Difficulty by Design - What’s the Difference between Sekiro and Crusader Kings?

[DrArchon]

That would only go so far as there really isn't that much raw text in Paradox games, and most of it is just flavor text. The difficulty comes from reading the UI and map and learning the game mechanics.

Better tutorials are something they definitely need to strive for. They've made some attempts, but rarely keep them up to date with the evolution of the game.

Click to shrink...

I feel like a lot of complaints about difficult could be mitigated with better on-ramping. We saw a lot of this when Monster Hunter World released, where people that previously thought that the series was completely impenetrable were getting into World because of basic stuff like tutorials for weapons (not even great ones at that).

 

[Yerffej]

Austin walker already adressed him the right way on this. My thinking is it takes absolutely nothing away from a dev to put in an easier mode in the form of bosses taking much less damage to go down. All the mechanics are in place, you still have to learn patterns, it just doesn't as long to overcome. If your system's are fun enough, and especially if you've built in NG+ and story/alternate paths and bosses with another run through, these people might feel it's absolutely worth it to go at it again. Possibly on a higher, intended difficulty. I honestly don't see why this is a problem.

 

[Xero grimlock]

You guys understand that crusader kings is like paradoxes easiest most accessible strategy game right? I can play crusader kings fine, Europa I just limp around until I'm destroyed.

 

[marrec]

You guys understand that crusader kings is like paradoxes easiest most accessible strategy game right? I can play crusader kings fine, Europa I just limp around until I'm destroyed.

Click to shrink...

You guys understand that Sekiro is From Softwares easiest and most accessible action game right?

 

[Budi]

I just want to make sure we understand the implications here.

Both Paradox and From Software design their games with a specific difficulty ramp in mind. By design, their games are notorious for their inaccessibility. Yet because Paradox games require less physical dexterity than From Software games they get a pass, despite being more mentally challenging.

I think my point is that we cannot expect developers to change the design philosophy of their games if that philosophy includes a specific level of difficulty. Accessibility should be considered, however we have to stop conflating accessibility with difficulty.

Lastly, as for physical accessibility in From Soft games, consider:

https://kotaku.com/someones-playing-through-dark-souls-with-donkey-kongas-1692602550

Microsoft has released a controller that is designed specifically with inclusivity in mind. THAT is where we should be looking toward when we talk about accessibility in gaming, not some blind requirement that all games include some kind of easy difficulty option.

Click to shrink...

And because Paradox offers cheats AND difficulty settings. And I'm not sure Crusader Kings gets a pass. Nobody just isn't arguing against accessibility options in that, like they constantly do with From Soft games. If From Soft offered difficulty options and cheats too, or assist mode like Celeste. I'm sure it wouldn't be talked as much. Don't think anyone would be against better tutorials for CK, so your fiance could start playing.

 

[Turin Turambar]

So why then, if we are supposed to believe that difficulty and accessibility go hand in hand, do we not see endless articles about Paradox strategy games lamenting their difficulty? My fiancé would rather chew her own arm off before sitting through even 5 minutes of a Paradox tutorial, should they make some kind of change to the game in order to make her more able to play the game?

Click to shrink...

It sounds like she finds Paradox games boring, not difficult.

 

[Xero grimlock]

You guys understand that Sekiro is From Softwares easiest and most accessible action game right?

Click to shrink...

I wasn't discounting the topic, just found it weird that's the paradox game they went to for difficulty, particularly to those interested, but intimidated by the game crusader kings is one of paradoxes more accessible games.

 

[marrec]

It sounds like she finds Paradox games boring, not difficult.

Click to shrink...

Nope, she loves the idea of that kind of grand strategy game but due to her ADHD she physically cannot get through the tutorials necessary to play.

 

[PeskyToaster]

I don't think it's necessarily true that games are the only media that has some sort of barrier to fully appreciate.

 

[Morrigan]

Neither Paradox nor From should dumb their games down so that everyone and their parents can beat them. I actually like the comparison because I'm super familiar with From, yet I'm the dog in a science jacket with Crusader Kings 2.

That said I respect what Paradox is doing even if its way too complex and over my head. They definitely shouldn't have to make changes to their game for a dummy like myself.

Click to shrink...

Microsoft has released a controller that is designed specifically with inclusivity in mind. THAT is where we should be looking toward when we talk about accessibility in gaming, not some blind requirement that all games include some kind of easy difficulty option.

Click to shrink...

Agreed entirely with both these posts.

 

[Sean Mirrsen]

I'll just repost this because the other thread got locked and I feel this still is at least slightly on topic here.

You already lost me. But I'm sure this will be a fun discussion from people that enjoy having options taken from them.

Edit: I'd like to elaborate: If you make a hard game, that's fine. If you don't include an easy mode, that is also fine. But claiming that NOT including an easy mode will make people enjoy a game MORE is a stance I'm not following at all.

Click to shrink...

It's a more general statement, going beyond difficulty modes.

Limits are good for game design. A game without limits, on the broadest level, is a quicksand box. A game where you can fly anywhere in the world, kill anything easily, with nothing to structure or define the experience like tasks or progression (i.e. limits), is a nice toy, but it's not a game.

Thus, imposing limits is part of what defines the experience. More limits is not always bad, more choice is not always good, and the reverse is also true. So the point that limits can be an improvement, is not at all false. A storyline in an open-world game is a limit, a set of rails to follow. A wall in your way is a limit, the size of your rifle's magazine is a limit, your healthbar is a limit. The choices of being limited is what makes a game what it is. So yes, being limited to a certain difficulty is in no way bad - most games, at least back when game design was still an art and not an industry, just had cheatcodes for when you couldn't handle the pressure.

---------------------------------------------------

More on the point of difficulty versus accessibility, I'd like to posit that it's literally impossible to make games always comply with all accessibility requirements. Because games that use audio cues to alert the player will make the deaf disadvantaged. Games that require the use of a keyboard will make (most) people with missing or injured hands unable to enjoy them. Games that utilize visuals of any kind won't be much use for the blind. Etc, etc.

It's not a requirement to make accessibility functions, even where a game's design and vision allows for them. It is certainly not a given for them to be present where it does not. And adding lower difficulties, rebalancing the game for a different kind of disadvantage, is likewise possible - but in no way should be required. Games, as constructs of their creators' imagining, have the right to be hard.

 

[Deleted member 45414]

By the time FromSoftware release their next game, I'm certain Sekiro won't be remembered as their hardest game, it'll be whatever the new game is.

 

[Pillock]

It is quite patronizing for a bunch of able bodied people to argue that disabled people need easy modes.

 

[TheCthultist]

I don't think it's necessarily true that games are the only media that has some sort of barrier to fully appreciate.

Click to shrink...

They're very much not, but good luck convincing someone who thinks that way of the contrary...

 

[Budi]

It is quite patronizing for a bunch of able bodied people to argue that disabled people need easy modes.

Click to shrink...

Nah, it's something people with disabilities do themselves. But they're disadvantaged and opressed minority and their voice gets drowned, especially here. So helping to get their voice heard shouldn't be patronizing. I've been also using tweets from people who work on accessibility for disabled or are disabled themselves.

If you're a person with a disability and feel that way, then I apologize for that. But I can assure you, I don't think everyone who is in some way disabled wants or needs easy modes.

 

[BossAttack]

There's no downside to difficulty modes and it would help lots of people out.

It's not hard to grasp.

Click to shrink...

Git gud.

Nah, it's something people with disabilities do themselves. But they're disadvantaged and opressed minority and their voice gets drowned, especially here. So helping to get their voice heard shouldn't be patronizing. I've been also using tweets from people who work on accessibility for disabled or are disabled themselves.

Click to shrink...

A quadriplegic just beat Sekiro. Difficulty is not the same as accessibility. Color-blind options is something all games should implement, not a difficulty scale.

 

[Morrigan]

You guys understand that Sekiro is From Softwares easiest and most accessible action game right?

Click to shrink...

lol? Now you've lost me.

Most accessible, yes. I agree there. It has more streamlined tutorials, a training dummy, no obtuse gameplay mechanic, a more digestible story.

Easiest? Shit no. It's much harder than Souls games.

Nah, it's something people with disabilities do themselves. But they're an opressed minority and their voice gets drowned, especially here. So helping to get their voice heard shouldn't be patronizing. I've been also using tweets from people who work on accessibility for disabled or are disabled themselves.

Click to shrink...

And we've had disabled people who disagreed too. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

 

[Kaguya]

I wouldn't mind if it actually had a difficulty setting, since it lacks online play that benefit from a unified player base, but also don't think anyone is "entitled" to a difficulty setting option. If the developer didn't want one, then godspeed, not every game have to cater to everyone and a big part of those games brilliance is not following AAA "gotta make sure everyone can get through" designs.

And for Souls fans who are now complaining about Sekiro's difficulty, how did you feel about those complaining about the lack of maps, proper checkpoint, "heavy movement", unfair difficulty, etc... Before toward Souls games?! Is it only an issue now because you're outside the targeted group?

 

[Delusibeta]

In the very specific case of the Kingsoulsbornesekiro style of From Software gamrs, I do think that "it's hard" has become the unique selling point. Subsequently, I don't expect them to ever put in a specific "easy mode" in these games. Heck, there's a bunch of design changes in Sekiro intended to take away crutches people were relying on in previous Soulsborne games.

In comparison, Celeste's unique selling point was the story, and the fact that it was hard as nails was primarily in service of said story (the narrative payoff in the end would have been severely watered down if it was an easier game). Subsequently, I can see the logic behind adding the "accessibility mode" to help people who were only there for the story.

Ultimately, the conclusion is "know your unique selling point, and know your intended audience", and design accordingly.

 

[MonadL]

I mean, the downside is the increased development time and resources obviously.

Yes, some developers simply don't have the resources necesary to dedicate toward tweaking difficulty options just right.

Click to shrink...

Like 95% of Sekiro's challenge comes from bosses (and sometimes enemies) taking off 3/4ths of your health bar in one swipe. You can fix that easily with a tweak to an Excel spreadsheet. It's not like Dark Souls or Bloodborne where a decent amount of the challenge comes from navigating the spaces themselves or figuring out other obscure shit. Sekiro is actually the first From game I've played where an easy mode could be implement without too much hassle.

 

[Budi]

And we've had disabled people who disagreed too. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Click to shrink...

That matters none. There are disabled people who need them and want them. That's what matters. There's a speedrunner I linked in another thread who is also disabled, but he explicitly also has said that don't use him as an example that assists aren't needed. Or the fact that he loves Dark Souls which is considered inaccessible.

Edit: That might have came out the wrong way, the person against easy modes of course is entitled to their opinion and free to state that. And it's super cool if their disability isn't limiting them from enjoying games they are interested in. But I ment it doesn't erase the need for more accessibility to others.

 

[marrec]

lol? Now you've lost me.

Most accessible, yes. I agree there. It has more streamlined tutorials, a training dummy, no obtuse gameplay mechanic, a more digestible story.

Easiest? Shit no. It's much harder than Souls games.

Click to shrink...

I was just being glib, the point isn't that CK2 is the hardest Paradox game, only that it's a popular example of acceptable difficulty in contemporary games and I want to know why.

 

[VonGreckler]

Some disappointing responses here...
Steve Spohn had a great thread about this.

Spoiler: Twitter Text

Tweets like this scare me. Here you have someone with a very large platform yelling developers shouldn't waste their time on adding difficulty levels because it's "not accessibility" Yes, it is Also, we do many things to make books accessible including braille and audio formats

I have spent years fighting alongside my accessibility allies reasoning with the public that accessibility is not the enemy Some people NEED difficulty levels/difficulty options to be able to enjoy a videogame. And if those options don't hurt you, why would you try to stop em?

I get it. People are proud to defeat games like Dark Souls BECAUSE not everyone can beat the game. If you beat the game on hard, and I beat the game on easy. You can still brag But if difficulty levels are present, at least we can both beat the game. We can both enjoy the game.

Along the way in arguing whether or not difficulty levels should EXIST we forgot why difficulty levels were invented Games are supposed to be about FUN. Difficulty levels are there to allow people to determine what FUN IS TO THEM Let's try to remember games are for everyone

Let me say this one time very succinctly so that reporters and Reddit can quote it: YOUR enjoyment of a single player game is not affected by how another person chooses to experience that same videogame.

 

[Morrigan]

That matters none. There are disabled people who need them and want them. That's what matters. There's a speedrunner I linked in another thread who is also disabled, but he explicitly also has said that don't use him as an example that assists aren't needed. Or the fact that he loves Dark Souls which is considered inaccessible.

Edit: That might have came out the wrong way, the person against easy modes of course is entitled to their opinion and free to state that. But I ment it doesn't erase the need for more accessibility to others.

Click to shrink...

OK to be clear, are we talking about accessibility or easy modes here?

 

[Deleted member 29682]

In comparison, Celeste's unique selling point was the story, and the fact that it was hard as nails was primarily in service of said story (the narrative payoff in the end would have been severely watered down if it was an easier game). Subsequently, I can see the logic behind adding the "accessibility mode" to help people who were only there for the story.

Ultimately, the conclusion is "know your unique selling point, and know your intended audience", and design accordingly.

Click to shrink...

Yeah, that's why I don't think there would be much pushback from fans to accessibility options added to something like Crusader Kings, as opposed to something like Sekiro. I'm not sure it's a comparison that works that well.

 

[Budi]

OK to be clear, are we talking about accessibility or easy modes here?

Click to shrink...

Both, because they work as the same. And assist modes and cheats etc. There's a lot of ways one can approach this and much is of course tied to difficulty too.

Some disappointing responses here...
Steve Spohn had a great thread about this.

Spoiler: Twitter Text

Tweets like this scare me. Here you have someone with a very large platform yelling developers shouldn't waste their time on adding difficulty levels because it's "not accessibility" Yes, it is Also, we do many things to make books accessible including braille and audio formats

I have spent years fighting alongside my accessibility allies reasoning with the public that accessibility is not the enemy Some people NEED difficulty levels/difficulty options to be able to enjoy a videogame. And if those options don't hurt you, why would you try to stop em?

I get it. People are proud to defeat games like Dark Souls BECAUSE not everyone can beat the game. If you beat the game on hard, and I beat the game on easy. You can still brag But if difficulty levels are present, at least we can both beat the game. We can both enjoy the game.

Along the way in arguing whether or not difficulty levels should EXIST we forgot why difficulty levels were invented Games are supposed to be about FUN. Difficulty levels are there to allow people to determine what FUN IS TO THEM Let's try to remember games are for everyone

Let me say this one time very succinctly so that reporters and Reddit can quote it: YOUR enjoyment of a single player game is not affected by how another person chooses to experience that same videogame.

Click to shrink...

And this

 

[Timeaisis]

Why is the entire argument against this pretending that we are saying every game needs a difficulty setting when in reality we are just saying we wish every game had them?

Need and want are two very, very different things.

 

[Oklusion]

The problem with the argument of "I can't finish this game because is too hard" is that it's not true.

There's no game that at some point takes control away and tells you: "You suck, GTFO".

Baring some disability any game can be completed by anyone because the more play the better you get. Obviously people start at different levels or learn at a different pace, but if someone quits it's their choice.

 

[Deleted member 34618]

Some disappointing responses here...
Steve Spohn had a great thread about this.

Spoiler: Twitter Text

Tweets like this scare me. Here you have someone with a very large platform yelling developers shouldn't waste their time on adding difficulty levels because it's "not accessibility" Yes, it is Also, we do many things to make books accessible including braille and audio formats

I have spent years fighting alongside my accessibility allies reasoning with the public that accessibility is not the enemy Some people NEED difficulty levels/difficulty options to be able to enjoy a videogame. And if those options don't hurt you, why would you try to stop em?

I get it. People are proud to defeat games like Dark Souls BECAUSE not everyone can beat the game. If you beat the game on hard, and I beat the game on easy. You can still brag But if difficulty levels are present, at least we can both beat the game. We can both enjoy the game.

Along the way in arguing whether or not difficulty levels should EXIST we forgot why difficulty levels were invented Games are supposed to be about FUN. Difficulty levels are there to allow people to determine what FUN IS TO THEM Let's try to remember games are for everyone

Let me say this one time very succinctly so that reporters and Reddit can quote it: YOUR enjoyment of a single player game is not affected by how another person chooses to experience that same videogame.

Click to shrink...

I agree with Sam Thorne

 

[Morrigan]

Both, because they work as the same.

Click to shrink...

Yeah, I don't agree with that. If a quadriplegic can play Sekiro better than me, the game is accessible enough.

 

[jph139]

Paradox games aren't hard, they just have a high barrier of entry. If they could snap their fingers and include an amazing, perfect tutorial that helped people play the game without a learning curve, they would absolutely include it.

The reason you don't see people complain is just because most people don't really want to play Crusader Kings. It's an incredibly niche genre of games without much appeal to mainstream audiences. If there was a huge thirst for janky looking historical sandboxes there'd be a lot more clamoring.

 

[marrec]

Yeah, I don't agree with that. If a quadriplegic can play Sekiro better than me, the game is accessible enough.

Click to shrink...

Yep.

The physical barriers should be removed, not the gameplay barriers.

 

[Budi]

Yeah, I don't agree with that. If a quadriplegic can play Sekiro better than me, the game is accessible enough.

Click to shrink...

You do know that not everyone with a disability is the same? Come on now. And honestly, you came of bit like "my black friend says it's okay." With all due respect. And you can disagree too, the discussion still goes on and the need is still there.

 

[Kaguya]

Nah, it's something people with disabilities do themselves. But they're disadvantaged and opressed minority and their voice gets drowned, especially here. So helping to get their voice heard shouldn't be patronizing. I've been also using tweets from people who work on accessibility for disabled or are disabled themselves.

Click to shrink...

Did any disabled person actually complained about this or is this a case of people using the plight of the disabled to further strengthen their own case toward what they themselves want?

 

[Budi]

Did any disabled person actually complained about this or is this a case of people using the plight of the disabled to further strengthen their own case toward what they themselves want?

Click to shrink...

Yes, there's tweets just few posts above. And accessibility consultants have also talked about this. I don't want easier difficulties to From Soft games, I don't give a shit myself. And if I did, I'd use Cheat Engine since I play on PC. It's not a problem for me.

 

[Dark1x]

I'm fully with Ben on this. Accessibility options are great but not every game needs to be for everyone. There are a TON of super popular games that are absolutely not for me and that's OK. I can't play Fortnite and I don't care - that's fine. There are so many impenetrable games out there that I simply cannot enjoy - they aren't for me and I can't play them. Sekiro, to me, is much easier to master than something like a Call of Duty multiplayer. Why is Sekiro the target for this anyways when there are so many other examples of games that, if you haven't kept up, you basically cannot play.

Tangentially related - horizontal and vertical shooters are an interesting example. My preferred style is something like Gradius. Why? You take a hit, you die. There are also limited continues.

If I play a shooter and you have A) infinite continues or, more importantly, B) you can continue where you die, it's basically ruined for me. The reason? There is no real incentive to master the game. It's that steep challenge and need to repeat those challenges that leads to mastery - you begin to appreciate every corner of every stage. You learn the stage and it feels rewarding. That part of the experience is something I enjoy greatly and I can't find a way to repeat this joy with shooters that allow you to just keep retrying where you died. I never feel that incentive to really master the game.

Sekiro is exactly like Gradius or other comparable shooters of that era to me.

I also finally picked up a copy of Shadow Dancer on Mega Drive - been playing it and having fun. The fact that you can die within seconds until you get to grips is actually very appealing to me. It's a game that requires perfection. If you had a huge life bar and could take tons of damage I probably wouldn't bother playing it at all. The thrill would be gone.

I'm OK with whatever the developers want to do, though, and I understand the various perspectives on it. It's just, for me, a focus challenge on a small scale is very appealing. I think that's why open world games don't really do anything for me - it all feels aimless. There isn't any reward or challenge in getting through the game.

Again, though, this is 100% my feeling. I do believe the option to play using easy mode in a game like Sekiro would personally detract from my enjoyment as I know I'm weak willed when it comes to that. I need to be pushed. I'm not really sure it's all that more difficult than something like 2004's Ninja Gaiden which is another game I absolutely adore and challenge plays a huge role there.

I will say, though, that creating difficult games seems to be very difficult to pull off in a way that's fair and fun. Call of Duty single player on the hardest difficulty? It's terrible and not well design. The Adventures of Batman & Robin on Mega Drive? Again - it's very poorly designed and cheap. It wasn't well thought out and isn't rewarding to master as a result.

Again, just my thought on difficulty, NOT accessibility. Very different, from my perspective.

 

[elyetis]

I doubt most people arguing for more difficulty settings in a game like Sekiro, would be against complexity settings ( in addition to existing difficulty settings, or cheats ) in Crusader Kings 2.

You just don't hear about it because Paradox games are far more niche, and forum like Era -mostly- don't care about PC games.

 

[eathdemon]

I doubt most people arguing for more difficulty settings in a game like Sekiro, would be against complexity settings ( in addition to existing difficulty settings, or cheats ) in Crusader Kings 2.

You just don't hear about it because Paradox games are far more niche, and forum like Era -mostly- don't care about PC games.

Click to shrink...

feels like a lot of it is games that tend to be challenging, also use interesting art style. so I get why people would want to play it.

 

[MZZ]

Reducing enemy damage will do miles in making any fromsoft game to become easier. The most difficult part of their games is managing to stay alive. Figuring out the strategy or pattern takes time and you need to stay alive to do that. Once you died enough and built up a good strategy and muscle memory, enemies will eventually fall. It has always been like this for fromsoft games for me.

I can see how skill levels may differ and how it can take different attempts for a person to finally defeat a boss. So an easy mode is not out of the question.

The ideology of the fromsoft games have always been reward through perseverance and skill. An easy mode where enemy damage is less would be sufficient. Players are just provided more attempts to learn how to defeat a boss which makes the struggle far less. There are items that increases armor for a limited period but the effect is short enough that the game barely becomes easy with it.

I'd rather that the easy mode is not a toggle option. It should only be selected from the start.

OR an item that you have to use in game with special requirements like dying to the same boss 10 times in a row will allow activation of easy mode for 10 more attempts and the game gets easier if you still keep dying. You can cancel the effect any time the same way that the bell works in sekiro to make the game harder.

 

[Neilg]

I am just sad because sekiro looks cool and i'd like to run around it's world killing stuff, but also I dont have time after to work to bang my head against difficulty walls. If there's a chance in a game I could spend 2 hours playing it and not make any progress, or that my being a little bit tired could prevent me from progressing, it's totally off limits to me. I dont play games to feel like I have to put work in.


I haven't made any public complaints calling for an easy mode, but i am sad it's a cool looking game i'll never be able to play and can see why some people might feel the same.

e: for what it's worth, i'd see an easy mode in from games as things like a parry indicator, maybe a touch of slo-mo when you're in danger in of getting one-shot and an attack comes close. Not invincibility or so much defense you cant get hurt - you'd still have some touch & go moments when only just winning a fight, but it'd take some of the need for relentless studying and day-job like levels of focus required for some people down a notch.

 

[Manu]

This is gonna go nohwere just like every other thread about this we've had in here.

I think the crux of the issue is that some people are adamant on the belief that everyone should be able to experience any game start to finish. I personally think that's a load of crap and that not being able to beat a game because it's too hard or too complex or whatever is just part of playing video games and there's nothing wrong with that.

Accesibility settings that allow people with disablities to be on the same playing field as everyone else though? Perfectly fine and I commend any dev who goes the extra mile.

And also this:

I don't think it's necessarily true that games are the only media that has some sort of barrier to fully appreciate.

Click to shrink...

 

[DoubleTake]

This conversation only ever comes up with From games because the accessibility "problem" is much easier to pinpoint(dexterity based) even though that particular issue of accessibility is easier solved by accommodating peripherals and remappable controls(which Sekiro has) than developing modes that may or may not cater everyone. When its something like cognitive ability then no one pays any attention.

From will continue to make the game they want to make. Miyazaki has said his vision is for everyone to experience their games from an even playing field. To be able to share their experience of overcoming challenges without having to wonder if they were on a higher or lower difficulty than someone else. Yes, that means not everyone will be able to join in the conversation but that is a fact and reality of life across many different things. It's not about being a part of an elitist group like so many seem to believe. Let From continue to strive for their vision until they don't care to anymore.

 

[Spence]

I think the whole "if person X can beat the game so can person Y" argument falls pretty flat, a lot of people wont play or finish the game because mentally it's too taxing on them, it stresses them out because the bar is so high. That means a lot of people who might have wanted to wont finish or even play the game, that's a lot of people who will miss everything awesome it has to offer outside of the most difficult encounters. I'm not sure if an easy mode is the solution or if there is another way to ease the most difficult encounters as an option but if we had that option would it really hurt those that chose to play on the intended difficulty?

 

[Budi]

I don't think it's necessarily true that games are the only media that has some sort of barrier to fully appreciate.

Click to shrink...

It's not about appreciation, but accessibility. This isn't about asking that From Soft should make games they appreciate, people already do hence they'd want to be able to play them.

From will continue to make the game they want to make. Miyazaki has said his vision is for everyone to experience their games from an even playing field. To be able to share their experience of overcoming challenges without having to wonder if they were on a higher or lower difficulty than someone else. Yes, that means not everyone will be able to join in the conversation but that is a fact and reality of life across many different things. It's not about being a part of an elitist group like so many seem to believe. Let From continue to strive for their vision until they don't care to anymore.

Click to shrink...

But people aren't on even playing field, the game is same for everyone but the player is different. Hence it's a different experience. And you can just ask "what difficulty you played on?" Then you know.

 

[casnix]

Git gud.



A quadriplegic just beat Sekiro. Difficulty is not the same as accessibility. Color-blind options is something all games should implement, not a difficulty scale.

Click to shrink...

That's amazing. Thanks for sharing that.

 

[VonGreckler]

The thing that people are not understanding, I think, is that difficulty IS accessibility.
I don't understand why there is so much gate-keeping here on this topic...

YOUR enjoyment of a single player game is not affected by how another person chooses to experience that same game.

 

[Man Called Aerodynamics]

I am just sad because sekiro looks cool and i'd like to run around it's world killing stuff, but also I dont have time after to work to bang my head against difficulty walls. If there's a chance in a game I could spend 2 hours playing it and not make any progress, or that my being a little bit tired could prevent me from progressing, it's totally off limits to me. I dont play games to feel like I have to put work in.

Click to shrink...

I feel the same way about Souls. I think the setting and atmosphere look super neat and I would love to experience that, but I don't have the time and inclination to master the difficulty level of that series.

The series isn't for me, but that's okay! I don't believe that my personal preference should override what From is trying to accomplish artistically with their titles. There are tons of other games that do cater to what I'm looking for.

 

[marrec]

It's not about appreciation, but accessibility. This isn't about asking that From Soft should make games they appreciate, people already do hence they'd want to be able to play them.

Click to shrink...

From Soft games are as accessible as the control set up you are using to play them.

 

[Morrigan]

I think the crux of the issue is that some people are adamant on the belief that everyone should be able to experience any game start to finish. I personally think that's a load of crap and that not being able to beat a game because it's too hard or too complex or whatever is just part of playing video games and there's nothing wrong with that.

Accesibility settings that allow people with disablities to be on the same playing field as everyone else though? Perfectly fine and I commend any dev who goes the extra mile.

Click to shrink...

Perfectly reasonable and I agree completely.

I also can't help notice something (after discussing this with someone in Discord): Nexusmods has 4 pages of mods for Sekiro... almost all of which are entirely cosmetic. Unless I'm blind, I'm not seeing any mod that tweaks the difficulty in any way. So people should maybe stop saying it's trivial dev work, eh?

 

[Windu]

yeah games don't need to have difficulty modes but if you want to hit large sales numbers these days then you need to play test the hell out of it for easier play or have separate difficulty levels, which I guess could be the same thing depending on the game. The biggest issue with a lot of small indie games these days is that they are just too hard, devs either don't have time to play test them or just want to limit the game to a hard difficulty. I just hope they are aware that when they do that, it limits the market for them in a market already saturated with games to play.