• Introducing Image Options for ResetEra 2.0! Check the left side navigation bar to show or hide images, avatars, covers, and embedded media. More details at the link.
  • Community Spotlight sign-ups are open once again for both Gaming and EtcetEra Hangout threads! If you want to shine a spotlight on your community, please register now.

(Insert game here) isn’t even that hard.

Oct 27, 2017
13,477
#1
Am I the only one who can’t stand this argument? Look if you find a game people complaining about to be easy for you fine that’s cool, but chances are people are complaining for a reason.

I don’t know something about this really bugs me. The way it just immediately assumes that obviously people should not have trouble with a game or section because they didn’t. It feels arrogant even if that’s not the intention of the argument.

I’m not trying to insult anyone who enjoys challenging games but something about this line has always bugged me. Anyone else or am I just being to sensitive?

(Let’s see how many people don’t read the OP and just start listing games they don’t think are hard.)
 
Feb 25, 2018
3,130
#2
Yeah it’s a condescending argument, although can have some useful insight

I didn't realise how souls and bloodborne worked when i was young because i didn't understand what i frames where. Once i did it became easy
 
Dec 14, 2017
483
#4
It is offensive, no matter the situation. Those who say it enjoy in having done something someone else has not. When discussing difficult games it's the easiest to see who truly loves the game and those who enjoy the notion of it.
 
Oct 28, 2017
2,524
#5
I sort of had this reaction to Sekiro recently, but only because it was my first FromSoftware game after years of hearing people treating these games as gauntlets of pure torture. In reality, it's not much harder than other hard games, you just die a handful of times against the boss until you figure out what their whole deal is, then it becomes manageable and you beat them. It's nowhere near the 50 attempts per boss level of hard I expected.

I support easy modes for these games btw, because I recognize that they still take a number of tries per difficult boss, depending on the person. Parents with less free time, older or not as skilled gamers, disabled players, etc. would still like to see the content and experience the adventure, and they should be free to. An easy mode doesn't affect me in any negative way, provided the core experience is still available for players seeking challenge (which, of course it would be, multiple difficulty settings have been a thing for a long time now).
 
Last edited:
Oct 25, 2017
3,019
#6
Edit - Didn't read the OP. I don't feel Soul games are hard but I never use that way to down play someone's skills. I find Mario games super hard, so who I'm I to talk.
 
Oct 27, 2017
3,734
#7
It is offensive, no matter the situation. Those who say it enjoy in having done something someone else has not. When discussing difficult games it's the easiest to see who truly loves the game and those who enjoy the notion of it.
It's not offensive when people try to throw a games difficulty in your face to prove you lack the skills to enjoy said game. That happens quite a bit when I say I don't care for a particular game.
 
Oct 25, 2017
21,059
#8
I sort of had this reaction to Sekiro recently, but only because it was my first FromSoftware game after years of hearing people treating these games as gauntlets of pure torture. In reality, it's not much harder than other hard games, you just die a handful of times against the boss until you figure out what their whole deal is, then it becomes manageable and you beat them. It's nowhere near the 50 attempts per boss level of hard I expected.
I haven't actually played any soulsborne outside of just literally 5 minutes of bb, but posts like these make me want to try them more.
 

Bit_Reactor

Banned
Member
Apr 9, 2019
152
#9
I definitely agree that the people who are dicks about it should leave people alone, I've also seen the opposite example where someone is provided multiple pieces of advice by multiple users on the forum on how to tackle something and insist that the game is "broken" or "stupid" for being "too hard" even after the fact. It goes both ways in my experience.

We're all here to share our experiences with gaming, but if someone gives you a ton of options and your only answer is "Screw this game it's broken" or some other variation of "it's the game's fault" I have issues with that just as much.
 
Nov 2, 2017
1,096
#10
Maybe the people saying that have a bit of insight your ego doesn't want to deal with? Nobody's intentionally putting down your skill, maybe there's some truth to the statement that 'it's not that hard' and they have some insight to offer as to why.

For example, Sekiro . . . isn't that hard. Once you learn the patterns to the enemies, which are super obvious after you face them a few times, the game becomes cake.
 
Oct 28, 2017
2,524
#11
I haven't actually played any soulsborne outside of just literally 5 minutes of bb, but posts like these make me want to try them more.
You should try at least one of them, and see if it's your thing. There's a reason they're so acclaimed, and it's not just because people like to act as gatekeepers on hard games. The atmosphere, enemy design, boss fights, lore (if that's what you're into), environments, etc. are all very top notch. Loved my time with Sekiro, and will be playing Bloodborne within the next few months for sure.
 
Nov 17, 2017
208
#12
It is offensive, no matter the situation. Those who say it enjoy in having done something someone else has not. When discussing difficult games it's the easiest to see who truly loves the game and those who enjoy the notion of it.
Don't really agree with this. A lot of the time it's the other way around with people hyping up the difficulty to keep the aura and mystique of the games going and enhancing its mythology as DIFFICULT and IMPENETRABLE which doesn't really add anything to a discussion.

Of course drive-by comments that sneer at those who find something difficult are shitty, as are insults, but it's possible to suggest something isn't as difficult as people think and for that to be a constructive and uplifting addition to a conversation as well. I imagine a lot of people who have finished those games are coming from a place of experience and trying to use that experience to say Yo, it's not that bad, you can figure this out, which is a much more constructive thing than jackin off the notion of the impossible game.
 

L Thammy

Spacenoid
Member
Oct 25, 2017
13,315
#13
The eagles in Ninja Gaiden NES aren't even that hard. They take a while to start moving so if you go right for them you can slash them before they do anything, and failing that, they'll charge straight into your slashing range if you stand still.
 
Oct 25, 2017
3,480
#14
Gotta swing your gamer balls around man lol

It's the same genre of argument as when you say you have a problem with something or some fault with something and they'll reply "never happened for me". Ok? That helps how?
 
Oct 27, 2017
2,007
#15
fromsoftware elitists thread? fromsoftware elitists thread
For me at least, Dark Souls 2 was honestly really really really easy. Some of the bosses were mobs as bosses lmao. The others are a different story. Bloodborne was one of the harder games I ever played. Especially some of the DLC bosses.
 
Oct 27, 2017
250
#17
I'd rather see people just admit they're bad at certain games instead of calling them hard, impossible or unfair when they're clearly not for others. It's fine to be bad at something. There are plenty of games I suck at too.
 
Oct 25, 2017
806
#18
My favorite example of this was in a Street Fighter 5 thread (I think on the old board, but maybe here) when someone said they haven't reached Silver League, and got a condescending "You surely can't be THAT bad?"
Still sticks around in my head, maybe because I have to fight for my live to stay in Silver League, lol.
 
Oct 25, 2017
330
#21
A lot of people who will be the first to tell you that a game isn't even that hard are also the ones dumping 3+ hours every single day without exception into videogames since they were like 5 years old. They've completely lost any and all basis for what hard or easy even is after dedicating that amount of time into videogames. The possibility of playing a game and not instantly coming to grips with any number of complicated control schemes or mechanics is something they'll never have to deal with or even consider as to a reason why someone might not be enjoying a game or why it might be harder for others. Souls games have basically poisoned the well for the foreseeable future on the discussion of games difficulty because certain people who beat these games that advertise themselves as being a difficult and crushing experience like to downplay their difficulty to pat themselves on the back for completing them as some sort of jackass badge of pride and nerd cred.
 
Feb 16, 2019
267
#23
People can be dicks and there's no saving them, but honestly speaking the Internet LOVES hyperbole, and quite frankly some difficult games have their difficulty blown out of proportion. So I'm comfortable with using the "game isn't that hard" argument if I can back-up my argument with strategies and approaches to trivialize encounters or even just a simple paradigm shift.

This won't work for every game, but some games just need a different approach to get eased in.
 

Manmademan

Banned
Member
Aug 6, 2018
3,110
#25
Castlevania 1 isn't too bad once you learn enemy patterns/have decent sub-weapons.

US Castlevania III... now that is hard.
There's a handful of NES games that are just unfair because no one really seemed to give a shit about QA or whatever (Castlevania 1 is in this boat- IIRC they removed the save function for the US version, and the less we talk about Bayou Billy the better), but most of those games were designed to be played by young kids, castlevania III included.

Understand that you're meant to memorize enemy placement and patterns over time with those and NOT cruise through them the first time you pick it up and you'll be fine. Most of those games can be completed in a couple of hours- but getting good enough to make it through in a couple of hours is expected to take weeks/months.
 
Dec 14, 2017
483
#26
It's not offensive when people try to throw a games difficulty in your face to prove you lack the skills to enjoy said game. That happens quite a bit when I say I don't care for a particular game.
Uh, isn't that offensive? And also the situation I am describing?

Don't really agree with this. A lot of the time it's the other way around with people hyping up the difficulty to keep the aura and mystique of the games going and enhancing its mythology as DIFFICULT and IMPENETRABLE which doesn't really add anything to a discussion.
I agree that can be the angle some say it from. But those people can't honestly say that unless they have played it themselves, which then adds the connotation that they are gloating over others and are in the 'club' and others are not. I also don't see how what I said differs from your standpoint.
 
Oct 25, 2017
6,063
Columbus, OH
#27
There's a handful of NES games that are just unfair because no one really seemed to give a shit about QA or whatever (Castlevania 1 is in this boat- IIRC they removed the save function for the US version, and the less we talk about Bayou Billy the better), but most of those games were designed to be played by young kids, castlevania III included.

Understand that you're meant to memorize enemy placement and patterns over time with those and NOT cruise through them the first time you pick it up and you'll be fine. Most of those games can be completed in a couple of hours- but getting good enough to make it through in a couple of hours is expected to take weeks/months.
The original CV was a Disk System game in Japan, so naturally it was lower priced than an average Famicom game and saving worked w/o a battery pack cart. IIRC the Japanese cart release (in the 90s!) didn't let you save but it had difficulty options.
 
Nov 17, 2017
208
#28
Uh, isn't that offensive? And also the situation I am describing?


I agree that can be the angle some say it from. But those people can't honestly say that unless they have played it themselves, which then adds the connotation that they are gloating over others and are in the 'club' and others are not. I also don't see how what I said differs from your standpoint.
What differs is the interpretation of intent, I suppose. I don't presume that everyone who finds something easier than I do to be gloating or lording over me, and I've been aided numerous times by people giving me constructive feedback that made me realize, hey, they're right and I'm a lot more equipped for this than I figured, I was just looking at it from the wrong angle.
 

Manmademan

Banned
Member
Aug 6, 2018
3,110
#30
The original CV was a Disk System game in Japan, so naturally it was lower priced than an average Famicom game and saving worked w/o a battery pack cart. IIRC the Japanese cart release (in the 90s!) didn't let you save but it had difficulty options.
Sounds about right. Regardless, CV1 was intended to allow the player to save during gameplay- it's not THAT difficult unless you're trying to get through the entire thing in one sitting, and in a game with THAT much dying it will wear you down. Getting all the way to death or dracula, running out of time and having to turn the nintendo off, then come back later and restart at the gates is an experience no one likes but everybody had with that game.

someone could have easily mimicked a save function with passwords (Castlevania 2 DID have this) but no one cared because reasons.
 
Oct 27, 2017
3,734
#31
Uh, isn't that offensive? And also the situation I am describing?


I agree that can be the angle some say it from. But those people can't honestly say that unless they have played it themselves, which then adds the connotation that they are gloating over others and are in the 'club' and others are not. I also don't see how what I said differs from your standpoint.
No, I'm saying if someone rubs a game's difficulty in my face as the reason I don't like it (as in I'm not skilled enough to enjoy said game) and I respond saying I didn't find it difficult, my response isn't offensive.
 
Dec 14, 2017
483
#33
What differs is the interpretation of intent, I suppose. I don't presume that everyone who finds something easier than I do to be gloating or lording over me, and I've been aided numerous times by people giving me constructive feedback that made me realize, hey, they're right and I'm a lot more equipped for this than I figured, I was just looking at it from the wrong angle.
Agreed, but ops example is a gloating phrase. The 'even' in it is the thing that makes it arrogant and dismissive. Saying a follow-up qualifying sentence would make it not arrogant. "Dark souls isn't even that hard; if you take your time, stay calm, and observe your surroundings and foes." That's not offensive.
 
Oct 25, 2017
6,063
Columbus, OH
#34
Sounds about right. Regardless, CV1 was intended to allow the player to save during gameplay- it's not THAT difficult unless you're trying to get through the entire thing in one sitting, and in a game with THAT much dying it will wear you down.

someone could have easily mimicked a save function with passwords (Castlevania 2 DID have this) but no one cared because reasons.
Castlevania III also had passwords too. Both II and III are much larger/longer games than I so I feel like the passwords not being on option in I isn't THAT big of a deal.
 
Dec 14, 2017
483
#35
No, I'm saying if someone rubs a game's difficulty in my face as the reason I don't like it (as in I'm not skilled enough to enjoy said game) and I respond saying I didn't find it difficult, my response isn't offensive.
Ah ok, yes I agree with that. And that's quite a reach for a someone to take to try and undermine your stance.
 
Nov 17, 2017
208
#36
Agreed, but ops example is a gloating phrase. The 'even' in it is the thing that makes it arrogant and dismissive. Saying a follow-up qualifying sentence would make it not arrogant. "Dark souls isn't even that hard; if you take your time, stay calm, and observe your surroundings and foes." That's not offensive.
Ah yeah. Completely agree in that specific scenario.
 
Jan 20, 2019
222
#37
Experience and perspective can make any game someones hard game an easy game. Games are designed to be beaten and its easier to do so if you are more and more familiar with the design. I think this argument can be super frustrating for both parties.

Personally I can play and beat pretty much any AAA game in about a week. No other game wants to be beaten more than a game aimed at the mass market so I actually tend to avoid them.

Game difficulty is entirely a matter of perspective so the Soulsborne elitist are the some of the most confusing around. They are the same crowd that say that all of the Souls games are "actually pretty easy" an opinion I would commend but they don't recognize that their biased is based on constantly playing one type of game along with constant engagement with a community that does the same.

You get the impression that they've NEVER played a hard game before Demon's Souls so they need to constantly gate keep to hold on to their one accomplishment. Obviously this can't be true for everyone who defends this argument but their in lies the problem.

They lack perspective.
 
Dec 1, 2017
1,796
#40
For me it depends on how you follow it up. If you follow up say "Dark Souls isn't that hard" with "it feels like it is at first because your first instinct is to play it like an action game, but once you realize the pacing it tends to get a lot easier, with the occasional hiccup that you won't repeat too many times because once you learn it can happen you won't do it again. Plus bosses are still challenging, but the game isn't as impossibly hard as it seems at first" then it's fine. It's an elaboration on apparent difficulty versus real difficulty.

If you go "Ehhh it's not that hard, you're the problem" it's a little, well, yeah.

It honestly massively depends on context.
 
OP
OP
Crazy Izanagi
Oct 27, 2017
13,477
#41
Maybe the people saying that have a bit of insight your ego doesn't want to deal with? Nobody's intentionally putting down your skill, maybe there's some truth to the statement that 'it's not that hard' and they have some insight to offer as to why.

For example, Sekiro . . . isn't that hard. Once you learn the patterns to the enemies, which are super obvious after you face them a few times, the game becomes cake.
So yeah here’s an example and yep i still bugs me.

You just come across really rude and condescending assuming everyone will have the same experience as you and implying that any rejection of this statement is purely do to my “ego.”

(Haven’t even played Sekiro yet so I have no comment but seeing as I didn’t enjoy either Dark Souls or Bloodboorne I’m not particularly eager to rush in.)
 
Jul 11, 2018
113
#42
It's just people puffing their chests out to confirm they are a true gamer and that you are just a casual. I was going through an old Demons' Souls playthrough on Youtube and saw this comment:

some dickhead said:
i came here because i saw you painfully fighting this boss on another video and wanted to ask, WHY some people find these games hard. They're so easy, ive poured hours upon hours into this series of games and want to know, how in the WORLD can you be utterly bad enough to think Alant was a hard boss, watching you put out that sigh was cringe. it hurt my soul watching someone feel so achieved over something so mechanically small ajd insignificant. idk maybe its just the fact that i play the whole series so much that its child play, but really... i dont get how people can be so incompetent to play the games or dont fins them enjoyable because the person playing just sucks. it makes no sense to me.
 

Manmademan

Banned
Member
Aug 6, 2018
3,110
#45
Castlevania III also had passwords too. Both II and III are much larger/longer games than I so I feel like the passwords not being on option in I isn't THAT big of a deal.
You can complete CV1 without a password or save. it can be done in one sitting. But a lot of the "difficulty" surrounding that game comes from the intended ability to save one's progress being arbitrarily removed and not replaced.

Metroid isn't really that long or difficult either- but that game had a password system in place despite being released the same year. You CAN Get through metroid without saving, but removing that function would skyrocket the "difficulty" because the game wasn't really designed to be played that way- and neither was CV1.
 
Oct 25, 2017
3,822
#48
I mean sure If you automatically assume they said that to be mean sure. When I throw it out it usually means that you just need to take your time and not panic when faced with a problem, like how people tend to panic mash in fighting games or panic dodge/mash in soulsborne games.

A lot of the time the actual fight itself really isnt that hard, but the consequences of losing makes things harder than it really is.

Case in point being NES Ninja gaiden's final three bosses. The last two are actually pretty easy once you get the pattern down, but when you die you get slapped back to 6-1 and have to do everything over. The first boss is pittifully easy if you have the right setup, but thats ONLY if you have the right setup. Chances are if you die once you have to get the powerup AGAIN.
 

Aters

Banned
Member
Oct 26, 2017
7,948
#49
There's always some fanboyism behind this argument.

In videogame world, it's "It's no that hard, I got pass it the first time".
In console world, it's "my launch PS4 is always quite" or "my Joy-con never had any problem".

It's an utterly useless comment that fanboys leave there because they can't find a better way to defend their favorite things.
 
Oct 28, 2017
5,957
#50
I sort of had this reaction to Sekiro recently, but only because it was my first FromSoftware game after years of hearing people treating these games as gauntlets of pure torture. In reality, it's not much harder than other hard games, you just die a handful of times against the boss until you figure out what their whole deal is, then it becomes manageable and you beat them. It's nowhere near the 50 attempts per boss level of hard I expected.

I support easy modes for these games btw, because I recognize that they still take a number of tries per difficult boss, depending on the person. Parents with less free time, older or not as skilled gamers, disabled players, etc. would still like to see the content and experience the adventure, and they should be free to. An easy mode doesn't affect me in any negative way, provided the core experience is still available for players seeking challenge (which, of course it would be, multiple difficulty settings have been a thing for a long time now).
Honestly Sekiro is NOT the same vein of game as Soulsborne imo. The design philosophy is totally different to me. Sekiro is more Super Meat Boy than Bloodborne. You're expected to repeat a challenge a lot, but you're never set back far and the challenge is always fair. Soulsborne is more.....dick moves and haha gotcha moments. And about being punishing by forcing players to repeat long stretches. The design philosophy is very different to me. Sekiro is not a Soulsborne game.