Unpopular Opinion: All games should have a difficulty slider

[NightmareFarm]

I might get a lot of hate for this but I firmly believe all games should have one. Even games like Souls. Especially games like Souls and games with similar difficulty where you have to die again and again countless times to get past a checkpoint. There is no disadvantage to giving games multiple difficulties. If one wants to play it the traditional way then they can go ahead, but if you just want a fairly challenging difficulty which doesn't constantly halt your progress and doesn't feel like groundhog day having to play the same section over and over then there should be an option for that, that way everyone wins.

Edited April 28, 2022 by NightmareFarm

[kingpotato]

I will disagree on this one, Im not a fan of souls games , I actually have a lot of complaints about them, but with that being said I think that the difficulty adds up to the inmersion and the atmosphere of the game, for example in Souls games the world is almost always described as a dangerous place were death lurks at every corner , if the game had a difficulty level you wouldnt have to worry about whats on the other side of a door or whats behind the next tree, but since the game is so difficult that you can lose your "souls"(or whatever currency the game has) at the slightest mistake, you have to be carefull as to where you go and what you do in the that world giving you a feeling of uneasiness but at the same time rewarding you if you are able to overcome those dangerous places. At the end of the day I think that the difficulty is what makes souls games special, I just wish they added a fucking pause option for once, that should be on every game no exceptions unless its a purely online game.

[NightmareFarm]

10 minutes ago, kingpotato said:

I will disagree on this one, Im not a fan of souls games , I actually have a lot of complaints about them, but with that being said I think that the difficulty adds up to the inmersion and the atmosphere of the game, for example in Souls games the world is almost always described as a dangerous place were death lurks at every corner , if the game had a difficulty level you wouldnt have to worry about whats on the other side of a door or whats behind the next tree, but since the game is so difficult that you can lose your "souls"(or whatever currency the game has) at the slightest mistake, you have to be carefull as to where you go and what you do in the that world giving you a feeling of uneasiness but at the same time rewarding you if you are able to overcome those dangerous places. At the end of the day I think that the difficulty is what makes souls games special, I just wish they added a fucking pause option for once, that should be on every game no exceptions unless its a purely online game.

Fair enough. My opinion? If gamers want that they can choose that. There is nothing wrong with that, however there should be a difficulty slider so gamers who prefer a more fair challenge with steadier progression and less repetitiveness can have that. There's zero downsides to more options when it comes to difficulty.

Edited April 28, 2022 by NightmareFarm

[Shagger]

I couldn't agree with @NightmareFarm more. With the expectation of some games like interactive narratives (Life Is Strange and Telltale Games), platformers (difficulty options can be hard to implement is these types of games as the way game controllers and shape of the environment directly affects the gameplay), games for very young children and multiplayer focused titles like MMO's. Other than that, there is no excuse.

 

However, for single player experiences, there is no reason for a game to have one difficulty setting, especially if that one setting is really hard or really easy. Having multiple options doesn't take away a challenge, on the contrary it may even add to it. For someone who wants a challenging game, you can turn it up, the challenge has not been lost. For everybody else who may be impaired or be more interseted in art style, storytelling and exploration, the game opens up for them. And even better, it forces developers to so those other elements making a game more interesting, immersive and just generally better. The Souls game have other problems that I won't go into (like not even allowing a player to pause), but compare something like a Souls game to Horizon Zero Dawn with it's Ultra Hard mode, HZD is better. Better story, better graphics, better world building and exploration and better, more rewarding combat, all in a game that is at least a challenging as Soul's games tend to be. It has those advantages because the game had to work at lower difficulty settings as well harder ones. Having multiple difficulty options makes a game better, simple as that.

 

Besides, when was the last time you saw somebody gush about the story, graphics or anything besides the difficulty in a Souls game? Nobody cares about it because it's possible to have a conversation without talking about one thing, the difficulty. It's a shame as I'm sure there are souls games that have a lot going for them other than just the difficulty.

 

I see what you say @kingpotato, but I disagree. A game being challenging  can make it more tense, but that doesn't justify having one difficulty setting. Tension and that daunted feeling can also be created (And I would argue is better being created) by the atmosphere the game itself. Once you faced and been killed by the same, cheap boss 15 times, that feeling tension disappears replaced by frustration, so it's the wrong way to do it. That kind of tension doesn't last. It's just as bad if the boss end up being to easy, that's why being able to adjust it is a good thing.

 

There is something else about this, the worst thing of all actually. Now let me make this clear, I understand that this isn't strictly the game's fault and I'm not painting every Souls fan or people who do believe that games should only have one, brutally hard setting with the same brush, but the toxicity and generally bad attitude that comes from this sector of the gaming community can't be denied. They have have earned this unfortunate reputation for a reason and that reason ties very closely with these games difficulty and lack of difficulty options. It does breed arrogance and a condescending, superior attitude that I absolutely cannot stand.

 

Accessibility options and difficulty options make games better for everybody, especially those who play for the challenge.

[Crazycrab]

I don't care what those selfish and elitist fans of the "Soulsbourne" genre think.  Their is absolutely no good reason to not have difficulty options in a single player action game.  You want a challenge, great more power to you but some might want a different experience.  They want to explore, check out the lore or experience a story without the gameplay being so strenuous.

 

They constantly argue somebody playing the game a different way would ruin the experience for them.  To that I say, GET YOUR HEAD OUT OF YOUR FUCKING ARSE!  That makes no fucking sense!

 

I like a challenge, I genuinely do but if someone else wants to play on an easier mode I don't care!  It doesn't affect my playthrough!

Edited April 28, 2022 by Crazycrab

[Withywarlock]

On the one hand I think it's a fantastic idea; if you've paid for something you should be able to use it. Video games are essentially the only medium that requires you to have some competency at it. Tabletop games can have as much roleplay or combat as you'd like, and you can still flick through a Choose-Your-Own-Adventure book without consequence. You can't fail to engage in music or a television show or a book quite like you can fail at a video game. So on that side of the coin, I'm with people.

On the flipside, what do developers have to do to add difficulty sliders? How much more time needs to be set aside to include difficulty sliders, and to what extent? How low is too low? How high is too high? What does the slider actually change per increment? And ultimately, who am I to suggest/request/demand someone change their artistic vision for me, when I might not even indulge in those features or the game in at all? I like difficulty sliders, but I want them to be good and if they're mandatory they're unlikely to be worth bothering with.

[Heatman]

For me, it's not just in soul's games that should be made available because it really sucks for me when they take away the option for gamers to chose how they want to play. 

[NightmareFarm]

2 hours ago, Withywarlock said:

On the one hand I think it's a fantastic idea; if you've paid for something you should be able to use it. Video games are essentially the only medium that requires you to have some competency at it. Tabletop games can have as much roleplay or combat as you'd like, and you can still flick through a Choose-Your-Own-Adventure book without consequence. You can't fail to engage in music or a television show or a book quite like you can fail at a video game. So on that side of the coin, I'm with people.

On the flipside, what do developers have to do to add difficulty sliders? How much more time needs to be set aside to include difficulty sliders, and to what extent? How low is too low? How high is too high? What does the slider actually change per increment? And ultimately, who am I to suggest/request/demand someone change their artistic vision for me, when I might not even indulge in those features or the game in at all? I like difficulty sliders, but I want them to be good and if they're mandatory they're unlikely to be worth bothering with.

Difficulty sliders have been a thing since like the 90s lol. And most games still feature them with on average like 5 difficulty options. They aren't that hard to program.

Edited April 29, 2022 by NightmareFarm

[NightmareFarm]

2 hours ago, Heatman said:

For me, it's not just in soul's games that should be made available because it really sucks for me when they take away the option for gamers to chose how they want to play. 

I know, I mentioned similare games as well. I was playing Sifu earlier this month and thought the combat is really fun but what really kills this game is how repetitive it is having to do runs over and over on the same level to beat the game. It's one of those games designed to have you die over and over on the same parts. Guess how many levels are in the entire game? 5. Each take about 15-20 minutes to beat if you don't die. Most of the playtime is from just constantly dying and having to do the same thing over and over, not from actually progressing through the game and story and doing new stuff. It's actually helping people get away with lazy game design. It could have been so much better if it wasn't like this because the gameplay is very well designed.

Edited April 29, 2022 by NightmareFarm

[Crazycrab]

31 minutes ago, NightmareFarm said:

Difficulty sliders have been a thing since like the 90s lol. And most games still feature them with on average like 5 difficulty options. They aren't that hard to program.

 

It's not always that simple.  Sometimes rebalancing a game's difficulty is just a case adjusting health and damage.  There are times when that's not enough.  It might mean adjusting the balance of in game items like health potions or even making changes to enemy AI.

 

This is another argument that defenders of the "Git Gud" mob like to make.  They say that including other difficulty modes would "take development time away from the game".  What a shame it would be to take another 2 or 3 months (probably less) to do the rebalancing for an easy mode so you can sell the game to a wider audience which would make up the additional cost and generate more profit....  Yeah, can someone explain to me why they don't do that again?

 

Wether you look at it from a business or gameplay standpoint it's still totally brainless.  There are tons of developers that find the time to do the extra work even when it does take diving deep into the games code and put out critical and commercial successes.  This is laziness that these fans inexplicably just let them get away with.

[NightmareFarm]

8 minutes ago, Crazycrab said:

 

It's not always that simple.  Sometimes rebalancing a game's difficulty is just a case adjusting health and damage.  There are times when that's not enough.  It might mean adjusting the balance of in game items like health potions or even making changes to enemy AI.

 

This is another argument that defenders of the "Git Gud" mob like to make.  They say that including other difficulty modes would "take development time away from the game".  What a shame it would be to take another 2 or 3 months (probably less) to do the rebalancing for an easy mode so you can sell the game to a wider audience which would make up the additional cost and generate more profit....  Yeah, can someone explain to me why they don't do that again?

 

Wether you look at it from a business or gameplay standpoint it's still totally brainless.  There are tons of developers that find the time to do the extra work even when it does take diving deep into the games code and put out critical and commercial successes.  This is laziness that these fans inexplicably just let them get away with.

I'm not sure it would take months to include one. But yeah, even assuming it does I agree there should still be a difficulty slider. This is really something that should be mandatory. Having to play every section dozen times or so kills all the fun. It hurts to think how much of a better game games like Sifu and Sekiro would be if they didn't focus on appealing to digital pride sweatlords. 

Edited April 29, 2022 by NightmareFarm

[Empire]

People play different games for different reasons. Sometimes people themselves play different games for different reasons depending on the mood they're in.

For example, I might be playing cities skyline which is relatively easy. I just like the planning, building aspect of it. I don't like the challenging way of playing that. But then I might be playing Battelfield 4 online where it can be quite challenging at times. Then I might play a story driven game for the story. If you like games for the challenge, that's cool. Buy challenging games and enjoy them. But the way you like isn't a standard. Gaming is something to be enjoyed, let people enjoy them!

[Heatman]

On 4/29/2022 at 12:28 PM, NightmareFarm said:

I know, I mentioned similare games as well. I was playing Sifu earlier this month and thought the combat is really fun but what really kills this game is how repetitive it is having to do runs over and over on the same level to beat the game. It's one of those games designed to have you die over and over on the same parts. Guess how many levels are in the entire game? 5. Each take about 15-20 minutes to beat if you don't die. Most of the playtime is from just constantly dying and having to do the same thing over and over, not from actually progressing through the game and story and doing new stuff. It's actually helping people get away with lazy game design. It could have been so much better if it wasn't like this because the gameplay is very well designed.

I have been meaning to get that game, I think that it's still on my wishlist but for me to get it and have to deal with this repetitive process, it's not something that I would like to experience. Aside from that, what's another letdown in the game you never liked at all? 

[NightmareFarm]

8 minutes ago, Heatman said:

I have been meaning to get that game, I think that it's still on my wishlist but for me to get it and have to deal with this repetitive process, it's not something that I would like to experience. Aside from that, what's another letdown in the game you never liked at all? 

Well, the game is pretty solid apart from that. I'd say the story is also virtually non existant basically an afterthought but it it's marketed as a gameplay focused game. And it delivers on that front, the combat has a badass feeling to it that very few games can replicate you have an extensive movelist of kung fu you can utilize to fight people like you can even pick up baseball bats and smash people up with it. The animations also feel very crunchy like you can feel each blow. Especially the finishers. The repetitivity is really the main problem the game has though if you ask me. It's just that one flaw that drags it down. It's an average game but could have been great if it wasn't based around dying constantly.

Edited April 30, 2022 by NightmareFarm

[Heatman]

2 minutes ago, NightmareFarm said:

Well, the game is pretty solid apart from that. I'd say the story is also virtually non existant basically an afterthought but it it's marketed as a gameplay focused game. And it delivers on that front, the combat has a badass feeling to it that very few games can replicate like you can even pick up baseball bats and smash people up with it. The animations also feel very crunchy like you can feel each blow. The repetitivity is really the main problem the game has though if you ask me. It's just that one flaw that drags it down. It's an average game but could have been great if it wasn't based around dying constantly.

Then it's lack of content that's the main problem with the game which was why they had no other choice but to design its gameplay to come with a lot of repetitive play. I think that can be managed to an extent, if it gets too boring, I can rest 😂.