"Easy" Modes in Games

[Shauna]

I wouldn't play with them ever. Sounds like a boring game. Let's listen to everyone have those on all game and tell everyone the game is easy and criticize anyone who worked to beat the game. For the love of god, stop making these things in games.

This post got me thinking about all the times any kind of "easy mode", for lack of a better term, is implemented in a game. EDITL I'm not directing this at you, Nutty, I'm just using you as an example of a counterpoint to myself!

Why is it such a bad thing to have a game be more accessible to others who may not be as skilled? Those who don't want to use it, don't have to use it. It's there as an option that can be ignored, for everyone who doesn't want it. Its existence doesn't invalidate anyone's achievements who completed the game "properly".

I guess I just don't understand this elitism around people enjoying video games. If more people can enjoy them thanks to a little bit extra help, then that can only be a good thing for the medium as a whole.

Anyway, where do you stand on ez modes?

[Pheesh]

I can't remember the last time I actually played on an easy difficulty when there was a 'medium' option available, but I don't really care if it's there. I mean, I'm thinking ahead 15 years to if I had kids, I would like them to be able to enjoy a game even if their hand eye coordination isn't great, so I'd probably appreciate it being implemented at that point. If not, well then I'll just have to tell my n00b children to git gud.

[Vermachtnis]

http://i.imgur.com/NFQZJdf.jpg

But in all seriousness they're just games and they're for enjoyment. If you need to tone it down a bit to get through, more power to you. Giving up and quitting is worse.

[Mr. Carnelian]

Nothing wrong with easy mode. Sometimes you're not so good a game, but you still want to play it, so you stick it on easy. Or maybe you want to play without the stress of your character dying (that really bothers Formy). All games should have an easy mode.

[Galuf]

If its an FPS. easy modes seem to be ok.
if its a Jrpg then it seems ok. but its weird having an option.
as for Wrpg i cant say anything because i played skyrim and ME on easy. atleast on the first play. However i'm glad a game like Dark Souls doesnt have an option, its hard BUT you learn it.

so. um. yeah that.


i want to play ME now

[Loony BoB]

Uncharted 2/3: I first played in normal mode for the "real" experience, then I played in hard mode for the achievement and because hey, it's a good game, I'm gonna replay it! And then I figured I'd get all the achievements, and that's where easy mode came in.

[Aulayna]

I usually go to easy mode if it's a game I'm only really playing for the story, and not looking for a challenge with. If I enjoyed it enough to replay it, then I'll up the difficulty.

[Wolf Kanno]

I don't have a problem with easy modes being in games. I don't always go for them but I have nothing against there existence. I don't care for "easy" games, which is why I generally prefer when games give you an option for game difficulty instead of just one mode. I have nothing against Easy Mode or the people who play it, I prefer my challenge but I that doesn't mean its a better way to play a game, just a preference.

As for the context of the actual post though, I would point out the discussion was more about a built in cheat mode, not an actual easy mode option. Choosing to play a game at a lower difficulty level is a bit different from playing a normal game and activating cheats midway through to win. I mean the boosts in the FFVIII Steam version alone lets you gain all skill for a GF once its obtained, always do 9999 damage with attacks, permanent Limit Break and max health. I mean that's not easy mode man, that's some Game Genie shenanigans. There is a difference between learning the rules of a game to win and just letting the game let you win. I mean if you went to a football/soccer match and one team just used a special rule to start the game with 99 points, it wouldn't exactly be a game anymore.

[Shauna]

Eh, I am aware of the context and I phrased it as such because it is inclusive of many things. The Invinciblity Leaf in Mario games, for example, would be something akin to an "easy" mode as far as Mario would allow. In an RPG, something inbuilt that allows you to be max level and get through battles quickly is for all intents and purposes an "easy" mode.

And I don't think equating this to competitive, team-based sports is the right way to go. Obviously in that situation it's not right - but if someone is just wanting to play a game by themselves then I don't know why it should be frowned on that they play it the way that makes it most fun for them.

[Night Fury]

I often go with the easy mode, and then I'll try it out and maybe push up the difficulty if it's *too easy* 5 me.

But sometimes though upping the difficulty in a lot of game just means that there's more enemies to kill - like just more waves and waves and waves and ain't nobody got time for that shit.

[FFNut]

I wouldn't play with them ever. Sounds like a boring game. Let's listen to everyone have those on all game and tell everyone the game is easy and criticize anyone who worked to beat the game. For the love of god, stop making these things in games.

This post got me thinking about all the times any kind of "easy mode", for lack of a better term, is implemented in a game. EDITL I'm not directing this at you, Nutty, I'm just using you as an example of a counterpoint to myself!

Why is it such a bad thing to have a game be more accessible to others who may not be as skilled? Those who don't want to use it, don't have to use it. It's there as an option that can be ignored, for everyone who doesn't want it. Its existence doesn't invalidate anyone's achievements who completed the game "properly".

I guess I just don't understand this elitism around people enjoying video games. If more people can enjoy them thanks to a little bit extra help, then that can only be a good thing for the medium as a whole.

Anyway, where do you stand on ez modes?

the thing that makes me cross with it is the fact that many people use the help from easy then claim its way to easy. I guess I always enjoyed the satisfaction of figuring things out or grinding it out to skin bye and get through the game.

[Psychotic]

Difficulty levels are great and as the OP says, making games more accessible to more people is a good thing. In response to FF Nut's concerns, the opinion of someone who has played the game on easy saying that the game is too easy doesn't hold any weight. The overwhelming majority of gamers and devs would just laugh that off. If you enjoy a hard and challenging experience it doesn't detract in any way from that enjoyment if others prefer an easier ride.

I don't find many hard or nightmare modes to be enjoyable. As I've said in the past threads on this, I find them often to be a test of patience rather than skill. My favourite playstyle is that of a berserker. You will find me right in the heart of the carnage where the fighting is thickest hurtling around like a man possessed and attacking as many opponents as I can. Many harder difficulties tend to reward a cautious steady playstyle and punish mine.

Sadly too many games take the route of just making enemies bullet sponges rather than making them faster or have improved AI and tactics. I believe that popping off three headshots on three different enemies in quick succession requires more skill than hitting the same enemy with three headshots and that it is a hell of a lot more fun.

[Old Manus]

I remember 'Kid Mode' in the original Spiderman game.

[Fynn]

I think it's great to have the choice. Games are about enjoyment. And I even like the fact that more recent games don't actually take away stuff for beating the game on easy mode. Like, I know there were some games in the past that wouldn't give you the true ending or something if you played on easy, or some item drops would be altered so you would get less cool gear. Now it's just about letting people experience the games at their own pace, which is amazing.

But yeah, I agree with Wolf. The cheat mode thing is kinda pushing it.

[Shauna]

the thing that makes me cross with it is the fact that many people use the help from easy then claim its way to easy. I guess I always enjoyed the satisfaction of figuring things out or grinding it out to skin bye and get through the game.

Do people really complete things on easy and then say that it was too easy? If they do, then you can say "try it on a higher difficulty setting", or "don't use the L99 mod if you want more of a challenge". If they don't, well... eh. That's their choice, and their complaints about the difficulty won't be taken on board by anyone because of these choices.

Either way, you're putting too much weight in someone else's experience. What should matter is your experience and what you enjoy. You've said that you like the grinding and getting through by the skin of your teeth, and that's great. That's not everyone's idea of a good time though, and that's what matters.

[Kalevala]

I generally care more about plot and atmosphere, so I don't see a problem with easy modes whatsoever.

That being said, I do think there is an argument to be made against them when they're so easy they ruin the immersion of the game. In survival horror, for example, if whatever wants to kill you doesn't feel threatening enough I can see how it would ruin the atmosphere.

[Pumpkin]

I play most games on easy because a) I'm bad at video games and b) I generally play for story/to de-stress and easy is the best fit for me. I understand it isn't for everyone though, which is why I'm glad when they give options. Some people like a challenge, that's how they get their enjoyment. None of it is right or wrong, just different strokes for different folks.

[TheKeybasHKey]

I honestly don't care for an Easy mode, i'm not really good at videogames anyway.

[Sephex]

I generally don't go for easy mode unless I already beat the game and just want to blow through it really fast because I enjoy the story or something.

I always found it really weird that so many people care how other people play video games, though. Different people have different levels of skills/time to devote to video games. I mean, I always find it weird when people in their 20s or 30s are still trash talking about video games like they are still 17 or something. Time to take the sand bag off the gas pedal, buddy. Different strokes for different folks.

For example, I like Dark Souls challenge stuff as much as the next guy, but I'm not going to act all flabbergasted and spout memes at people because they won't play a single player game--in a session that I will never see--in the style that I would play in.

[Vasher]

I understand the need to broaden the "audience", but am disappointed by the "dilution" (in general). I had to take a look at "Nut's" post (reference). I feel the same way.

It's akin to the dulling down of society (in general), parallels. One step further and it's life on "auto-pilot". Autonomous cars, because most are too daft to control an auto, or too busy "contributing" to social media, or just swinging "vines". Painful, when you think about it (really).


Many would like to ride a street/dirt bike, many cannot. However, some choose to override this innate deficiency, crash, and hurt themselves and/or others. Many fancy themselves as "race car drivers", we all know how that turns out. How about the group of "master pyrotechnician's", or "chemical engineers" (if you get the "social media" reference", you get this) on Youtube?

What about those who "can", have strived to achieve"it", only to be joined by "Bob, Steve, and Phil", who happened to stumble upon "it"? The elitist's of that exclusive group have been robbed, their accomplishments "belittled".

When I'm around, everyone that was "God" at MvC has their ego crushed. They cannot use "Simple". My eldest is pretty good at pulling off combos. I do this, because at one time I was pulling off "Infinite" combos on Killer Instinct. Lazy kids these days. I used to walk backwards to school, every day. This was in the snow, up hill both ways... with land mines... and tactical snow troopers, plus you had to keep your eyes peeled for snow-camo Storm Shadow. This is in Southern California, so there was an earthquake every 5 minutes.

Seriously though, it pisses me off that some games have a prerequisite for the highest difficulty setting, namely; Beating it a dozen times on a dozen different shades of "Easy Peasy". Also, the additional Dark Aeon's+ included in the PAL release of FFX made me absolutely livid. It's Japan's way of saying "the US has a much higher percentage of "stupid lazy" than the UK. Pissed (because true).


It may sound mean, but if you can't, just "don't". It's that simple. If you disagree and aren't familiar with guns, go buy several, plus munitions, and "goof off" with those. (Please don't)






Now that I'm done with my rant. "East Mode", I'm all good with that. Honestly, it's probably the only way I'll ever get a chance to "complete" a game from now on (kids/wife/life). I'm team "Easy". Go "Cheat Mode"!!!!!

[Fynn]

But you can't really apply that broad perspective to gaming, which is a medium whose most important goal is to bring joy to the players. Saying "if you can't do it, don't" kind of misses the point of what gaming in general is about.

[Night Fury]

Gaming is for everyone and therefore should be accessible to everyone - and they can play it however they want.

You completing a game on insane mode doesn't detract from my achievement of completing it on easy. I still sat and played it, sat and completed it. Sure you may have done a few harder battles, maybe a more difficult puzzle - good for you, but we both completed the game! :)

[Psychotic]

Also, the additional Dark Aeon's+ included in the PAL release of FFX made me absolutely livid. It's Japan's way of saying "the US has a much higher percentage of "stupid lazy" than the UK. Pissed (because true).To be fair, the PAL release came a full 6 months after the NA version.

[blackmage_nuke]

I don't mind their existence but I'd prefer if they said at the time of choosing whether it has any bearing on the actual plot of the game (Inaccessible secret endings and the like). I like to pick easy in genre's where I'm not particularly strong and just want to play for the story elements.

Also if it's a mixed gameplay sort of game I want to know what gameplay elements effected by the difficulty. I like full difficulty puzzles but if there's combat involved I'd like something from easy to medium for that.

Sure it's stuff I can google but if a game is 5 years old I run the risk of stumbling onto spoilers.

[Shauna]

The elitist's of that exclusive group have been robbed, their accomplishments "belittled".

How so? I mean, it's not an exclusive group, for one. And the elitists will always have their shouts of "I played this game on X difficulty in X manner, so I am the greetest!" regardless of how many people baby step their way through the same game. How have these achievements been belittled by someone else playing the game in a different way?


It may sound mean, but if you can't, just "don't". It's that simple.

It's not a case of can't though. It's a case of can, but not at the same skill level as some other individuals.

[Karifean]

I find myself in a similar boat as Wolf Kanno here. When it comes to easy modes deliberately put into the game by the creators, I have zero problems with them. I mean the whole point of them being there is to be used by those that want to use it, so why would I ever condemn it?

But when it comes to cheat modes I can't say that so one-sidedly. To me that is akin to reading the solution to a mystery novel before tackling the mystery yourself. When I play a game, I want to experience what the creators prepared for me the way they want me to; cheating would be completely missing the point. At worst it could even be considered disrespectful.

To give an easy example, imagine a cheat mode for Danganronpa where shooting any bullet at any statements instantly wins the argument. Or Phoenix Wright, presenting any evidence at any statement instantly advances the story. Sure you can still enjoy the games this way, no question, but it's completely circumventing the entire purpose of these gameplay segments, and I wouldn't be easily convinced it's actually for the player's benefit to do that.

Though of course this argument has holes in it and only applies to very specific cases. For one, author's intention is not as important for everyone as it is for me, in which case simply playing the game the way you like them best is obviously the best way to go about things. Secondly, 'tackling the mystery yourself' is not always the point in the first place. If you don't really lose any of the game's storytelling experience by using cheats, naturally there is no harm in doing so, and in fact, not having to struggle could just as well improve your experience.

But to bring it back to the subject that kicked off this whole discussion though, cheat modes in FF VII/VIII/IX, I do think it's probably harmful to the overall experience of the games to be using these extra modes. You may be saying they were put in the game by Square Enix themselves, but I still question the intention behind that; while it surely makes the game more accessible, I can't help but feel that going through the games with cheat modes is missing just a liiiittle bit of the originals' magic. You *can* separate the story and gameplay of these games, sure, but it overall benefits from the two playing off one another, and that's just lost this way.

Most of the time though I don't care enough to say anything. The amount of games I've played where any of this is actually relevant is pretty low anyways and telling someone else how *they* should best enjoy a game feels pretty arrogant. :shrug:

[Pheesh]

I don't exactly know what cheats you're talking about, but if the creator of a game didn't want cheats usable then they wouldn't put them into the game. You can't speak for the creators intention if they have offered you things like a "god mode" "infinite ammo" "spawn *X* vehicle" etc.

If it's something modded into a game that the author didn't create then I guess you can make a case for it being detrimental to the intended product, but that is the trade off you have to make to get amazing mods for games like Skyrim, which in a lot of ways enhance games above and beyond what the original intention was.

[Clo]

Sometimes I only want to play a game quickly to see the story unfold and experience the game a little. In those instances I play on easy in order to play QUICKLY.

[Elly]

there was a time when i would never play on easy... but now my backlog has gotten so big, easy is a welcome time-saving option... most of the time higher difficulty usually translates into more enemy HP or more waves of enemies, which means more time slogging through opposition to get to the next bit of story... on the subject of cheats i like how some games give you cheats but disable your ability to earn trophies if you use them, that should be more common with in-game cheats...

[Skyblade]

I understand the need to broaden the "audience", but am disappointed by the "dilution" (in general). I had to take a look at "Nut's" post (reference). I feel the same way.

It's akin to the dulling down of society (in general), parallels. One step further and it's life on "auto-pilot". Autonomous cars, because most are too daft to control an auto, or too busy "contributing" to social media, or just swinging "vines". Painful, when you think about it (really).


Many would like to ride a street/dirt bike, many cannot. However, some choose to override this innate deficiency, crash, and hurt themselves and/or others. Many fancy themselves as "race car drivers", we all know how that turns out. How about the group of "master pyrotechnician's", or "chemical engineers" (if you get the "social media" reference", you get this) on Youtube?

What about those who "can", have strived to achieve"it", only to be joined by "Bob, Steve, and Phil", who happened to stumble upon "it"? The elitist's of that exclusive group have been robbed, their accomplishments "belittled".

When I'm around, everyone that was "God" at MvC has their ego crushed. They cannot use "Simple". My eldest is pretty good at pulling off combos. I do this, because at one time I was pulling off "Infinite" combos on Killer Instinct. Lazy kids these days. I used to walk backwards to school, every day. This was in the snow, up hill both ways... with land mines... and tactical snow troopers, plus you had to keep your eyes peeled for snow-camo Storm Shadow. This is in Southern California, so there was an earthquake every 5 minutes.

Seriously though, it pisses me off that some games have a prerequisite for the highest difficulty setting, namely; Beating it a dozen times on a dozen different shades of "Easy Peasy". Also, the additional Dark Aeon's+ included in the PAL release of FFX made me absolutely livid. It's Japan's way of saying "the US has a much higher percentage of "stupid lazy" than the UK. Pissed (because true).


It may sound mean, but if you can't, just "don't". It's that simple. If you disagree and aren't familiar with guns, go buy several, plus munitions, and "goof off" with those. (Please don't)






Now that I'm done with my rant. "East Mode", I'm all good with that. Honestly, it's probably the only way I'll ever get a chance to "complete" a game from now on (kids/wife/life). I'm team "Easy". Go "Cheat Mode"!!!!!

Okay, so those who can't, won't.

And all of those developers will lose potential sales because they're elitist snobs who think only the hardcore deserve to play their games.

And the real developers who are committed to providing enjoyable experiences for everyone to partake of in their RECREATION TIME will dominate the market.

It's entertainment. People should be allowed to do what they want with it.

If that's not why you're gaming, maybe you're doing it wrong.

[Wolf Kanno]

Eh, I am aware of the context and I phrased it as such because it is inclusive of many things. The Invinciblity Leaf in Mario games, for example, would be something akin to an "easy" mode as far as Mario would allow. In an RPG, something inbuilt that allows you to be max level and get through battles quickly is for all intents and purposes an "easy" mode.

And I don't think equating this to competitive, team-based sports is the right way to go. Obviously in that situation it's not right - but if someone is just wanting to play a game by themselves then I don't know why it should be frowned on that they play it the way that makes it most fun for them.

You missed my point though but brought up a better way to put this. Finding exploits in an RPG system is not a cheat, even if the exploit was unintended, it';s still the player learning to work the system for them. The Invincibility Leaf on the other hand is not a good design idea, it's basically a built in cheat for people who can't be bothered to put the time in to master the skills the game asks of it. Even worse, it can quickly become a crutch item as the item will always help the player complete the stages with ease, but each use basically denies the player the chance to actually master the skills needed to finish certain obstacles, meaning they'll have to resort to it when it comes again or harder obstacles present themselves.

It's like seeing a child in elementary suffer in a subject they don't like, yeah the teacher can give them a pass, and that may boost their confidence temporarily but it will hurt them in the long run as they never mastered the fundamentals of the subject. Likewise, I feel the item just hurts the players ability to get good at the game or learn to appreciate it.

I'd rather have an easy mode that may deny the player some things to spurn them on to try a higher difficulty and become better; than an item that just let's you win because a person can't learn the patience to put in the time to be better at something they say they love. I'm not against easy modes, but I don't like easy games.


I don't exactly know what cheats you're talking about, but if the creator of a game didn't want cheats usable then they wouldn't put them into the game. You can't speak for the creators intention if they have offered you things like a "god mode" "infinite ammo" "spawn *X* vehicle" etc.

If it's something modded into a game that the author didn't create then I guess you can make a case for it being detrimental to the intended product, but that is the trade off you have to make to get amazing mods for games like Skyrim, which in a lot of ways enhance games above and beyond what the original intention was.

To be fair, many of the cheats and codes of games from the old days were never intended to be used. They existed in the code as shortcuts for the designers and play testers to skip around and check quality control. They caught on, and many games in the future added them in since the kids who grew up playing those games and exploiting the codes thought it was fun, but I feel there is a strong difference between mods that balance and add a few fun things to games as opposed to adding an ability that just lets the player win. I don't imagine Skyrim would be a fun to play if you could enter god mode where all your attacks are one-hit-kills, you can't lose health and you succeed at every attempt at theft and persuasion with no risk of screwing up. Might be fun the first time you try it to dick around, but I doubt most players would ever finish the game like that.

Mods in my mind is a different beast, if you want to play a mod that adds in an easy mode that's fine and can be great for people who only want to enjoy the story of the game, but I feel that cheats that rob the player from learning the game mechanics or acquiring the skills needed to be a better player hurt you more in the long run.

[Shauna]

I don't think comparing video games to school is fair either. Videos games are entertainment. Fun. It would be great if school was also those things, but that's not its primary function. I am not saying that everything has to be super easy and people should get passes on every walk of life regardless of skill/effort.

A lot of people seem to approach this subject with "I wouldn't find X fun, so I don't know why anyone else would either". By saying this, you are dictating what people should find fun based on your own opinions. If that person feels an appreciation for a game, you can't say that they didn't appreciate it because they played it in a certain way. You may think that in some cases they are cheating themselves out of a "better experience", but that's up to them to make those choices based on what they want. Their experience doesn't affect yours, and if they got everything they wanted out of their experience, then good for them.



I suppose we can go back and forth over the finer details, but it really comes down to this: You say yourself that you don't like easy games. That is completely fine. You do you. You are not wrong in not liking them. But not everyone is you. Let them do them. They are not wrong if they do like easy games.

All I'm getting at is let people play their single player games however they heck they want. It makes no odds to anyone else.

[FFNut]

I hope nobody got me misunderstood. I don't mind an easy mode either, I just don't want people to call me an idiot when I ask for advise beating a hard boss in a boss fight on hard because they beat him on easy and tell me to just use easy mode. If you are going for a challenge it defeats the gaming experience.

[Skyblade]

I hope nobody got me misunderstood. I don't mind an easy mode either, I just don't want people to call me an idiot when I ask for advise beating a hard boss in a boss fight on hard because they beat him on easy and tell me to just use easy mode. If you are going for a challenge it defeats the gaming experience.

I don't think anyone disagrees with you there. If someone refuses to play on the more challenging settings, I'm not going to listen to them complain about the lack of challenge.

[Pumpkin]

I play on easy mode but I don't complain about lack of challenge. I might comment on "It was easy even for me" when playing a game without a difficulty setting but it's not complaining. I prefer it that way

[Wolf Kanno]

I don't think comparing video games to school is fair either. Videos games are entertainment. Fun. It would be great if school was also those things, but that's not its primary function. I am not saying that everything has to be super easy and people should get passes on every walk of life regardless of skill/effort.

A lot of people seem to approach this subject with "I wouldn't find X fun, so I don't know why anyone else would either". By saying this, you are dictating what people should find fun based on your own opinions. If that person feels an appreciation for a game, you can't say that they didn't appreciate it because they played it in a certain way. You may think that in some cases they are cheating themselves out of a "better experience", but that's up to them to make those choices based on what they want. Their experience doesn't affect yours, and if they got everything they wanted out of their experience, then good for them.

The problem I have here is that you're doing the same thing you're accusing some gamers are doing, which is creating a value statement of what a game should be and arguing that people who see it differently are somehow wrong about it because it's less inclusive to your ideals. I'm simply arguing that games can be more than mindless entertainment and can have value beyond the play period. I simply point out that by relegating all of the medium to this ideal of mindless fun subverts the medium's potential to be something more. I'm not arguing about inclusiveness, I'm arguing that games have the potential to make us into better people and that by reducing it to mindless fun is not the answer, because some people don't want games to be anything more than mindless fun. My question is that how is reducing everything to the order of people who play purely for "mindless fun" any better of a solution than people who argue games should be "balls hard difficult"? Either way you're still faced with the dilemma of reducing the entire medium to favor one kind of player over another. Adding difficulty modes is obviously the best solution and I feel everyone is pretty much in favor of that as a solution.

Now if you're angry cause people may judge you for playing games a particular way then I would argue that his is simply human nature. One should understand that people are by nature cliquey and view reality from a contrasting filter, so it really shouldn't be surprise you'll find people who may act all high and mighty one way or the other based on views. That's just our nature, it's not the system that's the problem it's the people who are running it. It's our nature to judge the world around us as an "us vs. them" filter, it's how we discover who we are and build our identities. The fact we can't leave it at that but instead try to enforce our own feeble and pathetic attempts of placing objectivity on a chaotic subjective existence is simply the fault of our own meager evolution as a species. You'll be judged by assholes, just realize they're assholes and move on knowing their ideal world is not the same as yours.

[Shauna]

I don't think I've said at any point that games should only ever be mindless entertainment. Just that the option should be there if people want that in their games. People want to overcome the challenges? Fine. People want an easy ride? Fine. Not at all saying that challenge is bad, merely that challenge does not hold the same entertainment value for everyone. Not saying that only one side can be catered to because as you say, it just leaves the opposite problem.

Also this isn't about me. My views on what make video games enjoyable actually align very closely with yours. I just appreciate that my views are not universal. :3

[Fynn]

This kind of plays into that feeling I've been having recently. There's much talk on the Internet of what games should and shouldn't be, and can't we just have a variety of games that will be different from each other, so that a large variety of tastes can be catered to? Your most despised game can be an abomination to you, but it can also be someone's favorite and that's okay. SO you dislike JRPG tropes, but there's a bunch of people who just live for that stuff. And I've seen essay after essay about how X genre is ruining gaming and only genre Y knows what's up and all games should have the spiffy Z factor that genre Y has.

And it's all so pointless and dumb.

[Shauna]

Yeah. Pretty much. xD

[Skyblade]

This kind of plays into that feeling I've been having recently. There's much talk on the Internet of what games should and shouldn't be, and can't we just have a variety of games that will be different from each other, so that a large variety of tastes can be catered to? Your most despised game can be an abomination to you, but it can also be someone's favorite and that's okay. SO you dislike JRPG tropes, but there's a bunch of people who just live for that stuff. And I've seen essay after essay about how X genre is ruining gaming and only genre Y knows what's up and all games should have the spiffy Z factor that genre Y has.

And it's all so pointless and dumb.

Of course it's pointless and dumb. It's the Internet.

[Pheesh]

I don't think comparing video games to school is fair either. Videos games are entertainment. Fun. It would be great if school was also those things, but that's not its primary function. I am not saying that everything has to be super easy and people should get passes on every walk of life regardless of skill/effort.

A lot of people seem to approach this subject with "I wouldn't find X fun, so I don't know why anyone else would either". By saying this, you are dictating what people should find fun based on your own opinions. If that person feels an appreciation for a game, you can't say that they didn't appreciate it because they played it in a certain way. You may think that in some cases they are cheating themselves out of a "better experience", but that's up to them to make those choices based on what they want. Their experience doesn't affect yours, and if they got everything they wanted out of their experience, then good for them.

The problem I have here is that you're doing the same thing you're accusing some gamers are doing, which is creating a value statement of what a game should be and arguing that people who see it differently are somehow wrong about it because it's less inclusive to your ideals. I'm simply arguing that games can be more than mindless entertainment and can have value beyond the play period. I simply point out that by relegating all of the medium to this ideal of mindless fun subverts the medium's potential to be something more. I'm not arguing about inclusiveness, I'm arguing that games have the potential to make us into better people and that by reducing it to mindless fun is not the answer, because some people don't want games to be anything more than mindless fun. My question is that how is reducing everything to the order of people who play purely for "mindless fun" any better of a solution than people who argue games should be "balls hard difficult"? Either way you're still faced with the dilemma of reducing the entire medium to favor one kind of player over another. Adding difficulty modes is obviously the best solution and I feel everyone is pretty much in favor of that as a solution.

I don't understand how you correlate difficulty with a game's ability to transcend the genre or excel. The game that immediately springs to mind when I think of gaming carrying over from "beyond the play period" is The Last of Us. It's not my all time favourite game, but after I was done with it I could take a step back and say "that is an example of what games can accomplish at their best." It has the emotion and storytelling of a great book or film, coupled with the long, "your struggle is my struggle" investment that games provide better than any medium. Those things combined make that game what it is and changing the difficulty setting doesn't diminish either one. Some people simply prefer to get through the game without breaking a sweat and others want an extremely challenging experience. This is another reason why gaming is a potentially superior medium; it allows itself to be catered to a wide ranging audience.

Chances are that a lot of people also have a different viewpoint to me on what constitutes an influential experience from a game. That guy who played Dark Souls with a guitar hero controller probably had a similar feeling of unforgettable accomplishment as the grown adult who beat The Last of Us on easy, and both are equally valid and can't be diminished by other people.

Games are meant to be fun. Mindless fun, thought provoking fun, stressful, relaxing, emotional, shared, all of those and more depending on the game played and who played it. What I find stressful other people may find easy, and what I find emotional other people may find boring. It's not up to any one person to dictate how a game should be received by everyone (not even the developer), which I feel like is the ground you've been treading very close to. Honestly, who cares if people cheat their way through a game? You enjoyed it, if they didn't and you feel they could have then simply feel sorry for them and move on.

Also, in regards to ffnut's point about asking for help and being told to lower the difficulty; it takes less than one second to ignore bad advice. The internet is full of it and it's probably not worth giving everything you read on it credence.

[Ayen]

I have nothing against easy mode because the majority of the games I play are on easy when I have the choice. I think the only game I ever upped the difficulty on was Evil Zone because I was legit that good. I don't like when a game penalizes you for playing on easy to where you don't even get to play the whole game (I'm looking at you, Castlevania 64), or when they lock you out of the other modes after you choose it (Hello, Devil May Cry), but luckily those instances are rare.