I like to relax when I play. My days of stressing out over games ended when I had stress in real life.
this post was submitted on 06 Nov 2025
910 points (98.3% liked)
Gaming
6199 readers
498 users here now
!gaming is a community for gaming noobs through gaming aficionados. Unlike !games, we don’t take ourselves quite as serious. Shitposts and memes are welcome.
Our Rules:
1. Keep it civil.
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only.
2. No sexism, racism, homophobia, transphobia or any other flavor of bigotry.
I should not need to explain this one.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Try not to repost anything posted within the past month.
Beyond that, go for it. Not everyone is on every site all the time.
Logo uses joystick by liftarn
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Preach. Problems of my childhood became like wallpaper when I got adulthood problems. I used to stress out when I couldn't get past a video game mission.
I wasn’t expecting this post to bring out this kind of animosity in people. Jesus fuckin’ christ.
Video games are not a public service, there is no such thing as a 100% universally enjoyed video game for a reason. It’s ok that there are different types of video games, folks, be them too hard or too easy for your tastes, it’s kind of stupid to throw these kinds of stones about it.
I mean, is every book supposed to be palatable to everyone? Are we all supposed to feel the exact same way about every piece of art? This is like being mad that Guardians of The Galaxy involved sci-fi and super heroes and wasn’t a WWII documentary because that’s what you’d have preferred to watch.
I tried Dark Souls, got my ass kicked, tried again, got my ass kicked again, went "huh, guess it's not for me" and moved on with my life. I truly don't get this mentality where people think they're entitled to play a game that was clearly not designed for them.
Games, like movies, are easily consumed but difficult to create. As a result, everyone and their grandma can critique them and publish on the Internet which only further self-selects for the highly opinionated to do so.
But not all opinions are equal. You can be well studied in your field and generally intelligent, but if you don't have a relevant background in the humanities and the sciences, you can have complex reasoning but without having the depth, the breadth, and the relevance in the analysis.
Case in point the first replier. The analogy is fine and the deductive reasoning is self-consistent, but they didn't show the relevance to game design. (Ie. Why must the author make the text size bigger for people who can't enjoy smaller text, and why must the same apply to games.)
That's why gamers seem to be notorious for having takes that miss the trees for the forest.
(I am aware that I'm very much at risk of committing this very error with my post.)
load more comments
(1 replies)
load more comments
(10 replies)
I'm going to make this point again because it went unnoticed due to the sheer amount of comments, but you wouldn't complain about a Rubik's cube or crossword puzzle being too hard or anything else designed to challenge you. I'd argue that without the difficulty of solving a Rubik's cube that toy would be lost to time. The only reason it still exists today is because it was so hard to solve for children when it was released. Souls games are the same. The only reason we still talk about them and the only reason they gained the popularity that they did is because of the difficulty.
I remember distinctly picking up dark souls on sale on a whim before it started really entering mainstream discussion. The guy working at Gamestop warned me that people kept returning it because it was too hard. I took it home and played it and really learned the mechanics then I brought it to my friends to try. They learned the mechanics and since then we've had an unofficial race to see who can beat the newest FromSoft game fastest. It was the difficulty of the game that made it so addicting. Without that the game would be boring and no one would know what it was in 2025. If you don't believe me install the easy mode mods and come back to let us know what your experience was like.
There's nothing wrong with a difficult game, but there's also nothing wrong with difficulty selection or easy games. Why does a game need to be remembered if the goal is to make something fun? The fun alone is what makes something memorable
I never said there is anything wrong with easy games. I play many easy games that were designed to be easy and accessible. Games can be memorable for different reasons. I play Souls games because I love the difficulty. I also play farm sims and VNs because I love story telling and other aspects. My point is that Souls games only exist and are only memorable because of the difficulty.
I'll go back to the Rubik's cube. It was released in the 70s. It's a square puzzle that isn't flashy or intricate. Do you think it would still be relevant over 50 years later if it wasn't difficult? That doesn't invalidate other games or puzzles that survived the test of time that are much easier. The Rubik's cube was designed to be difficult as were Souls games. Without that difficulty they don't have much else to offer.
All game devs should be forced to play their own games all the way through.
Oftentimes, devs are practically the only person who can. Especially small hobbyist devs. They'll spend hundreds, if not thousands, of hours playing their own game as they build it and forget they have to then circle back and tune it for people who haven't.
Potentially my hottest take, but this is my biggest criticism of Silksong. Even as someone who likes difficult games, I bounced off it. I'll get back to it eventually, I know I'll love it once I crack it, but it was taking a lot of effort I just can't devote to it right now.
I wouldn't necessarily say that it's too difficult or that the difficulty level is bad, but it's overtuned. The devs spent 7 years developing it, playing it, replaying it, adding, tweaking. I believe they made exactly the thing they wanted, but that makes it very dense and intricate and you gotta be on just the absolutely correct wavelength to get there ...
Like Mario Maker level design rules.
I think Kojima gets it. For a lot of players, esp. on the more cinematic games, the story is the main driver and the action is how it progresses. The games I’ve played that were ordeals are often the ones I’ve given up on. It’s the ones you can start on story mode with, enjoy the narrative and then re-play at the harder levels that I’ve stuck with.
I'll keep saying it: I already have a job. I want to play a game to unwind.
Implementing a wide gamut of difficulty settings is also an accessibility feature, and allows people with certain physical or mental challenges the opportunity to enjoy your game firsthand. Why would you want to deny your audience this opportunity?
load more comments
(127 replies)
load more comments
(37 replies)
Reading this thread has re-confirmed that gatekeepers are a blight on humanity.
I will cheat in your sacred games and you can't stop me. I'll make my own rules. What are you gonna do about it, break into my house and steal my computer?
If a game is particularly hard, I'll use mods or cheats to make it easier. Gamers who sweat for difficulty can play it as hard as they want. I just want to experience the story, even if my play style goes against the creator's vision.
This is all fine and good, it really as.
I hate to keep overextending the restaurant metaphor, but it's the difference between demanding a world class chef be prepared to make a number of different substitutions on the spot to suit your individual tastes vs. taking the dish home in a doggy bag and then slathering it with ketchup.
It's fine. There's no law against it. It doesn't hurt anyone else (assuming we're not talking about multiplayer here). No one has to care. No one does. Cheating and mods are a great way for you as an individual to tailor a more personalized experience to your tastes with the tools you have available.
load more comments
(1 replies)
For me in Cyberpunk, I hated the breach protocol, and hated how by the time you get the fancy gear, the game is done (never meeting at embers btw).
As a result, on my second playthrough I removed breech protocol completely and 10x'd experience. Was a much more fun experience.
I'm so appreciative of games where that is possible. Otherwise its just a slog for no reason in what is supposed to be an entertainment product.
I also like Atomfalls difficulty settings where you could really change a lot about how the game played.
I don't think you're getting the point here. If you buy a game you can do whatever you want with it. Same goes with developers, it's their creation and they can do whatever they want with it. It doesn't have to please everyone.
load more comments
(17 replies)
load more comments
(11 replies)
Just allow users to mod the game to whatever difficulty they want and don't be dicks about it.
Devs get to stick to their original vision and gamers get to have whatever difficulty they actually want to make things fun for them.
That's just having actual accessibility and difficulty settings, but with extra steps.
I appreciate the ability to mod games, but decent difficulty options really should be first-class citizens that the developers have put some thought into. Accessibility is important.
Let them have their own philosophies, one of the many wonders of life and humankind.
load more comments
(1 replies)
It may be a difficult debate between accessibility, experience and artistic vision. Though considering how many games are made every year, I think we can have difficult games with no easy mode. People who don't enjoy them or can't play them can simply play the thousands of other games.
Don't get me wrong. I'm all for accessibility. During my time in the video game industry, I personally paid great attention to options for colorblind people. Unfortunately, pretty much everything else was outside my scope. But it doesn't make any sense to potentially ruin the entire work just so 3 more people on the planet will play it.
If a game is frustrating to play, but I enjoy the story - I watch a playthrough. If a game contains elements that I don't like - it's probably not a game for me, so I move on to other games. If I had some disability that made it very hard or impossible to play some games - okay, fair enough, that would genuinely suck. But again, I'd move on to other games.
Of course, it's possible to add detailed difficulty settings, so that everyone can customize their experience. Mostly a great solution, if the team has the time and resources to implement it well, which isn't always the case. However, it may still interfere with the artistic vision of the developers.
Some movies can cause epileptic seizures due to some of their scenes. Should the authors throw their vision and ideas out the window, because some people cannot safely watch the movie? I'd say no, because that would kind of ruin the whole point of artistic expression. I think we need to be able to depict and express all kinds and forms of art, even if some groups will be unable to experience them.
Maybe some time in the future we'll be able to solve all of this easily and reliably (e.g., some kind of neuralink for people with various conditions). But as of right now, it seems to me that this is practically a non-issue. The impact is incredibly limited, while proposed solutions are either costly, unrealistic or straight up counterintuitive.
Really well put. In general, I find it frustrating how many people use the word "acccessibility" as a means to argue no games like Dark Souls (intentionally having only 1 difficulty for a single intended experience) should ever exist. But to me that's conflating disability-accessibility with a more literal "accessible to more people" type of accessibility. I'd argue "approachable" would be a better word for the latter.
People with motor skill issues or whatever else beat Dark Souls all the time. Heck, fully abled people are intentionally giving themselves equivalent experiences by beating it with dance pads and guitar or drum controllers or whatever else all the time. So the difficulty isn't an accessibility issue, the game is actually pretty slow paced (you can make a decent argument that more recent From Soft titles speed things up to an unreasonable degree for some motor disabilities, but I'm talking about the OG here).
What I hear instead, most of the time, is some version of "I'm a dad, I don't have hours to throw at a boss every night". And my instinctive response, most of the time is simply.... I just don't think you like this game? Getting your ass beat and needing hours and dozens of deaths to learn a boss or beat an area is the intended experience, and you're having it, whether you put those hours in 1 or 12 at a time. If you don't enjoy that, that's just fine, there are millions of great games that don't force you into such a punishing experience. It's a little bit like complaining a puzzle game has too many puzzles in the way of the platforming.
Anyway, my point being, I think centering the From Software "accessibility" conversation around difficulty options, something the devs have determined is a pillar of the game's design that they won't change, prevents us from having a proper conversation about accessibility, in terms of actual disability accessibility. I think there's really cool conversations we should be having about how we can make attack animations more readable to a visually impaired player without compromising on difficulty, for example. None of the Souls games even have so much as a colourblind mode, and we should be putting pressure on From Soft to add something as trivial as that as the franchise explodes in popularity, but "dark souls accessibility" is an entirely unrelated conversation instead, which kinda drowns out any other.
I think there’s really cool conversations we should be having about how we can make attack animations more readable to a visually impaired player without compromising on difficulty, for example.
Good post, I agree with you and the above poster.
This brings to mind the parry system in Metroid Dread. Enemies flashed yellow before a parryable attack signalling you should hit the button at that moment. It's possible and it works.
So then why don't all games do this? Because Metroid Dread was designed from the beginning to support this system. In Souls games, parrying is not just a matter of timing on attacks, but if the attack can even be parried at all given the specific attack (not all can)/player stats/equipped items, 3D positioning of hitboxes for both the attack and the player's defensive parry, as well as variable parry windows based on the specific shield or weapon equipped. Now take into account that Souls enemies often have multiple attacks each and this becomes a very significant amount of developer work. Not to mention that given all these factors, timing a button press to a parry flash may not always result in 100% success rate. Imagine how frustrating a system like this would be if even when you did everything "right", the physical placement of hitboxes only resulted in an 80% success rate on any given parry. Would players not find this frustrating? The point I'm trying to make is how complex this system would actually be and how much work it would take to implement.
However, it may still interfere with the artistic vision of the developers.
I'm going to be honest here, I did not end up caring for Metroid Dread much. For a number of reasons I won't go into here, but partly because of this parry system. Parry windows were clearly telegraphed, did huge amounts of damage often resulting in one hit kills AND they guaranteed to drop health/ammo pickups. With the risk/reward system practically non-existent you were so highly incentivized to use them that it made combat feel much more defensive. Rather than attack enemies, it was often more beneficial to approach them, bait out an attack, and punish.
Now I do take some responsibility for my actions here. It was my choice to begin playing the game this way. But I do also think there's something to be said for design elements that train or at least encourage players to engage with them in certain ways. Difficulty options are not just game design decisions but also attempts to understand how individual players may engage with those decisions. Expecting developers to have the ability or even foresight to anticipate all these different interactions is an extremely high, if not unreasonable barrier.
But in the end, I simply say that Dread was not a game to my liking. I know there are a lot of people who absolutely love it. Just not a game for me.
I've heard the same excuses about Souls games that I hear about learning an instrument. Many times it's from the same people and no they aren't disabled. They just say I don't have the dexterity or it's too hard I could never do this or that. To them I show them this amazing man: https://youtube.com/@rickrenstromofficial
This man has an obvious disability, but plays guitar better than like 90% of guitarists. The same argument can be made about paralympic athletes. They're often in better shape and more talented than people who aren't disabled and the reason obviously isn't some natural talent they have. They've put in the work to be great. That's what it takes to master anything. You have to practice, you have to try, you have to push yourself.
Pathologic 2 Devs
My true desire was for this town to never have a direction or goal marker, not even once. It's intellectually offensive. Who do you have to be thrust a map marker under a free person's nose, saying "Here is your goal. You're too lazy and stupid to figure it out on your own, and I am not without mercy towards lesser minds, so I'll do the work for you. Go there. Go and don't forget to thank me for choosing your goal for you. Love, The Powers That Be.
Oh you died? Here's a debuff. Oh you thought you could save scum to get around the debuff? Ha! That debuff is on all your saves.
Why? We're Russian devs. Life is brutual and hard and so should this game.
load more comments
(7 replies)
Yoshi P (FFXIV): "Yeah, the game was a huge cultural hit that grew more successful with each expansion, so I thought to myself.. now that we've brought in millions upon millions of players, why not nerf all of the overworld content into absurdity to bring in maybe forty or fifty noobs? So I did. And then I changed all of the classes again once everyone had reached max level. Nobody liked that. So I thought.. why not do it again?"
Zenimax (ESO): "So I just kind of made up whatever and then dialed the difficulty down to about a tenth of what it used to be. Now overworld content is on par with swinging an aluminum bat through a pile of packing peanuts. Also, the Second Era was filled with superhero sky ninjas with lava wings who rode around Tamriel upon lightning horses and mechanical spiders. Deal with it."
God: .... I'll make a game ... random spawns ... one life ... no instructions .. no directions ... open world ... play as you want
load more comments
(10 replies)
And then there's Yoko Taro, who instead opts for the emotional difficulty in his games
And then there's Electronic Arts, who instead opts for technical difficulties.
load more comments
(1 replies)
The director should have reasons for the difficulty of the game. Celeste is a Perfect example. It's hard but it lets you learn and allows you to try again easily even if what you are doing is hard. Hard games that punish you and make you walk for 20-30 mins just so you can learn a few new moves the boss does can be incredibly frustrating. Many people who play these games eventually look at videos online to help after multiple tries because just "getting there" is extremely time consuming. A lot of games have normalized looking things up and that is disappointing as someone who would rather figure it out on my own. But wasting 30 mins to be killed in 2-3 hits from multiple stage bosses is not enjoyable IMHO.
load more comments
(17 replies)
Da Wei: gives step by step instructions only for players to ignore them and get stuck (reading is hard).
Also Da Wei: designs a fast, strong and tough endgame boss only for some psycho to hit-stun her, yeet her around the arena, kill her by fall damage and post it on Bilibili for the lolz.
view more: next ›