaking. So the intent is to face you with players that perform similarly to you. Also many games have bots. I'm definitely in favor of having bots in any online shooter and moba. With different difficulties too obviously.

And to add, I think people should be able to play on their preferred controller method. So if someone can't use a gamepad, but can use mouse and keyboard, then this should be possible in online console games too. This possibly requires effort from the platform holders too, not just game devs.