Jimquisition: Dumbing Down for the Filthy Casuals

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 . . . 30 NEXT
 

Regarding the argument everyone is entitled to play through all of the content of their game that they payed for:

I bought Skyrim and I really wanted to like it, everyone I knew was playing and enjoying it and talking about it - I wanted in on that action. But no matter how hard I tried I simply couldn't get into it - no matter what I just found myself bored while playing it. By your argument Betheseda should be expected to modify Skyrim to better suit my tastes so that the game doesn't drive me away and that I can enjoy all of the content that I paid for.

Of course many of the things I found that turned me off to Skyrim are probably a lot of the things other people like about it.

But hey fuck those guys, they are obviously all elitists who want to keep Skyrim for themselves and if they can't see how having a smaller world with fewer side quests and a more focused story could help the game appeal to a new audience then they probably hate gays and beat women too.

5 straight days of Jimquisition? YAAAAAAAY (Kermit arms)!

Also, I love Willem Dafoe's gloves.

jehk:

getoffmycloud:
My issue with the dark souls easy mode is what is the point in even playing it. It would be like playing LA noire with all the interrogations taken out.

Who are you to say "what's the point" for other people?

I think it's safe to say that the point of a game with the tagline "prepare to die" is to be hard. Just my two cents.

If you abolish a things defining aspects it loses its individuality, meaning and very purpose.

I have nothing against people who prefer for any reasons to play games that are easily embraced. The thing is, though, that not every game can or should be so easily accessible to every single person imaginable. Our personal tastes and preferences are unique to us and that is why there at least should be a broad selection of different kinds of games to choose from. It is important to remember that not everything is meant for everyone, and seeing others enjoy something doesn't mean it's necessarily suitable for you as well. Or should every game perhaps also have an exceptionally difficult mode, even if it goes against the games nature? Of course not, it would be nonsensical.

Dark Souls is often said to be a punishing game. That may be so, but in general it only punishes those who are hasty or otherwise remain indifferent to the many visual clues the developers have intentionally placed all around and often in reasonable locations.

Dark Souls is often also mistaken to be an action RPG. While Dark Souls certainly has many aspects that are usually affiliated with such a genre of games, the description in this case would be lacking. Perhaps the most prominent theme in Dark Souls is exploration, coupled with quite a heavy focus on strategic, knowledge based gameplay.

Edit: I've seen (and been a part of) this argument before. I'm out.

Korten12:

orangeapples:
People fear Dark Souls getting an Easy Mode because they feel it would remove difficulty from future games as developers feel the need to cater to the casual market who wouldn't want to play a difficult game.

this of course is wrong as developers pretty much start at the hardest difficulty as "how the game should be played" then dial down enemies for lesser difficulties. People who hate the idea of easy mode feel as though easy mode is destroying games.

which is also wrong. I remember easy mode as far back as Doom (and possibly even existed before that). So if Easy Mode was going to destroy video games as a medium, it would have happened a long time ago. You people need to just calm down.

Thing is though, Dark souls really isn't hard. No really it's not. The enemies usually don't have that much health, the game isn't that long, all it takes is patience.

But here is the thing, Easy mode for Doom is not the same as Easy mode for Dark Souls. If you take difficulty out of Dark souls what do you have? A very mediorce Action-RPG with little to no story (at least not straight to the point), and that's it. You literally suck the soul out of the game.

Doom on easy? It's an FPS which adjusts well to easy mode and still is enjoyable.

Are you saying that playing the game on Easy makes it less enjoyable? Is there anything inherently wrong with a mediocre action RPG with little to no story?

would I somehow enjoy games less because I play on a lower difficulty? Because not everyone plays a game for challenge. some people just want to sit back, relax and enjoy the atmosphere of a game. They don't want a long tedious puzzle to help them unwind. Some people on the other hand would be able to relax with a long tedious puzzle and that helps them unwind. Is it somehow wrong for a game to be open to both of these avenues of relaxation and enjoyment?

sindremaster:

Casual Shinji:
I'm sure this post will bite me in the ass, but the last few episodes of Jimquisition have been nothing but "You gamers are upset about something; How dare you, you whiny little bastards." I'm sorry, but it's starting to get a bit condescending.

To be fair, judging by what gamers get upset by, most of us are whiny little bastards.

And you might've wanted to play Dark Souls first before stating that adding an easy mode wouldn't matter. It's easy to generalize everyone in the "no easy mode" camp as bitchy, hardcore elitists.

I'm pretty sure he has played it.
And everyone in the no easy mode camp are bitchy hardcore elitists. It's optional there is no reason to not want it, other than hating the idea that someone can play through it without being awesome at games. Which is pretty much the definition of bitchy hardcore elitists.

With all due respect, I personally do not approve of an easy mode in Dark Souls. It's just kinda contradictory to the whole point of the game. I really don't care about what difficulty you play on when it comes to most games, but Dark Souls is an exception, because the difficulty is the whole point of the matter. Please do not insult me for having a different opinion than you.

I would like to think that it isn't the fact there might be an easy mode in Dark Souls, it is more of what it represents to the gaming industry. Let's be honest here guys, Dark Souls is a hard core game for the hard core gamer. That is the target demographic for the game. A game like Demon Souls and Dark Souls are beloved by this community because as it stands, these games are practically a dying breed. A shining example of what many of us would like to play in a increasingly casual pandering industry. As such, when one of these games come along, and it is good, it is bound to garner a passionate player base.

I don't think people complaining about Dark Souls potentially having an easy mode are being elitist, I think they are generally concerned about what such implications could mean for games like Dark Souls down the line. Dark Souls at it's core is not meant to be easy, and as such, Dark Souls attracts a certain crowd of usually like minded individuals who are craving a challenge that is quite honestly missing in today's gaming market. These people play through the game, and these people beat the game...and usually will replay it trying different methods and strategies. It is a game that will not pander you, it will test your mettle as a gamer. People want that challenge. Dark Souls is strictly skill based. If you die over and over and over again, it's probably because you suck....but you can learn from your mistakes. The game rewards persistence and patience, it rewards learning from your mistakes. In a way, it sort of untrains you to a degree from all the easier games you have played.

People are afraid of a game like Dark Souls losing its identity. They are afraid that the people who are so used to being pandered will pick up the game, see how hard it is, and automatically complain about it...usually quitting in the process. They are afraid that From Software will hear these complaints and tailor it to meet their needs. They are afraid that corporate greed will take over, and have games like Dark Souls developed so that it would appeal to a wider audience, to make it more "accessible".

So yes, adding an easy mode to Dark Souls is a big deal. It's one step closer to a game like that losing it's identity. It's one step closer to becoming like the others. And if a game like Dark Souls is not immune from being a victim of corporate pandering, what game is? And what does that mean for the gamers like us who enjoy those types of games? Yes, it is possible for a game like Dark Souls to maintain it's difficulty while having an optional easy mode...but as soon as that happens, we cannot kid ourselves. The second that a easy mode is implemented means a decrease in overall difficulty in the games that follow, it has happened in many game series. Plus there is still the fact that a game in which it's community had all gone through the trial by fire known as Dark Souls, would be no more different than the rest of the online communities.

One of the posters above was very much correct. Dark Souls has a niche online community, and many of us want it to stay niche. The include of an easy mode would threaten that community. It all goes back to how unique Dark Souls is, and how it attracts a certain group of people. Dark Souls is for us, and people willing to take on the game's challenge and learn from their own mistakes. The game is a refuge for a playerbase that games are no longer made for, as such we are a passionate bunch which is why we are the ones loudest when we hear something that threatens the experience of future games in the franchise.

Hey, Hey Jim!

You DO know that games aren't made by magic right?

You DO know that creating easy modes takes time, right? Not every game can be made easier simply by adding more player health and making the enemies less durable, if the difficulty is execution based then it WILL take time out of development to put in a easy mode and as such provide less of the actual good game content that people want. A game that would provide a good example of this would be, oh I dunno, DARK SOULS.

Not a SINGLE person is complaining about just adding a mode where the player health is simply increased. Not. A. One.

I would like to say I found the Brave new world reference funny, good show there Jim.

Also an while I am for inclusiveness in in Easy, Normal, Hard, and Sadistic modes to gameplay. I thought Darksouls modus operandi was being as sadistic as possible.

I disagree with Jim's assessment of this issue and of his broader assertion that hardcore gamers hate the things they hate because of egocentrism Certainly that exists, but he's over emphasizing it.

The Dark Souls backlash is a perfect example of this. With that game, complaints about the difficulty have nothing to do with shutting people out. Most hardcore fans, myself included, pray that more people pick the game up and plug at it until they understand it better. That's the thing about cult series, you're not always sure you'll see another game in the franchise so you want to see it do well.

But Dark Souls is to video games what The Wire is to television in terms of approachability. Difficulty in the 'Souls' series is a crucial part of the franchise's DNA. Death and rebirth, determination and fear, triumph and loss, these elements are the essence of the games' souls.

Putting in an easy mode, that tempers the consequences, is to miss the entire point of a game that is built from the ground up with death as the central mechanic. It would fundamentally break the game by negating all of the work put into weapon balance, enemy design and animations, and level structure.

And that, would ruin the series.

See, this is why I WASN'T one of the guys who got up in arms about an easy mode in Mega Man 10. Mega Man is fucking hard, and I don't want to risk strangling myself in frustration when there's an easier option. I mean, there are many different levels a game can be played. Like some people try playing the original Zelda without using the sword. Who's to say we can't do something similar with modern games; having the option of both easier to play games for everyone and harder to play games for experts wanting to test their mettle.

What I want to know is what will happen to Jim now that he has eaten his experiment?

Will he develop the powers of a carrot gifted with gab? Will he breed an army of vegetable/Willem Dafoe hybrids? Are there no limits to the dark designs this sinister mastermind conjures?

Mortamus:

So if I pay for the game at the same price you did, but I'm not able to make the same investment that you did in the content in terms of knowledge, then I shouldn't have access to all the content that I paid for?

Yes you are. You paid for the challenge, so get better. The game doesn't put up a magical door that stops you from progressing if you are a casual or some such nonsense. It puts appropriate challenges in front of you, learning the skills to beat the challenges is the entire point of the game.

Little known fact about this video:

He actually shot this several years ago and his carrots injected with the DNA of American game show hosts turned into the cast of the Jersey Shore.

I like how this episode describes TotalBiscuit.

getoffmycloud:
My issue with the dark souls easy mode is what is the point in even playing it. It would be like playing LA noire with all the interrogations taken out.

Well your issue is silly.

You don't have to play it that way.

Now if you wanted a legitimate issue that isn't silly, being concerned that they get tons of sales from the easy mode and realize that they could save time and effort by making Dark Souls 3 just an easy game with the same atmosphere would be a concern.

One might think that's a silly fear, but look at the rising price of PC games in response to that FPS getting raised 10 bucks (though it looks like this is going back to 49.99?)

Or what happened to most franchises that EA got a hold of.

Dragon Age 2?

Stuff like that.

Basically people, I hope, are not worried that the CURRENT game will get or be ruined. They are worried that the profits will be so disproportionate that there will be no fiscal incentive to continue catering to the "hardcore" folks.

It's a genuine problem and the one that gets lost when folks just complain that they can't get how other people would 'like that sort of thing'.

I don't get Hostel films, but lots of folks like them, I just make the choice to not. Same for folks playing DS on easy. (Albeit I probably would, I don't have the time or desire to play a game that punches me in the asshole all day, but I do respect that the option is there).

wyldefire:
And that, would ruin the series.

To you.

It wouldn't actually change anything to ADD optional features to any game.

When I was a kid folks had "easy" mode through devices like gameshark and game genie. These days those are nearly impossible to find or use, so now folks turn to developers actually catering to everyone if possible.

Just because you don't get it, or don't like it, doesn't mean its wrong. Also your opinions on art aren't objectively correct. What you feel is the DNA of this thing is not necessarily the case.

This isn't ACTUAL biology, you don't have a literal concrete string of data to pull from. This is an intepretation of an art.

A good example was Smash Brothers. Everyone I ever knew thought the game was about intense competition. The game dev thought it was about being retarded and tripping all over the place.

I disagree with his view, but that's just how it works. I feel one way, they feel another, and other people feel different further still.

That's the beauty of gaming, letting everyone interpret things as they wish. Especially when the modularity of those interpretations literally never impact you in any way whatsoever.

bringer of illumination:
Hey, Hey Jim!

You DO know that games aren't made by magic right?

You DO know that creating easy modes takes time, right? Not every game can be made easier simply by adding more player health and making the enemies less durable, if the difficulty is execution based then it WILL take time out of development to put in a easy mode and as such provide less of the actual good game content that people want. A game that would provide a good example of this would be, oh I dunno, DARK SOULS.

Not a SINGLE person is complaining about just adding a mode where the player health is simply increased. Not. A. One.

Wouldn't what you said at the end be exactly what Easy Mode in Dark Souls would be >.>

Higher DPS and Higher Health...

I'm not aware of anything else you'd add that would be necessary. That's exactly what most games I've played do for easy modes, you become a walking tank and your enemies are paper dolls.

Mortamus:

Korten12:

And the game would be very medicore. I think people don't get that. Without the difficulty (which isn't that hard, just need to be patience), the would have nothing to stand out aside from being dark fantasy. The game on easy could be beaten in 5 hours to 7 hours tops. Hell on the current difficulty it can be beaten that fast.

This still wouldn't affect your play experience. As for it taking away from someone else's play experience in "not getting the full game", that is their decision and they can interpret how good the experience was on their own.

We're also assuming that this easy mode is going to be a severe reduction.

It would effect my play experiance, I posted why nearly right above your post.

I would really hate to see the online community stagnate any more than it has.

Among other worries. Why can't a niche title stay a niche title? If people want a game for the story not the gameplay, why not play something that caters to that instead of trying to make niche games appeal to you?

Elois:

I would really hate to see the online community stagnate any more than it has.

Among other worries. Why can't a niche title stay a niche title? If people want a game for the story not the gameplay, why not play something that caters to that instead of trying to make niche games appeal to you?

...or you could disable the online for easy characters.

Just like achievements are disabled in games when you use cheats.

This isn't rocket science, and the precious "gem" that is this game wouldn't be "tainted".

PS. I've played both games a bit, I cared none at all for the online aspect. So losing that for "easy" wouldn't have bothered me, I imagine most folks like myself that just found it passingly interesting would not mind losing that either.

erttheking:
.. I really don't care about what difficulty you play on when it comes to most games, but Dark Souls is an exception, because the difficulty is the whole point of the matter..

I disagree. I've beaten Dark Souls several times now, and I think its a beautiful game with great art and atmosphere, and I think everyone who wants to experience it themselves should get the chance. Don't sell the game short my friend.

Rooster Cogburn:

Why does EVERY game need to cater to this audience, or indeed to ANY particular audience?

And why shouldn't it include an easy mode? Because you don't think anyone could possibly appreciate the game in a different way than you do? Yeah, lets not throw around the 'absolutist' title.

I've watch that video, and in fact I've been a fan of ENB's work since before the game even came to America (he's what got me to buy the game in the first place)... and I have to say, both of you are completely wrong. Yeah, You, Me and ENB (and many other Dark Souls players) derive our enjoyment of the game from its difficulty and harshness. But that doesn't mean other people can't enjoy it in different ways, and that has no effect on how we play the game.

When I purchased the Prepare to Die edition several months back, I had already beaten the crap out of the PS3 version last year, but I also purchased a copy for a friend since he had seen me play it. However, try as he might, he just could not kill one of the earlier bosses. He tried and tried, but couldn't do it. He stopped playing for a week but then asked me if I knew any cheats, so I found him a trainer for the game and he played through like that. After a few nights with an invincibility hack he'd beaten the game, and he absolutely loved it. He gushed about the art direction and sound, and all the incredibly design boss fights and locales. It's a great game without the difficulty too. Now, would you and I and ENB (and others..) say he was missing a critical part of the game? Maybe so. But that doesn't matter, he enjoyed the game immensely in a different way.

Now, the only argument I have ever heard on this issue that holds even a drop of water with me is the "This is what the designers intended". For me, that's the trump card. If the designers feel the only way to experience their work is the one difficulty setting, well, that's their decision and I would stand by that. However, if for Dark Souls 2, they make an "easy" mode they feel is an acceptable addition new players or those who want a different kind of experience, I'm totally fine with that too. I don't think it would ruin my souls experience at all, or anyone else's for that matter. And if that just doesn't make any sense to you... well, I don't know what the hell is going on in your head.

I apparently missed this story entirely.

I have a little trouble believing that there will definitely be no possible knock-on effect of the series now being designed with casual or easy modes now a part of the consideration. The best stuff that gets made in creative mediums is developed with focus. You try to be all things to all people, and you're going to make compromises.

Dark Souls was awesome because it was so focused and uncompromising. I'm not saying this will end up being a problem, but I'm not convinced that it won't bite us on the ass a little further down the line.

The incinuation that it's only a problem because people don't want the series to gain popularity strikes me as childish, though I do appreciate that it's really convenient and easy to be able to assign people their motivations and beliefs before telling them why they're wrong.

Elois:

It would effect my play experiance, I posted why nearly right above your post.

I would really hate to see the online community stagnate any more than it has.

Among other worries. Why can't a niche title stay a niche title? If people want a game for the story not the gameplay, why not play something that caters to that instead of trying to make niche games appeal to you?

So you're worried that a broader audience will harm the community, and bring in the kind of player that depends on others to do the work for them?

Mortamus:

So you're worried that a broader audience will harm the community, and bring in the kind of player that depends on others to do the work for them?

Yes, basically. The difference in the community from Demons Souls to dark souls is basically because Dark Souls got way more advertising and brought in a broader playerbase. Along with the aforementioned fat that you can summon people to help you much more easily.

I want more people playing, don't get me wrong. I just want more people to develop the skills they need to play against people in the later parts of the game. Its no fun for anyone involved if you get people who (by no fault of their own) never learned to play in endgame pvp.

It breeds bad habits into players who should have learned essential skills.

theultimateend:

Elois:

I would really hate to see the online community stagnate any more than it has.

Among other worries. Why can't a niche title stay a niche title? If people want a game for the story not the gameplay, why not play something that caters to that instead of trying to make niche games appeal to you?

...or you could disable the online for easy characters.

Just like achievements are disabled in games when you use cheats.

This isn't rocket science, and the precious "gem" that is this game wouldn't be "tainted".

PS. I've played both games a bit, I cared none at all for the online aspect. So losing that for "easy" wouldn't have bothered me, I imagine most folks like myself that just found it passingly interesting would not mind losing that either.

If online mode was turned off I could see that working. People who enjoy the harsh game and the online aspects keep their game and people who don't can play for other reasons.

I really don't have an issue if they decided to do it like that.

Being able to invite people from your friends list into your world directly in the next game could solve most if not all of the multiplayer community issues as well, time will tell I guess.

Jimothy Sterling:
snip

PREACH IT!!

I mean I don't get why adding an 'easy' mode, to a game is an issue, if there's an easy, there's a hard right? And if there's a hard mode, you and your "1337" skillz are free to frolic and play with the big nasty things.

But the 'elitism' has always been, and very likely will always be a problem in the gaming community which is sad really.

Next week in "Problems that are only Problems to a Very Small Minority of Privileged People", Jim addresses problems that are only problems to a very small minority of privileged people.

Mortrialus:

Mortamus:

So if I pay for the game at the same price you did, but I'm not able to make the same investment that you did in the content in terms of knowledge, then I shouldn't have access to all the content that I paid for?

In the case of Dark Souls specifically, yes. Gaining that knowledge base bit by bit quite literally IS the game in Dark Souls. Not everyone is going to enjoy every game. That is just a simple fact. The idea that every developer should make their games with the intention that everyone should enjoy the finished product is wrong, and isn't even if it was universally adopted isn't going to change that.

How is that any different than paying for a difficult, challenging book on philosophy? Not everyone is going to have the previous knowledge base required to understand the book and the ideas presented. Not everyone is going to be able to understand the concepts presented in the book. They will be missing out on the content of the books, the ideas presented in it, just like gamers who don't want to obtain the knowledge base required to complete Dark Souls will be.

I am not against modal difficulty in games. I am not against easy games in general. I am not saying every game needs to be crazy hard. I'm saying it depends on a case by case basis. What I am against is the absolutism presented in the video. To me it's like akin to demanding that every game include both first and third person modes, regardless of how the rest of the game is designed. Some games should only have 1st person modes. Some games should only have 3rd person modes. Some games should offer both. It depends entirely on how the game is designed.

I would agree with you...except for three things that really poke holes in your argument.

You say that gaining the knowledge is quite literally the game. From what I understand, that knowledge is gained through trial and error if you don't already have it, which still does not take away from the play experience.

You compared this by saying it's similar to a challenging philosophy book...except that one is designed to educate or enlighten, and the other is designed to be entertainment, and I don't feel that it's fair to say that one should be wholly invested in a product to get the full entertainment value it can provide. Some people do not have that much time to a commit to a game and should not be punished in order to experience it all. Especially with the number of new titles that are released these days. Yes, Dark Souls is meant to be a time invested and challenging game, and that's fine. However, that doesn't make a simpler version of it for those whom are unable to invest a bad thing for it. This comparison is rather weak in my honest opinion.

As well, it's not our place to deside whether or not a game should not have the option to play it in a different mode. If someone else gets a different experience than you, it does not make it a bad one. I personally always played Elder Scrolls in 1st person, but thoroughly enjoyed playing in 3rd person in Skyrim. The option had always been there, but it didn't work as well until this instalment, and I loved it for it. Did this harm the gameplay in the first person perspective? Not at all. Just like an easy mode of Dark Souls will not affect someone not looking to invest as much in it, but still would like a good experience. Nor will it affect those like us who want to play it as it was meant to be played.

IamLEAM1983:

TwiZtah:
Easy modes are not the problem. The problem is that games are now designed for inept players, making the experienced players experience of the game extremely easy.

Far Cry 3 was ridiculously easy at Hard, because it was catered towards the casuals.

I'm sorry, give me a moment to recover from my spitting coffee all over my desk.

Ahem.

I played through FarCry 3 on Adventurer. It was *not* easy. The AI is nearly prescient, and the only way to survive is to play a constant game of duck-and-cover. After covering the north islands, LMGs become absolutely necessary as Heavies start to show up. Bringing anything else to a gunfight guarantees your death.

I've been playing games for about 25 years. I don't think I count as a "casual". I'm not particularly skilled, but assuming Hard is catered towards "casuals" is only proving the existence of the problem Sterling mentions in the video.

The AI is to say the least, stupid as a pile of rocks. They are easily exploited.

But my point still stands with many contemporary games, they design the games to be somewhat challenging for casuals/controllers, which makes them stupidly easy for veteran players.

Here is my problem, games as a whole are getting easier. I am going back and playing old NES and SNES games and finding them brutal to all but the most damning of current gen games. To liken it to your book analogy, if you buy a book you can't understand, does that mean the writer needs to include footnotes explaining everything at kindergarten level for you? No, it's your fault for buying a book you couldn't read. Don't get me wrong, there have been a few games and a few modes I myself can't beat. Many J-RPG's on the hardest setting are nothing short of absolutely unfair and ridiculous (I am looking at you Resonance of Fate and Infinite Undiscovery), but that doesn't mean I sit and ask for an easy version or for the whole game to come down because I simply am not as skilled as those elite players who can beat those modes.

Monxeroth:
Really now Jim?
This is getting ridiculous even for you.
Most recent videos have been nothing but the same argument about varying things over and over again and its getting REALLY old.
Could you just please put some effort into a future video that isnt filled with your rambling about the same kind of bullshit argument i hear on a daily basis:
*Oh, it doesnt affect you, so why do you care?
*Oh, you already have access to what you want without being interfered by something else, so why do you care?
*Oh, this thing may or may not have a negative impact on the gaming community, but lets for argument sake say it doesnt, then why would you care?

I mean fucking hell Jim, youre a broken record by now.

Have you ever considered the other side of the matter that the controversies are broken records?

-WAH I'M PISSED FOR SOMETHING UNRELATED.
-WAH I'M PISSED BECAUSE OF THIS
-WAH IT WILL RUIN EVERYTHING!!!

But seriously, the Internet gaming controversies are pretty much some of the biggest whinefest for small reasons that exists... Jim responds to controversies or stupid decisions. If you've been on the Internet for a long while, you'll know that the former comes often.

i prefer the halo method

"psst, psst

hey.... want the COOOL amror and ALL the points

...play a harder mode, it can be fun."

basically as long as i get a better stuff out if , i don't care if there is an easy mode, some cases i don't but in many cases i do, so i don't mind easy mode, as long as the game isn't hard because of bad game design

ninja guiden..

speaking of hard modes, i think gta needs one well a harder one, though i love them there gets to be a point in gta where the only reason the mission is hard for me is because i have to chase someone in a vehicle or there a bunch of dudes with guns
i canNOT see, other wise i can get though the game with a medium amount of skill

i propose a gta hard mode where you have more health and police act more like police, forcing you to be smart and if you wanna be dumb your gonna have to work for it.

theultimateend:
Maybe if I include enough "buzzwords" and use enough "quotation marks" people will "listen" to what I have to say...

Come on man, this ain't Reddit/Tumblr.

Anyway, in relation to the original video;

I can see what Jim is saying and where he's coming from, but he's over-simplifying the issue and ignoring (or not understanding) the other factors that play into something like this. Difficulty is a massive job for a dev team to measure correctly and takes time and resources away from other areas. Some games can just change the numbers under the hood, but the Souls series difficultly often comes from the environment or the attack patterns of the enemy. Many of the fights in the game rely on the devastating power of the enemies for them to work as intended.
If the developers go in with easy mode in mind, it's going to encourage them to try make their lives easier later my making everything adjustable by the numbers like every other RPG, and then it's not Souls anymore.
And aside from that, it's at the very...er...soul....of the game. It's part of the experience. A casual player might get the content, sure, but it won't be much fun for them.

It's really not a matter of elitism for most Souls fans, those guys just seem the loudest because people focus on negative. The truth is, there isn't anything to be elitist about with Dark Souls, other then the fact it's a very well designed action-RPG.
The truth is, Dark Souls really just isn't that hard, it just requires the right mindset going into it.
Image related, slightly large.

It's not game to relax to, it's a game to sit up and get focused and tense at. Not all games need to be brain-candy, if you want that you've already got a HUGE selection out there.
I admit, I find Skyrim more difficult then bloody Dark Souls. I just like how the Souls titles make take all my actions into serious consideration, and I think most "casuals" could/would as well. In my experience, once someone gets the feel of it, they carry right on and end up loving it.

The game's big flaw is the utterly shite tutorial and the fact it doesn't explain what any of the stats do in any detail. It seems to me this is where all the difficultly comes from.
That, or because people keep going to the cemetery and trying to fight the skeletons until the give up, rather then step back and think about trying another direction. But even that isn't their fault, they've just been trained by modern games to follow the most obvious route and follow the corridors.

So, in my books, 0 votes for an easy mode, 1 point to a better tutorial. That is how you make something accessible, you don't assume the worst in your customers and dumb it down.

Another one was Mass Effect 3. OMGZ HOW DARE IT HAVE A NARRATIVE MODE!!! Yet nobody could explained to me why I should be as butthurt as they were. I was content to just ignore it and play on Hard/Insanity/whatever. Just because it's in the game doesn't mean you have to use it guys. And what's with nonsense like this:

getoffmycloud:
My issue with the dark souls easy mode is what is the point in even playing it. It would be like playing LA noire with all the interrogations taken out.

Excuse me, but who the hell are you to dictate how other people enjoy their entertainment? Who the hell are ANY of you people to dictate how other people enjoy their entertainment? I'm seeing a lot of snobby, stuck-up comments like the one I quoted all over this thread, and my message to these people... would get me modded, so I won't actually say it, but the polite version is stop it. Other people enjoying a game in a different way than you did doesn't change how much you enjoy the game with your "hardcorez" settings. For fuck's sake, get over yourselves. You all thoroughly disgust me.

TwiZtah:
Easy modes are not the problem. The problem is that games are now designed for inept players, making the experienced players experience of the game extremely easy.

Far Cry 3 was ridiculously easy at Hard, because it was catered towards the casuals.

No, Far Cry 3 was ridiculously easy at Hard because the developers fucked up. Easy mode is there to cater to the casuals, Hard mode is supposed to be hard. If Hard mode isn't hard, that's not the fault of Easy mode or casuals, it's the fault of developers who did a shitty job of making their Hard mode actually hard.

burningdragoon:
It's not that games shouldn't have an easy mode, it's that "there being an easy mode won't effect your experience/normal mode" is not a guarantee. If easy mode is tacked on as an afterthought, maybe it won't. If it's designed for easy mode and scaled up for harder modes, then it will, because increasing difficulty should be more than just changing a few variables to a higher number.

And once again, those instances are the fault of the developer, not the casuals. They made the game incorrectly and THEY should be the ones getting bashed by teh hardcorez gamerz, not the casuals.


Anyway, 5 episodes next week? Thank god for you indeed, Jim! I look forward to seeing what 4 games are covered on Monday through Thursday before The Walking Dead's Friday episode.

Quite a few people may not care much for the online aspect and just want an easy trip to the lore and story and I can sorta get behind that.

It must be kept in mind that the souls series is not just a hardcore action rpg for hardcore fans, its a hardcore action rpg that hardcore fans can play together against other hardcore fans. Its a niche game that lets niche fans play together and that nearly never happens anymore.

The games difficulty is integral to the social aspect of it. A hugely important factor that has bonded its players together. I've meet so many people in this game and had so many experiences because of it.

I've invaded and been invaded by a lot of players who sent me a message congratulating me for the victory, telling me it was a good fight when I lost, asking me where one of my weapons or hard to get spells they saw me use could be found. I was once invaded and killed feet away from a boss gate, asked that same player for assistance on said boss and received it. I've made friends this way. I've made friends on an online game after brutally getting killed by these people or killing them in their worlds.

This is totally unlike the random people you meet on Xbox live's other multiplayer games. Good people play souls games, I don't want to see that become like call of duty's multiplayer. Filled with hyperactive swearing kids.

If easy mode turned off the multiplayer this would sort of make the above a moot point, but I still would rather people just got better so more people could hang out at the top.

Mortrialus:
snip

jehk:

Who are you to say "what's the point" for other people?

For Dark Souls specifically; the stated goals the developer had when creating the game.

>implying that people care that you place that much value you in the game

>implying that some guy on the internet should dictate who values what in the game

>implying that people will give a damn

and i believe i have won

Maybe is THIS why people dont want Dark Souls to have easy mode?

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 . . . 30 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Registered for a free account here