Volte posted:

The appeal of most Souls games to me is that they are actual super accessible, relatively easily learnable games cloaked in a sinister and heavily punishing aesthetic. Death is a narrative device in Dark Souls and the marketing reflected that. The idea that Dark Souls is some kind of absurdly hard game is a straight up myth. Fuckin Crash Bandicoot is approximately 1000 times harder than Dark Souls. I'm by no means a gaming wizard, but I semi-regularly do strolls through Dark Souls just for fun. I haven't played Dark Souls 2 as much but other than the absurd optional co-op areas in the DLC which I had to abandon entirely (talk about runs back...), it is similarly pretty accessible. Bloodborne is way faster, but the rally system and quickstep mechanic go a long way to level the playing field, plus you can get some pretty beefy weapon runes. In fact, I think Bloodborne is probably the game where I have become the most unstoppable out of any of the Souls games. The point isn't that the bosses or enemies are difficult, it's that they are there, and you can hit them until they die. Being difficult is a side effect of you just not knowing how to fight them. But somewhere along the way, around Dark Souls 3, the actual difficulty started to become the point, and to me that's like a core characteristic of the Souls series being left behind. I don't even like exploring Irithyll of the Boreal Valley, as beautiful as it is, because it's just filled to the brim with super fast horseshit enemies that aren't fun to fight more than a few times. That whole bit of the game I've generally just sped through, which is a shame because exploring every corner was always my favourite part of the other ones.

KazigluBey posted:

Nobody here went that far, outside of whatever strawmen flatluigi is shadowboxing with. "My position: fair and rational. Your position: dumb and so goddamned crazy"-hyperbole-posting sucks, but whatever.

Terminal autist posted:

Movies are allowed to be challenging, books are allowed to be difficult, music is allowed to be obscure and abrasive. I've never understood the sentiment and obsession that all video games need to be accessible. I can't imagine anyone claiming that more esoteric rappers like billy woods or aesop rock need to dumb down their lyrics or explain their references or hardcore punk bands would need to tone down their political content or play less abrasive to attract more people. The soulsborne games clearly sell well enough that they dont need to attract a wider audience that dont appreciate what they are doing and its totally ok to dislike them, steam has a 2 hour refund window and that should give people plenty of time to decide whether or not these games are for them. Frankly its classic gamer entitlement that makes people demand an easier setting, if fromsoft wanted to do it I wouldnt be opposed but they have been making these games for over a decade and they clearly dont want to at this point. You can call me a gatekeeper or whatever else but the truth of the matter is they make a highly tightly balanced game and I get a little concerned if they start to forsake their core fanbase at the attempt to attract more people who dont appreciate what they are doing.

Tl;dr https://mobile.twitter.com/fetusberry/status/1114364382606053378?lang=en completely unironically

Floodkiller posted:

Sometimes it's the entire point of the game/genre to be inaccessible to the majority of the population and that's okay too.

PantsBandit posted:

Ultimately, yes. And developers shouldn't be expected to cater to everyone's individual preference on how things are done. If you don't like Sekiro's mechanics and hardline stance on player skill, well hey there are lots of other games out there.

Hub Cat posted:

KazigluBey posted:

We live in a cultural post-scarcity, he's not wrong. I really enjoyed watching a friend play Football Manager and kinda' wanted to have a go myself, but that thing is basically an insane spreadsheet simulator and I bounced right off. If making a more accessible mode was realistic and didn't drain resources from the main game getting fully featured, I'd be all for it. But if the devs have decided that their time and effort is best spent elsewhere, that's not really a bother for me. I've got plenty of other games I can play, and they're games, it's not the end of the world if I miss one every now and again.

flatluigi posted:

the conversation just really ends up going like this:

A: "I want to play through X because [the story/the aesthetic/the developers/the fact that a lot of other people are playing it and it's become a cultural touchstone] is compelling to me, but [my very little free time/my personal skills/my personal abilities] keep me from doing it. I wish there were more options in games that would allow for me to play it."
B: "I have the [time/skill/ability] to play through the game and I think the difficulty is [as important/more important than] why you want to play it."
A: "I still want to play it, though?"
B: "Then you should somehow overcome what's stopping you (even if that's not possible) or give up on playing it."
A: "That sucks, but at least you think I should have the option to play more of these games in the future, right?"
B: "I think the difficulty is too important to let you play the game at all, and I think providing options would stop me from enjoying the game as much even if I don't ever pick the options that would make you [enjoy/able to play] it."
A: "That also sucks and I'm not sure why I'm talking to you anymore."

edit: this was typed up before pantsbandit illustrated my point

Cowcaster posted:

i don’t feel like what you’re saying is contradicting what i said?

KazigluBey posted:

yeah fair enough, that post's vibe kinda sucks, especially quoting that cringe rightfully meme'd to hell tweet.

For the record, flatluigi, I'm for more difficulty options in general. I'd just rather they be extremely well realized & well integrated like in, say Celeste, rather than the garbage fire we see in 4Xs or Total War style games. If we end up with more of the former and less of the latter, it's all good.

Seventh Arrow posted:

I'm playing Far Cry 4 and am on "City of Pain," the mission where you have to get to De Pleur's hideyhole undetected. The stealth in Far Cry is kind of fiddly to begin with, so having to stealth through a whole mission with stingy checkpoints is a bit much. I watched some walkthroughs but it's a lot of StealthGamerBR types who are far too good at scoring headshots. I think the answer is in bringing lots of bait. The best part of Far Cry games is letting a hungry four-legged predator loose on a bunch of soldiers anyways.

Perpetual Hiatus posted:

On a completely different tangent I am really appreciating the fact that demo's seem way more commonplace again. Both for things that on paper seem like they will extremely float my goat but really need to be played to see (Yoku's Island Express sunk my goat), and for all the games that my graphics card doesnt actually meet the minimum but I can play smoothly anyway (latest= RedOut). I bought Baba Is You after playing the initial gamejam or whatever proof-of-concept. It feels respectful of peoples time and money, and also confidence in the product the studio has developed.

[Obligatory follow up post: Really its just cynically cashing in on perceptions of fairness because people can finally get a refund on steam games, nihilism for president YOLO]

Andrast posted:

Well since this is the PC thread, people can always just use cheatengine, trainers or mods to customize game difficulty for them

Cowcaster posted:

i love the dark souls games

PantsBandit posted:

Lol your whole post is fluff and I don't think I illustrated any point you may have been trying to make.

Yes it would be great if every developer had infinite time and resources to make a game that nobody disliked or had trouble with, but that's not the case. There's nothing wrong with picking a tone and level of challenge that isn't immediately accessible to everyone and I think saying it's "impossible" for some people to overcome the challenge is bullshit. Unless you have a literal handicap that prevents you from being able to improve to the point where you can progress, it's just a matter of trying more.

Or, again, playing a game in a genre and with a level of difficulty that appeals to you. Crazy, I know.

PantsBandit posted:

Or, again, playing a game in a genre and with a level of difficulty that appeals to you. Crazy, I know.

Hub Cat posted:

Mea culpa in that it was lovely of me to insinuate it was the threads/your position, that was an unnecessary rear end in a top hat move on my part.

Volte posted:

Sekiro's level of difficulty very much appeals to me. What does not appeal to me is the roadblocks on the way to mastery that have nothing to do with skill and are simply about depositing time into the time slot. If I use Cheat Engine to make it impossible to die and I spend a week practicing my skills against Genichiro with impunity, then I go back to the fully unaltered game and wreck him, is that legit? Did I cheat? If so, does that mean that the actual execution of the moves isn't the point of the game, but rather the amount of time you spend on it (i.e. paying your dues)? If not, then what are the possible objections to adding such an ability to the actual game so that anyone can access it, not just people with Cheat Engine? Again this isn't about an obligation on the devs' part to add such a thing, but a rejection of the idea that it would somehow ruin the game.

PantsBandit posted:

To me this whole conversation is like if someone complained about not having enough time to finish a massive RPG and being like "don't tell me I should play something shorter if I don't have enough time, I should be able to play every video game! The devs should make a version that's 10 hours instead of 100"

Putting it on the dev to make every game beatable by every player is ridiculous.

Volte posted:

Sekiro's level of difficulty very much appeals to me. What does not appeal to me is the roadblocks on the way to mastery that have nothing to do with skill and are simply about depositing time into the time slot. If I use Cheat Engine to make it impossible to die and I spend a week practicing my skills against Genichiro with impunity, then I go back to the fully unaltered game and wreck him, is that legit? Did I cheat? If so, does that mean that the actual execution of the moves isn't the point of the game, but rather the amount of time you spend on it (i.e. paying your dues)? If not, then what are the possible objections to adding such an ability to the actual game so that anyone can access it, not just people with Cheat Engine? Again this isn't about an obligation on the devs' part to add such a thing, but a rejection of the idea that it would somehow ruin the game.

Andrast posted:

Yes you cheated but who loving cares, it's a single player game

KazigluBey posted:

Putting aside FromSoft for a second, really how lazily are difficulty settings handled in games like Total War or 4Xs like Civilization, huh? Literally just stat bonuses for the AI, or for you on the easier settings (which, I mean... fine I guess). To the point that how factions are supposed to handle breaks down in the extremes; in TW:Warhammer there are factions balanced around their morale breaking fairly easily, but on the hardest difficulty that's just not the case anymore, and it rarely happens to you on the easier modes. I get it, it's easier to slap on some % toggles and call it a day, I just wish they'd had the time and resources to maybe make difficulty settings tie into build-orders/queues, army comps, the AI being more/less reckless, etc...

flatluigi posted:

beginning to think you don't even know how to read posts in general

flatluigi posted:

beginning to think you don't even know how to read posts in general

StrixNebulosa posted:

Sometime in the last month I finally crossed the line: I now own over 2,000 games in my steam library. I'm currently scrolling through my unsorted games and being occasionally surprised - "when did I buy that? / why did I buy that?" - and you'd think I could stop buying games now, but alas, no, my wishlist is still going strong.

Vivian Darkbloom posted:

Anyone have some advice for troubleshooting connection problems with an Xbox Wireless Controller? I've gotten it to connect to my desktop via Bluetooth before but now it's being extra squirrelly. The interface in Windows 10 to add Bluetooth devices seems to have no effect, but sometimes it will pop up a notification saying it's connected. It doesn't stay connected though -- as soon as I launch Doom the controller isn't responding, even though the system thinks I have the controller connected.

Artelier posted:

I tried Dying Light for the free weekend and does the game ever give you a sense of real power and progression? I am trying to enjoy dropkicking zombies but the game is trying its hardest to withhold this joy from me with special zombies and a low damage output.

Hwurmp posted:

difficulty sure seems to be a





difficult

subject

Too Shy Guy posted:

Dunno if you've finished it yet but if not, finding a way up onto the roofs made it a million times easier for me after a few false starts.