The Mainstream ruins everything

[CriticalGaming]

Welp I think the time has come my friends. Souls-like games are going to now be easier, because they've become the mainstream and the mainstream doesn't like resistance.

First Bezerker Kathan is releasing a patch introducing and renaming difficulty modes.
And Lies of P developers are looking at the Difficulty of the DLC because people think it's too hard. https://kotaku.com/lies-p-overture-dlc-difficulty-ng-scaling-patch-update-1851784206

For a long time Souls games have had the difficulty be part of the art, but now that Souls-likes are big ticket items publishers want them to be approachable by more and more people and thus their difficulty must now reflect the average DarksydePhil gamer.

 

[PsychedelicDiamond]

I dunno. I feel that's following a period of them becoming incrementally harder. I mean, compare the fights in Dark Souls 1 or Bloodborne (excluding the DLC) to those in Elden Ring and Lies of P. I understand there's some backlash. I dropped Lies of P halfway through because I felt that I had simply hit my skill ceiling and the feeling of accomplishment I got from beating a boss was simply not worth the time and effort it took to do so. And while I beat Elden Ring and even suffered through the Malenia fight even though it was optional and I didn't enjoy it much... honestly, I was burnt out. I imagine a lot of people felt that way. For me the Bloodborne base game basically hit the sweet spot. Hard enough that you'll probably need a couple of attempts for a few fights but not so hard that you'll spend an entire day trying to beat a single boss.

To be fair, though, I also think that there is a bit of a general Soulslike fatigue that I don't think walking back the difficulty will solve. The market's just become flooded with them. And very few of them do much to distinguish themselves. Elden Ring was enjoyable because the open world exploration was well done. If the boss fights were put in a linear game, god knows I'd never have finished it. For the genre to maintain its popularity it needs to change up the formula more or rather, test the boundaries of the formula more. I have zero interest in a Lies of P 2 or even an Elden Ring 2. I've already skipped the DLC.

You know what I'd take? A Sekiro 2. Because that one was different to the point I'm not even sure I should even call it a Soulslike. There hasn't been anything since it came out that plays quite like it on terms of its combat system and movement. Meanwhile I feel like I'll throw my controller out of the window if I ever have to play another game with a light attack, a strong attack, a block, a dodge roll and a stamina meter.

 

[Xprimentyl]

Ok, now that due panic is out of the way, time to put your money where your mouth has been all these years: *ahem* HOW DOES THIS AFFECT YOU OR ANYONE WHO CHOOSES TO PLAY ON HARDER OR "DEVELOPER INENDED" DIFFICULTIES?"

 

[BrawlMan]

For a long time Souls games have had the difficulty be part of the art, but now that Souls-likes are big ticket items publishers want them to be approachable by more and more people and thus their difficulty must now reflect the average DarksydePhil gamer.

Quit your belly aching. Here's an idea: don't touch the easier difficulties.

I see no issues with this, and i've already known about this for weeks now. I'm mainly referring to Lies of P. Not everybody's expect to be hardcore super tough gamer, nor should we constantly put that position on anyone. Especially when they are not asking for it. There are plenty of other challenging games out there. So this is a nothing issue, and just another boogeyman made up by the hardcore crowd, because they had nothing better to do with their lives. Always has been.

now that due panic is out of the way, time to put your money where your mouth has been all these years: *ahem* HOW DOES THIS AFFECT YOU OR ANYONE WHO CHOOSES TO PLAY ON HARDER OR "DEVELOPER INENDED" DIFFICULTIES?"

Preach brother!

 

[Dreiko]

Having a blast with lies of P so far at the highest difficulty (normal), only died a handful of times (outside that one time I fell off a roof), these people are pansies.

Ok, now that due panic is out of the way, time to put your money where your mouth has been all these years: *ahem* HOW DOES THIS AFFECT YOU OR ANYONE WHO CHOOSES TO PLAY ON HARDER OR "DEVELOPER INENDED" DIFFICULTIES?"

If they change the normal mode to easy, and lock the hardcore mode behind beating the game once, when otherwise the normal mode would have been the hardcore mode presumably, or at the very least harder than the current normal mode, that does in fact ruin your first playthrough. I hated when the recent FF games did this too, so it's not a soulslike thing. Don't lock the fun difficulty behind beating the game.


If this is done to accommodate people who want the easy modes, it is preferable to me that normal mode is the old normal mode at the cost of there not being a very easy mode. (though obviously the appropriate answer is to just let people select all difficulties right off like normal)

 

[Xprimentyl]

Having a blast with lies of P so far at the highest difficulty (normal), only died a handful of times (outside that one time I fell off a roof), these people are pansies.



If they change the normal mode to easy, and lock the hardcore mode behind beating the game once, when otherwise the normal mode would have been the hardcore mode presumably, or at the very least harder than the current normal mode, that does in fact ruin your first playthrough. I hated when the recent FF games did this too, so it's not a soulslike thing. Don't lock the fun difficulty behind beating the game.


If this is done to accommodate people who want the easy modes, it is preferable to me that normal mode is the old normal mode at the cost of there not being a very easy mode. (though obviously the appropriate answer is to just let people select all difficulties right off like normal)

LMAO!!!

So wait, let me get this straight, you don't like devs gating off YOUR enjoyment of THEIR game behind strict barriers because you think they should allow you to enjoy THEIR game the way that best suits YOU, because that's what YOU want? Basically, no easy mode options because games shouldn't accommodate "everybody," but when they restrict access to harder modes, subjectively-perceived "the way a game is supposed to be," well, we can't have that; "accommodate ME!" The irony here is fucking rich, type 2 diabetes rich.

"Normal" is what the devs say "normal" is. If it's too easy for some, and they can't be arsed to breeze through an easy run to get at the meat of a harder mode, then, I guess the game just isn't for them, and they should just go play something else, right? Right? Every game isn't supposed to be for everyone, right?

 

[Drathnoxis]

Do we need another 30 page thread arguing about difficulty in Soulslikes?

 

[BrawlMan]

Do we need another 30 page thread arguing about difficulty in Soulslikes?

No. Fuck that old shit.

 

[Xprimentyl]

Do we need another 30 page thread arguing about difficulty in Soulslikes?

We really don't, but a thread for those who've traditionally argued against accessibility now arguing against their own perceived lack of accessibility, or how the inclusion of accessibility literally did nothing to affect their own experience with a game, well, that might be refreshing. I don't mind watching people eat crow and pretend it's delicious to spite all of us watching them retching with every bite.

 

[Dreiko]

LMAO!!!

So wait, let me get this straight, you don't like devs gating off YOUR enjoyment of THEIR game behind strict barriers because you think they should allow you to enjoy THEIR game the way that best suits YOU, because that's what YOU want? Basically, no easy mode options because games shouldn't accommodate "everybody," but when they restrict access to harder modes, subjectively-perceived "the way a game is supposed to be," well, we can't have that; "accommodate ME!" The irony here is fucking rich, type 2 diabetes rich.

"Normal" is what the devs say "normal" is. If it's too easy for some, and they can't be arsed to breeze through an easy run to get at the meat of a harder mode, then, I guess the game just isn't for them, and they should just go play something else, right? Right? Every game isn't supposed to be for everyone, right?

When you buy a game you get it as-is, so the thing you bought into is whatever difficulty mode was the default at the time of purchase. Changing that in a subsequent patch to suit other people is literally a bait-and-switch to the core audience that bought into the game as it was launching. I don't think this is particularly controversial.

 

[Phoenixmgs]

More player options is always a good thing, they are OPTIONAL hence they are options.

The conversation about Dark Souls difficulty was always hilarious and made no sense.

 

[Phoenixmgs]

When you buy a game you get it as-is, so the thing you bought into is whatever difficulty mode was the default at the time of purchase. Changing that in a subsequent patch to suit other people is literally a bait-and-switch to the core audience that bought into the game as it was launching. I don't think this is particularly controversial.

You can still play it as it was. Is any update then a bait-and-switch? Should Dark Souls 1 not have rebalanced the horribly unbalanced weapon damage system?

 

[Drathnoxis]

We really don't, but a thread for those who've traditionally argued against accessibility now arguing against their own perceived lack of accessibility, or how the inclusion of accessibility literally did nothing to affect their own experience with a game, well, that might be refreshing. I don't mind watching people eat crow and pretend it's delicious to spite all of us watching them retching with every bite.

There is no difference between what you are describing and how the argument went the last 5 times. Not really sure how we're eating crow now as opposed to any other time.

 

[CriticalGaming]

The conversation about Dark Souls difficulty was always hilarious and made no sense.

The whole argument around Dark Souls difficulty was that the game already HAD difficulty options in terms of playstyle and multiplayer. The dynamic availability of difficulty was already there,.

Does Dark Souls become better because you can select "easy" in a menu rather than dynamically change the difficulty?

Elden Ring is only difficult if you choose to not use any of the weapons and summons that turn the game to your favor.


I dunno about Lies of Parry, but I know that Sekiro was exceptionally hard and there is nothing the player can do about it except figure that parry system out. Expedition 33 is much the same way. You MUST master the parry or you will NOT 100% that game. Which isn't to say that parry mechanics are too hard, they just don't work for some people who simply can't grasp timing.

 

[BrawlMan]

The whole argument around Dark Souls difficulty was that the game already HAD difficulty options in terms of playstyle and multiplayer. The dynamic availability of difficulty was already there,.

Congratulations, it's other Souls-likes style games, and not the Dark Souls franchise directly itself. Once again, you are losing nothing and you don't have to play the easier modes nor the games themselves, if you don't want to. Live with it.

Nobody cried about SIFU getting an additional easy and hard mode for free in the updates. There was nothing but praise on both ends, and all difficulties became properly balanced. Everybody won.

 

[Phoenixmgs]

The whole argument around Dark Souls difficulty was that the game already HAD difficulty options in terms of playstyle and multiplayer. The dynamic availability of difficulty was already there,.

Does Dark Souls become better because you can select "easy" in a menu rather than dynamically change the difficulty?

Elden Ring is only difficult if you choose to not use any of the weapons and summons that turn the game to your favor.


I dunno about Lies of Parry, but I know that Sekiro was exceptionally hard and there is nothing the player can do about it except figure that parry system out. Expedition 33 is much the same way. You MUST master the parry or you will NOT 100% that game. Which isn't to say that parry mechanics are too hard, they just don't work for some people who simply can't grasp timing.

Again, what I've said years ago, what if the player doesn't find the easier playstyles fun and enjoyable? Do they just then stop playing the game? The combat to me is the least engaging aspect of Souls games. I don't think the combat is hard so I didn't care there wasn't an easy difficulty but for someone that does find it hard but likes the other aspects of the game, I guess they are out of luck then.

 

[Xprimentyl]

When you buy a game you get it as-is, so the thing you bought into is whatever difficulty mode was the default at the time of purchase. Changing that in a subsequent patch to suit other people is literally a bait-and-switch to the core audience that bought into the game as it was launching. I don't think this is particularly controversial.

A "bait and switch" is a sales tactic wherein a buyer is lured in at a lower cost and manipulated into a higher one. In this case, the buyer still gets exactly what they paid for, but additional options have been added. You're getting MORE for your money; you may not want, appreciate, or use any of it, but it's there, and affects absolutely NOTHING for the purists who think if you're not playing with your balls in a vice, you're disparaging the devs' "artistic vision."

As for it being "controversial," I dunno, ask @CriticalGaming why he started the thread; I just found it substantially ironic that he'd post thread about "ruin" in gaming when it's about accommodating more players without affecting his own experience, i.e.: not accommodating his own gate-keepy ideals. Literally bandying about hyperbolic terms like "ruin" because games aren't what he thinks they should be because they're being adjusted for people other than him. You're right; it's not controversial, just really, really stupid and selfish.

Thankfully, he can just go play something else...

 

[CriticalGaming]

what if the player doesn't find the easier playstyles fun and enjoyable?

Does that not then infer that the player is having fun with the harder playstyles then? And if so? What's the issue?

 

[Bedinsis]

So, part of the reason Souls Likes have their high difficulty is because the lore presents a world where reality has ended and we are just living in the ashes of what once were, so it makes sense to have a difficulty that conveys how living in said setting is. This is at least the impression I've gotten from Yahtzee's videos.

Is that still true, or have they permitted other settings to be part of Souls Likes? Given the popularity of the genre I could easily see someone copying some aspects to make a "baby's first souls like" if there is a market demand for it and lowering the difficulty is impossible or breaks the regular games.

Personally I have no horse in this race, other than instinctively siding against gate-keeping.

 

[Dreiko]

You can still play it as it was. Is any update then a bait-and-switch? Should Dark Souls 1 not have rebalanced the horribly unbalanced weapon damage system?

No actually if you read the top post they're turning what used to be easy mode into normal mode, so now the old normal mode is either gone or locked behind beating the game once. The issue isn't that they added easy modes, it's that they turned the normal mode easier than it was and didn't offer a replacement for those who liked it as it was when the game was new.

A "bait and switch" is a sales tactic wherein a buyer is lured in at a lower cost and manipulated into a higher one. In this case, the buyer still gets exactly what they paid for, but additional options have been added. You're getting MORE for your money; you may not want, appreciate, or use any of it, but it's there, and affects absolutely NOTHING for the purists who think if you're not playing with your balls in a vice, you're disparaging the devs' "artistic vision."

As for it being "controversial," I dunno, ask @CriticalGaming why he started the thread; I just found it substantially ironic that he'd post thread about "ruin" in gaming when it's about accommodating more players without affecting his own experience, i.e.: not accommodating his own gate-keepy ideals. Literally bandying about hyperbolic terms like "ruin" because games aren't what he thinks they should be because they're being adjusted for people other than him. You're right; it's not controversial, just really, really stupid and selfish.

Thankfully, he can just go play something else...

I don't know how much of the top article in the OP you read through, but the issue at hand is that they basically turned the old easy mode into the current normal mode, not that they added an easy option but that they made the deafult mode easier. Adding options is the opposite of what happened. They took the option of playing in the old normal mode away.