Both are perfectly acceptable philosophies, but many Souls players need to learn that losing at a game for 150 hours is not what other people find fun.

I'm not paying for a game that doesn't allow changing difficulty if I want/need. I work two jobs and have to do most home cleaning and maintenance. I used to game competitively back in the early 2000s, but I don't have time for that shit nor gatekeeping.

Celeste did it perfectly imho with their Assist Mode. Just add those difficulty options in for accessibility, with a statement that it is not how the developers intend for it to be played, but still to use it freely if need be.

"Celeste is intended to be a challenging and rewarding experience. If the default game proves inaccessible to you, we hope that you can still find that experience with Assist Mode."

It is 2026. Gamers should be able to enjoy any game they want at any difficulty they want without judgement, as long as it does not affect anyone else.

"...to first face that challenge and to overcome it in some way that suits them as a player."

Honestly when that player is me, this is just going to mean playing a different game. I'm old and busy, I really don't have the time or energy for hard games.

Difficulty settings are accessibility settings and anyone who disagrees can kiss my ass.

Me, having beaten the game on the highest difficulty level, going back to play it on easy mode in the next playthrough: sometimes I just want to relax while I utterly massacre some bad guys.

Match the type of a game, sheesh.

Bethesda like open world? Gimmie difficulty levels - nothing will change with them except that people will be able to tailor the experience more.

Narrative and/or choice heavy game? Leave difficulty choice off to let the original vision of the author speak for itself - havimg parts too easy or hard due to watered down or pumped up difficulty can ruin the story.

Arcade/Dark Souls games? I...don't really see reasons for difficulty settings here except for harder than baselines ones? Like new game +. In these games, learning patterns and gettimg good is the game, there is no way around it.

All in all - not every game is for everyone, we have genres for a reason. Having difficulty tailored for arcades in open world exploration game makes no sense just as much as having watered down difficulty levels in narrative heavy games.

Tbh dark souls 2 has extra hard difficulty setting

Just join the covenant at the tree in Majula

It increases enemy dmg by 50%

Reduces your dmg by 20%

Prevents summoning (but you can still be invaded)

I had to double check that Tomonobu wasn't responsible for steel battalion. (A game that deleted your save if you didn't press the eject button in time)

As someone who's done Video game QA, working with Tomonobu Itagaki doesn't sound pleasant. Those campaign sprints are hard enough as is

All art should have difficulty sliders. I want to listen to avant-garde jazz but I think it should be in 4/4 time signature and they should play the most melodic notes. And I think art house movies should have a version where the script is rewritten so the characters explain the allegories and symbolism of the movie while I'm watching. And I think opera should have someone reading what is being sung because I find it hard to follow along with the singing

Making a game hard for the sake of making it hard is a cheap way to increase difficulty.

The challenge shouldn't come from enemies being damage sponges or the AI having superhuman reaction times. It should come from player skill.

Balatro is one of the best examples of this. The game naturally gets easier as the player learns its systems and gains experience through playing.

Destiny 2 also had excellent skill progression. Say what you want about the game as a whole, but the core gunplay and the mechanics of its three classes rewarded players for improving their own abilities.

Even games like Madden and NBA 2K have, to a lesser extent, systems that reward player skill rather than simply inflating difficulty.

Many older games were made extremely difficult because they were relatively short. The increased difficulty extended playtime and made players feel they were getting more value for the price. That's one of the reasons games like Ninja Gaiden on the NES earned their reputation for being brutally hard.

As for Soulslike games, they're simply not my cup of tea. I fully acknowledge that they're well-made games, and if you enjoy them, that's great. They're intentionally designed to be challenging. While the original Dark Souls was developed under a tight schedule and has some rough edges, its high level of difficulty was a deliberate design choice rather than the result of bugs or glitches.

A lot of people in this thread don't seem to have gotten the subtle meme post in this image. Itagaki was the dude who made the Modern Ninja Gaiden titles and the Dead or Alive franchise. The dude was always a massive troll to both the media and players but was very dedicated to the vision he had for the games he wanted to make. He also had a very close friendship/rivalry with Katsuhiro Harada, the main dev for the Tekken franchise starting at Tekken 3 and recently cutting ties with Namco to found a new company that is, unfortunately, owned by SNK. Itagaki sadly passed away last year and a lot of old school devs mourned for his loss, but probably none harder than Harada given just how long they had been actual irl friends.

Personally, I gave up at the first fight in Bloodborne (I have 40 min of gameplay). Never touched a souls game ever again.

I think difficulty settings are nice for letting more people play how they want without having to use mods.

I don't care for the gatekeeping b.s.

I played RE Village with an unlimited-bullets-mod cause otherwise I couldn't get past choke points.

I play with a controller and shooting is just not great with a joystick unless there is aim assist. Can't recall if this game had it or not but either way I kept dying when swarmed by werewolves.

I like horror games and I get that the point is to make you anxious about ammo or health. To build tension. But I just find it frustrating sometimes.

The first philosophy is why so many modern AAA games are complete crap. Why not just have FMV of the actors doing the scene and have the audience press X to continue to the next scene?

There’s a lot of “you made your art wrong” in here. If you don’t have legs, you’re not going to be able to play soccer. You can make your own no-leg soccer if you want, but I’m just going to make an “ew” face at you if you say that soccer needs to change for you. Try arm wrestling!

The best argument against games (or any software) that don’t work for you is that you often can’t get refunds, and that’s a valid concern, but it has nothing to do with the content itself.

I've been playing video games since the 1970s. Now I'm just a poor old man. My legs are grey. My ears are gnarled. My eyes are old and bent.

These days I mostly play video games for the story and to relax so I usually play on easy. And I'm ok with that.

Difficulty options aren't there to offer different experiences with a game, they're there to offer the same experience to players of different skill levels. People who are better at Dark Souls are playing it and its clones at a reduced difficulty compared to people who are worse at it.

I like the video games with a difficulty selector having a joke difficulty