Why are people against adding "easy mode" to some games?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Valk said:
Okay so, I agree that developers should strive to add more difficulty settings so players can tweak their own gameplay experiences to suit them
Persona 4 Goldeen(i mean golden) already have this custom difficulty u can adjust yourself, u can even adjust exp u get from battle or money u get
 
Shingo said:
Persona 4 Goldeen(i mean golden) already have this custom difficulty u can adjust yourself, u can even adjust exp u get from battle or money u get
Aye ye, I like those examples. Hell, even the recent Assassin's Creed Valhalla have individual gameplay tweaks.
 
Valk said:
Okay so, I agree that developers should strive to add more difficulty settings so players can tweak their own gameplay experiences to suit them, whether that be a easier experience, a difficult experience, or even any level of difficult but just with added convenience options. It is all dependent on the player and personally I feel the method of just having "Easy, medium or hard" difficulty settings alone are sort of outdated, by themselves. While this method might work for the majority, I often feel with certain games (For example bethesda games) that the difficulty setting never feel quite right, medium might not prove enough of an engaging challenge for me personally, but "hard" mode makes the game a chore with overly spongy enemies, etc.
That is why I am more in favour of individual difficulty values that the player can tweak themselves rather than just a set mode that cannot be tweaked by the player, that way it benefits everyone as players can individually tweak various values (differing from game to game) to craft their experience.

But ultimately, as kratox explained, this issue differs greatly from game to game due to the difference in gameplay mechanics, theme and of course developer intention. Thus, I would not agree with you point "They can add Easy Modes, it's as simple as making enemies easier to kill so your Gameplay is exactly the same" because as I previously explained, this would not necessarily fix the issue which is obviously a problem if we are talking about making games more inclusive and dropping the "elitism" which certainly exists in certain gaming communities. Which brings me to that:

I agree with you, we should drop the toxic elitism which attempts to make some people feel "superior" to others because they completed Dark Souls 3 with no deaths or whatever the hell. Just let others play the game how they want at their own pace, with or without help at their own behest.
However, a point I do not agree with you with is that the only point against "Easy modes" is that elitism. That straight up isn't true. I agree that it is a factor for some rather deluded players will through a hissyfit if anyone dares suggest that a certain game series should perhaps be tweaked, screaming that "that is the way the game is supposed to be!". But a major point you seem to be missing is on the developer side, that being developer intent. This ties into something else you said about that games are supposed to be "fun". Ultimately, a developer is creating a specific experience that is meant to invoke certain the feelings and reactions in the player. For example, satisfaction, challenge, horror, mystery, intrigue, curiosity, and even frustration. You can summarise these different feelings/reactions that will be tied to different games and genres as the game being "fun". But that is a subjective term, what is fun to me will likely be very different to what you find fun, and vice versa. And game developers cannot appeal to everyone's sense of "fun". That is why genres are formed, why different people have different tastes in games which they find interesting and engaging.

So, simply applying a blanket statement that developers should just add easy modes does not hold much water, as it will likely affect developer intention and it is not always in the interest of the developer to appeal to everyone, thus adding a "Easy mode" for certain games might never be in their interest.
And of course there is the point that kratox brought up, that being certain games are near impossible to make "easier" without changing the base mechanics. For a personal example to me, I suck at platforming games, for example Celeste and games like that. So, how do we make that easier? Well...we could make it so it does the platforming for me? But then what is the point of the game as I will not be developing the skills to platform well within the game. Or how about we change the level layout? But then, it wouldn't necessarily be easier, or harder, or more or less fun, it would just be different.

In the end, this debate of whether games should have an easy mode should, in my opinion, be taken on a case by case basis. As you never really get anywhere trying to apply this as a blanket rule across the whole of gaming.
Of course it is in their best interest to add an Easy Mode

1. More people get to enjoy the game if the Difficulty kept them away

2. That means ultimately more sales for them

"But thats not what they intended"

Who cares what they intended, you want to play it "as intended" play on Normal Difficulty then

Problem solved

The argument always reeks of "if you aren't good enough, you don't deserve to play this game"

You guys are overcomplicating it, they add in extra Difficulty settings to make things harder all the time, you don't see people refuse to play games over that because, and here is what people don't seem to get

ITS OPTIONAL

Everyone gets what they want, your experience isn't invalidated simply for allowing more people to enjoy the game on an easier setting

Whereas some people like to be challenged and die tons of times in the pursuit of "Getting Gud" others do not

I wasn't aware that simply wanting to have fun was no longer the point of Video Gaming, and see no downsides to being more inclusive
 
Lack of or existence of "easy mode" is a combination of several factors:

Marketing. Sometimes developers want to put in an easy mode (sometimes called a "narrative" or "story" difficulty) to allow everyone to pick up the game and play it. The more people who get into the game, in theory, the more people will buy it, and the more money the developer makes.

For some games, easy/medium/hard difficulties are balanced to train the player on the way up. Two good examples are Streets of Rage 4 and Doom Eternal. The easier difficulties teach you the mechanics and flow of the game and train you to win at the harder difficulties, should you choose. Meanwhile, the experience of the game doesn't lose value.

However, there are games where an easy difficulty detracts from the experience, not adds to it. I enjoy a wide variety of fighting games, and one counterpoint to the oversimplification of the genre--removing complicated input motions and combos--is that the easier the game is to learn, the shorter its lifespan. That a high level of technical expertise is required to play and compete later on is what can keep these games alive. Another example is the infamous Dark Souls/Bloodborne games. While that game is absolutely frustrating, 95% of the time the deaths you take are perfectly fair; that is, your death was your own fault. Sure maybe you got ambushed by an enemy you didn't see, but the next time you cross that line that enemy will be there, and you'll be prepared to fight him off. Dark Souls is a game that rewards for you for dying. If you are dying in Dark Souls, you are making progress.

In fact, Dark Souls prepared me mentally to write fiction, because it drilled in the value of failing over and over again, then reflecting on why I failed and how to fix it in my next run. When I dove into those games, I was ready for a challenge, and I got it, and I succeeded. The trick was to "open my mind" to the frustration and let my failures teach me how to win.

So with Dark Souls, if you were to, let's say, cut enemy damage by 75%. Now that monster that ambushes you takes three hits to kill you instead of one, and your player character has time, even after the ambush, to recover and counterattack. I would argue that's not realistic. If a monster gets the jump on the player, the monster should get the same advantages a player would; that is, killing them in a single blow. It hurts, but then again, it's the player that gains the advantage and comes back while the monster never gets any smarter. I would argue that an "easy" mode would harm Dark Souls as a game.

Now, as a counterpoint to that, one of my favorite Youtubers, Ross Scott, took the Dark Souls Streamer Plunge, and he eventually turned on the cheat codes for infinite health. His audience was sad, but he was literally like "Guys, I am not having any fun, I just want to play the game." And he had a point, so... yeah. For him the game was about the lore and atmosphere, not about the difficulty. So I can see why he cranked the difficulty down to have more fun.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Saltedcaramel64
NinjaPizza said:
Lack of or existence of "easy mode" is a combination of several factors:

Marketing. Sometimes developers want to put in an easy mode (sometimes called a "narrative" or "story" difficulty) to allow everyone to pick up the game and play it. The more people who get into the game, in theory, the more people will buy it, and the more money the developer makes.

For some games, easy/medium/hard difficulties are balanced to train the player on the way up. Two good examples are Streets of Rage 4 and Doom Eternal. The easier difficulties teach you the mechanics and flow of the game and train you to win at the harder difficulties, should you choose. Meanwhile, the experience of the game doesn't lose value.

However, there are games where an easy difficulty detracts from the experience, not adds to it. I enjoy a wide variety of fighting games, and one counterpoint to the oversimplification of the genre--removing complicated input motions and combos--is that the easier the game is to learn, the shorter its lifespan. That a high level of technical expertise is required to play and compete later on is what can keep these games alive. Another example is the infamous Dark Souls/Bloodborne games. While that game is absolutely frustrating, 95% of the time the deaths you take are perfectly fair; that is, your death was your own fault. Sure maybe you got ambushed by an enemy you didn't see, but the next time you cross that line that enemy will be there, and you'll be prepared to fight him off. Dark Souls is a game that rewards for you for dying. If you are dying in Dark Souls, you are making progress.

In fact, Dark Souls prepared me mentally to write fiction, because it drilled in the value of failing over and over again, then reflecting on why I failed and how to fix it in my next run. When I dove into those games, I was ready for a challenge, and I got it, and I succeeded. The trick was to "open my mind" to the frustration and let my failures teach me how to win.

So with Dark Souls, if you were to, let's say, cut enemy damage by 75%. Now that monster that ambushes you takes three hits to kill you instead of one, and your player character has time, even after the ambush, to recover and counterattack. I would argue that's not realistic. If a monster gets the jump on the player, the monster should get the same advantages a player would; that is, killing them in a single blow. It hurts, but then again, it's the player that gains the advantage and comes back while the monster never gets any smarter. I would argue that an "easy" mode would harm Dark Souls as a game.

Now, as a counterpoint to that, one of my favorite Youtubers, Ross Scott, took the Dark Souls Streamer Plunge, and he eventually turned on the cheat codes for infinite health. His audience was sad, but he was literally like "Guys, I am not having any fun, I just want to play the game." And he had a point, so... yeah. For him the game was about the lore and atmosphere, not about the difficulty. So I can see why he cranked the difficulty down to have more fun.
At the very bottom you got to the point I'm trying to make

Some people want a Challenge, others simply want to play a Game

Its supposed to be fun for you, if you like the GamePlay, but despise the difficulty, you should be able to turn the difficulty down

Mechanically it's still the same game

Who cares about "Realism" it's a video Game, fun is the point, not Realism
 
I’ve got a great game on this subject: Fights in Tight Spaces. Currently in early access. It’s a rougelite deck builder where you’re a close-quarters fighting secret agent on a turn based tactical grid. It’s a lot of fun once you find your groove, which is usually “avoid damage at all cost”. The game is pretty difficult to make progress in, because it’s permadeath, if that wasn’t clear. It’s more like puzzle solving than straight fighting.

Originally, the game had only four decks to play with and you could get screwed if you drew no movement cards. So, they changed it so you always draw at least one movement card. Then, there were complaints of unfair spawns, so they changed it so enemies don’t move on their first turn.

Well, all that made the game too easy. People realized the movement card rule could be gamed and you could play the movements you wanted with some consistency. So, the next update added four difficulty modes, with different combinations of the above accommodations: movement help, only a basic movement guaranteed, or no movement help at all; and player moves first or enemies move first. (Plus a really wicked Draft mode that makes you take responsibility for everything.)

It’s honestly a stellar game that just needs a little more refining and polishing in the presentation layer.

To the purpose of the difficulty levels and games being punishingly hard, I support this game being punishingly hard. But, I feel that they should progressively unlock easier modes as you fail at the hard modes, kind like how we have experienced it during development. That’s the way to keep the player tuned into the difficult nature of the game without being too frustrating. Reward persistence.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: CutieProtector
Oh forgot to add now that i finished both of the game Digimon Story: Cyber Sleuth this is the case that if u don't play at hard, the game wouldn't be as challenging as intended? I mean at normal i could 1 shot pretty much every bosses there are including the 7 demon lord digimon, and also GranDracmon(Hacker's memory), and in hacker's memory u can't even get a good damage on the boss on hard if not using skill that have "penetration" effect(could be defense penetration that rely on atk stat, and INT penetration that's rely on INT stat to penetrate INT def which is the same as INT for atk(it's pokémon gen 1 spc for short SpA and SpD in one stat))
 
Toxicity is to blame, not the games, or even gamers as a whole, if your game's fanbase is toxic then if you add in an easy mode you're going to have people be publicly upset, but you're also going to have a lot of people thankful. It's a no win situation for these developers, and the best thing we can do is discourage people from being big poopy buttface jerks.

Play how you like, don't ruin other people's fun.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ShippoFox, CutieProtector and Valk
Vivi said:
Toxicity is to blame, not the games, or even gamers as a whole, if your game's fanbase is toxic then if you add in an easy mode you're going to have people be publicly upset, but you're also going to have a lot of people thankful. It's a no win situation for these developers, and the best thing we can do is discourage people from being big poopy buttface jerks.

Play how you like, don't ruin other people's fun.
That's what I kinda figured, with the Souls-Like crowd especially because they want it to be an Elite Club

Like they fail to realize some people don't care about "Bragging Rights" and they can still have their accomplishments no matter what

Just that with an Easy mode added on, much more people can enjoy the game

"But that's not what they intended"

Who gives a F***, you want to play "as intended" put it on Nomal difficulty, enjoy the game, and let others have their enjoyment

I'm sure they probably would have added an Easy mode a while ago, but didn't out of fear of being Cancelled by some entitled Gamers that don't want others to enjoy the same game

I've already explained the Perfect way to adjust the difficulty, just make enemies easier to kill when "Easy" is selected, same way as they can make an enemy 10x as powerful for "Brutal/nightmare" mode or whatever they may call the highest difficulty

Literally plays the same and everybody wins (because you Choose the difficulty you want, nobody is forced to do anything.) except the Eltist P**** that can't stand some Lesser Skilled gamer enjoying the same game
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: ShippoFox
I know I'm late to the topic, but I have so many thoughts on this.

To the original question, I think it's like others said and that people get mad about this sort of thing because they want to prop up their egos by bragging about how they can beat hard games. They must somehow think that allowing people to beat it (even though it would be a lower difficulty) somehow invalidates their own wins. I think a lot of these people have no sympathy whatsoever for people with disabilities who actually need options to make the game easier in order to have any chance at beating them.

Though this is just a guess, but I can make plenty of arguments in support of options to make games easier, including those beyond just an Easy Mode. I agree that providing an option (such as Easy Mode) that makes an existing game easier doesn't ruin the experience for others who want a challenge.

I also believe that developers should take care in how they enable players to make the game easier. In some cases, there are ways to make a game easier without a whole separate game mode. The Last of Us 2 is definitely a great example because it has options not only for the overall challenge, but also for the challenge in specific aspects of the game including: your player's resilience, how aggressive enemies are, how aggressive your allies are, stealth difficulty, and how easy it is to find resources.

In other cases, an "easy mode" is an acceptable option. Sometimes these options remove a lot of the challenge of the game, but I think that's okay for some games. For example, Celeste's Assist Mode lets you go so far as to give you infinite dashes and invincibility. And Psychonauts 2 (coming out this month!) will have an optional invincibility toggle to avoid taking any damage in the game. While it seems like this removes all the challenge out of the game, Celeste and Psychonauts 2 are meant to represent disability, so it would be sad if people with disabilities were unable to finish these games due to their own limitations. And the stories are key aspects of these games, which is not affected by the game's difficulty.

And while it seems like we can't make every game accessible to everyone, there are ways we can challenge some of our preconceptions. We all think totally blind people can't play games, but it is possible with games that include enough sound cues to them. I always think back to the short documentary "Gaming Through New Eyes" about a blind gamer who plays DOOM using special mods that make him invincible. Here's a link for those interested:

I agree some games don’t have a way to make the game easier without fundamentally changing the experience. But I don't want to immediately dismiss other players and just force them to play another game, especially if they already paid for a game and are stuck with it. Even a game that is meant to be hard most of the time could benefit from options that make it easier. For example, such options could allow players to get used to the mechanics before jumping straight into the full experience. And as with the other options mentioned earlier, it could enable people with disabilities to enjoy the game. The trick is that the devs would have to spend time thinking of which options to add to their game to achieve a good outcome, and I can understand that some devs may not have the time to design those features.

kratox said:
The new gen gaming crowd does not have the same experience as the older players so it has lead a bunch of developers to making games easier for that crowd.

The issue is they have all forgotten about the old crowd that actually gave them money and cared about their series. This has lead to the older crowd not having anything to play because they are only catering towards one segment.
Are there specific games that have clearly been made easier recently to accommodate the new gen crowd? Even if it's just more of a general trend across gaming, I think there are still plenty of games on the market to challenge the older crowd. Even if the motivations of publishers and developers making games for the new gen crowd aren't pure, I still want to advocate for expanding gaming to all types of people.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DragonPrinceling, BabyTyrant and ShippoFox
Anybody that's played Pillars of Eternity would definitely see why an easy mode is included.

Frostpunk was terrifyingly hard and had not easy mode.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Saltedcaramel64 and NinjaPizza
Johnwolfie said:
Anybody that's played Pillars of Eternity would definitely see why an easy mode is included.

Frostpunk was terrifyingly hard and had not easy mode.
Huh. I've not gotten to Pillars of Eternity yet, but I'll keep that in mind when I do.

A friend and I are about 80% done with our Divinity 2 playthrough, and while I don't think we're on the "easiest" mode, we have turned on some quality of life options that allow us to respec our characters and use bedrolls as scrolls of resurrection, so long as one party member is alive. In that way the combat remains challenging, but the party isn't forced to waste gold on expensive resurrection spells, though I could see how some players would enjoy a more classic option.
 
Easy mode is for babies. Some people take offense to their favorite games getting a baby mode because they feel it diminishes the entire experience. For some games the brutal challenge is part of the experience. Getting a feeling of accomplishment from beating a tough game.
To an experienced gamer, when babies say they also play the game on easy, you might aswell not be part of the conversation, because the gameplay will be radically different.
Its like going to an archery range and standing 5 feet from the target with a shotgun and telling people you are an archer.
Its like lowering a basketball net and making the hoop wider and the ball smaller and still saying you play basketball.
The old doom and wolfenstein games actually had easy mode as baby mode. With the main character having a bonnet and paci. Some old games wouldnt even show you the ending of the game on easy mode.
If you play easy mode thats fine. My wife plays that mode too. You just have to realise that most gamers will see you as a baby gamer because baby games and toys also lack challenge.
 
  • Sad
Reactions: CutieProtector
Johnwolfie said:
Anybody that's played Pillars of Eternity would definitely see why an easy mode is included.

Frostpunk was terrifyingly hard and had not easy mode.
Both very fun games. I got into pillars after playing Divinity Original sin. Frostpunk is so much fun and a big challenge. I loved that one.
I enjoy both those games on hard settings.
 
I always play games on easy mode, some games don't take this seriously and make "easy" feel like "hard" so often I use trainers because I want to have a relaxing enjoyable time, I want to enjoy the story of the game, not another counter strike experience.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Kittyinpink
winterheart01 said:
I always play games on easy mode, some games don't take this seriously and make "easy" feel like "hard" so often I use trainers because I want to have a relaxing enjoyable time, I want to enjoy the story of the game, not another counter strike experience.
I chop and change due to my mood. But some games have been so much more enjoyable for me because of easy mode. I didn't like 'the last of us' until I tried easy mode. Then I replayed the whole thing in harder setting. Same with 'god of war' . I play games as a relaxing hobby , not to become a great master!
 
Saltedcaramel64 said:
Easy mode is for babies. Some people take offense to their favorite games getting a baby mode because they feel it diminishes the entire experience. For some games the brutal challenge is part of the experience. Getting a feeling of accomplishment from beating a tough game.
To an experienced gamer, when babies say they also play the game on easy, you might aswell not be part of the conversation, because the gameplay will be radically different.
Its like going to an archery range and standing 5 feet from the target with a shotgun and telling people you are an archer.
Its like lowering a basketball net and making the hoop wider and the ball smaller and still saying you play basketball.
The old doom and wolfenstein games actually had easy mode as baby mode. With the main character having a bonnet and paci. Some old games wouldnt even show you the ending of the game on easy mode.
If you play easy mode thats fine. My wife plays that mode too. You just have to realise that most gamers will see you as a baby gamer because baby games and toys also lack challenge.

The problem with your Argument is you are still doing the same task, I would argue some games are made a LOT harder than they should be

If some Entitled gamer feels THEIR experience is ruined because someone else can play the same game, that is THEIR problem

They should enjoy the game on the setting they prefer

If they want to beat it on "Legendary" difficulty for bragging rights, they can still do that

For some people it's not about Bragging, it's about fun
 
  • Like
Reactions: Kittyinpink
BabyTyrant said:
The problem with your Argument is you are still doing the same task, I would argue some games are made a LOT harder than they should be

If some Entitled gamer feels THEIR experience is ruined because someone else can play the same game, that is THEIR problem

They should enjoy the game on the setting they prefer

If they want to beat it on "Legendary" difficulty for bragging rights, they can still do that

For some people it's not about Bragging, it's about fun
You asked. Im just giving you an answer to the question. It goes both ways, if people on easy mode don't like the criticism that is also their problem.
But I agree, people should enjoy the game on whatever setting they like.
I dont play games on difficult settings for bragging rights or because I have an ego problem. I play them on difficult settings for my own personal enjoyment. Same as you on easy.
It's not an argument to say easy gamers are wrong or experienced gamers are wrong. As a hard setting gamer Im just letting you know why we dont like easy mode.
Nothing wrong with being a baby on baby mode. Or an experienced gamer on hard mode.
 
Last edited:
Saltedcaramel64 said:
You asked. Im just giving you an answer to the question. It goes both ways, if people on easy mode don't like the criticism that is also their problem.
But I agree, people should enjoy the game on whatever setting they like.
I dont play games on difficult settings for bragging rights or because I have an ego problem. I play them on difficult settings for my own personal enjoyment. Same as you on easy.
It's not an argument to say easy gamers are wrong or experienced gamers are wrong. As a hard setting gamer Im just letting you know why we dont like easy mode.
Nothing wrong with being a baby on baby mode.
I have no problem playing the vast majority of games on Normal or harder difficulties, especially once I'm used to the game and have better equipment (for games that rely on Leveling, Grinding and Gear)

But I don't think any game should be Difficult for Difficulty sake

If someone says "I enjoy playing games on Hard Difficulties because it feels like more of an Achievement"

Then my question is Why does being more inclusive bother you?

Why does the thought of more people having fun bother you if it's about YOUR enjoyment rather than Bragging rights?

Your Enjoyment should have no bearing on if someone else enjoys the game, especially if nobody sees it as "Bragging Rights"

Adding in an Easy mode does not ruin fun for the Normal + mode gamers at all

If someone wants certain games to only be accessible for "Elite" gamers, that's just some Braggadocious Elitism at work
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top