I mean we have tons of anticheat games working on Linux. More than people realize. Elden Ring, The Finals, Overwatch 2, CS2, Apex Legends, xDefiant and more that I can’t remember right now. It’s not that bad even as a multiplayer gamer. The ones that don’t work R6S, Val, LoL, Fortnite, CoD and Destiny pretty much.
Yeah, quantity over quality right here. If my favourite game doesn’t run on Linux, Linux is dead to me. Even if I had 5 favourite games and 1 doesn’t work, it’s still dead.
So for a lot of people it’s either 100% or it might as well not exist.
Are you cherry picking the good games out of older libraries? I find people do that a lot when remembering. It’s a survivorship bias thing. The good ones get remembered more and the bad one forgotten, so they seem like the population is better.
My guess is that they just want to separate GOG and their game accounts from each other because they are easier to manage that way. I think in legal sense GOG is still a separate corporate entity even though it’s owned by CD Projekt.
They are legally separate entities, but why should that affect customers? Why are CDPR games no longer being sold on the GOG store? This almost would be like if Valve stopped selling Half Life on Steam.
I don’t think it has anything to do with being “easier to manage”. I think the corporate structure is purely for financial reasons. Valve never spun up a second business for Steam.
I also suspect it has something to do with the fact that GOG is a staunchly DRM free platform. It sounds like either CDPR want to sell games with DRM (which means future titles similar to Pathfinder: Wrath of the Righteous and Baldur’s Gate 3 would no longer have a DRM-free option, as CDPR would simply have them on their main store rather than GOG), or CDPR want to include DRM in their own games.
I understand your concern based on how corporations tend to run these days, but this is a lot of speculation. It’s good to be skeptical though.
My guess is that they want to use a single account across more services unrelated to GOG, akin to the way google SSO works for gmail, YouTube, drive, etc. If the account is owned by a subsidiary that might not be possible for other subsidiaries to use the same account per data regulation rules.
I’d like to think I’m not so much speculating, but rather concerned about what this might mean. There’s certainly no apparent reason why splitting CDPR games away from GOG would be good for consumers.
My guess is that they want to use a single account across more services unrelated to GOG
The specific reasoning they’ve given is pretty clear:
You are receiving this email due to your use of online features, including Cross Progression and My Rewards, in CD PROJEKT RED games, as well as your participation in platforms like the CD PROJEKT RED Forums.
None of these things have a clear advantage in being separated from GOG. GOG is owned by CDPR, GOG is a CDPR subsidiary. CDPR have full authority to dictate how their games are sold on the GOG platform. The only unique thing about GOG is the DRM-free position.
By separating CDPR games from GOG, they can separate CDPR games from the DRM-free position, without facing the inevitable backlash that doing so would normally face. Then, newer CDPR games won’t be bound by the GOG philosophy, while GOG can die off somewhat naturally and without such significant backlash. This could be seen as commercially preferable over the current situation for a publicly traded company such as CDPR.
I am making assumptions, but that is the very nature of future predictions. I ask if you could make any other assumption that really challenges mine.
Their games might end up on both, but when it comes to a new 3rd party game being put on CDPR store with DRM or GOG store without DRM, which do you think will happen? Long term, do you think GOG would survive if CDPR shift their focus to another store?
It’s not really the same as Rockstar Launcher and Steam, because Rockstar don’t own Steam.
They are legally separate entities, but why should that affect customers?
Because they are not doing it because of customers, they are more likely doing it for themselves. It’s easier to manage things on a corporate level when the data is also separated similarly as their companies are.
I’m not confusing anything here. For clarity, CPD is the parent company, CDPR is a department within the parent company that develops games. The two are basically synonymous.
What I’m doing is inferring that their statement “online services including…” is in no way an exhaustive list, and directly implies that other things are migrating also. Furthermore, when I logged into GOG Galaxy I could no longer shop for new games (not just CDPR games, but recent games from other publishers - only old titles were available), which further leant into the idea that games were being removed from the GOG store. I’ve since checked gog.com and they’re still there, though.
In any case, even if it doesn’t happen right away this move absolutely is a step towards CDPR games not being listed on the GOG store and potentially even coming with DRM.
I’ve created a support ticket with them asking for further details about the change.
I disagree but I understand you… I don’t know why it didn’t click for me as an old Yu-Gi-Oh! Player (that is the only card game I have ever played… And several minutes of a “Duel Master” card game for GBA… Perhaps that one would trigger some old memories for some it was based on an anime too).
It suffers the same problem every trading card game does: if you don’t have the best cards, you lose. Skill and strategy and even luck are nothing compared to just having better cards.
IMO pay-to-win mechanics work really well for a game-within-a-game since rather than exploiting the player for money, they are exploiting the player character for effort, which can lead you to go on more epic quests
Personally I found it really annoying that halfway through the game when I decided to give gwent a go, i got absolutely trashed and was basically tole to go back to the beginning of the game and redo a bunch of areas I’d already spent too much time in.
Not to mention none of the gwent quests were epic in the slightest. They were literally “play these people, if you win you get a card”.
That’s a really superficial take. For instance in MTG every format has “must have” cards, like fetchlands or shock lands (or dual lands), but beyond that there’s no “best” cards. There are “meta” cards that go into a specific meta deck and when you have one meta deck playing against another that’s when skill and strategy come into play. And it’s not like you must build a meta deck to play, you can build anti-meta decks or lab out a completely new meta deck. The problem is that such a level of deck building skills go way beyond what 99% of players are capable of doing. Even some of the best players in the world suck at deck building, because is an entirely different skillset to playing the game.
But it doesn’t mean it doesn’t happen. The modern meta looks very different to when I got into MTG 10+ years ago. Some are still around in some form, like regular Tron turned into mono-g tron and burn turned into boros burn. But the bans on Twin and Pod have killed those decks while Jund and Affinity have dropped out of the meta. In those place we have brand new decks like amulet titan or 5c Omnath. Somewhere in that timeframe we also got Eggs that was literally jank cards thrown into a pile of meta-defining solitaire playing, and then it got banned for being too boring.
You can get meta cards to build a meta deck but you can’t explicitly buy “best” cards because a new combination of “bad” cards can create a meta deck and then those become the new “best” cards.
The one with a better deck wins. If a homebrew deck goes against a meta deck then it’s likely the meta deck wins, but if you homebrew a deck with meta cards vs homebrewing without meta cards it comes down to how well the deck is built. A homebrew with all the meta cards but without any game plan or poor mana source distribution is going to do worse than a homebrew without meta cards, but with a clear plan and cards that support that plan.
People not building their own decks and instead just copying meta decks is another discussion.
I wish someone had taught my friends and me how to play D&D when I was 10, but my parents were part of the “satanic panic” generation, and had zero interest in anything to do with fantasy or improv. Once you get out of highschool, finding a night that everyone can meet up for D&D gets exponentially harder, let alone finding someone who wants to put in the time to DM.
Oh yeah, DnD is a great idea, and if they aren’t into dragons (but who isn’t) there’s all kinds of variations of rpg games. Mutant Year Zero, Vaesen, Alien, Pathfinder, Starfinder, etc. The list goes on and on. And since you have mentioned you have a pc, you can use a virtual tabletop like Fantasy Grounds, for them to play where you don’t have to get them all together in the same room. I play a few different games each week with people I have only met in game. You could buy the FG Ultimate license for one pc, whomever is going to be the DM, and all the other kids could connect with the free beta license, and only the DM needs to own the books. Everyone else can just get on and read the manuals, or play the game with no expense.
Personally I have played dnd with those virtual tabletops and… they’re pretty bad. You spend about 3x as much time fiddling with it than you do playing. Plus you then get distracted by electronics when you should be getting into your character.
Well I guess it all depends on the dm and the material. I play a couple of games each week, and one is a 4 hour session and it’s pretty immersive. We have a few hiccups now and again, but it’s not anything that bad in my opinion. There is some work on the dm side, but since we are all spread about the planet, it allows us to get together and run a campaign. Even my local board game peeps use FG to play. We talk about playing local, but when we get together it’s usually to break out some board games we have and want to play, and one person playing our dnd game is a couple of states away. We joke about putting him on an ipad and facetiming him with his head sitting on the table. LOL.
Dnd (and tabletop gaming in general) is really fun, but I can foresee problems when you try to replace the electronic gambling skinner box of Roblox with a game where the core features are math and imagination.
For immersiveness, I recommend miniatures to use on a grid (can be just paper with 1”x1” squares drawn with a pencil). One thing I can say for doing it cheap and quick is to buy a bunch of those small game piece holders (1”x1”) and find monster art online to print, cut, and put in the holders as your minis.
[For example](LLMSIX 24 Pieces Game Card Stand Clear Card Holders Plastic Place Card Display Stand Photo Card Holder DIY Board Games Stand for Business Cards Price Tags Labels Menus Party Favor)
You can get basic rules online for free and you could probably pick up books used.
There’s many things I can overlook here but the lack of bikes nixed my hype fully. I don’t want to build car hell yet again. I can leave the house if I wanna see that.
I mean… If I want to build a hell, I still want options.
Like, realistic space use for car hell would be interesting but maybe sometimes I wanna build a university on a hill and student housing at the top of a different hill and to get to class you have to bike up a hill both ways.
No bikes??? I hadn’t heard that, one of the most satisfying things about playing C:S1 to me was making great bike routes and useful public transit, without bikes I really don’t feel a drive to play this one now honestly hah. Maybe they are going the Sims route where all the useful basic things they added in the previous edition will be released over time as DLC, ffs.
I don’t think the first Cities Skylines shipped with bikes either? Wasn’t it part of the After Dark DLC? Or maybe that was just bike lanes? I hate the DLC for Paradox games… It’s so confusing that I think I’m just not going to buy their games anymore.
You’re right. After Dark was one of the first(?) DLCs and I’m not sure if bikes were part of that or the eco-friendly DLC but bikes definitely are not part of the vanilla experience (I have quite a few DLCs that are important to me and no bikes yet)
Yes you are making an unreasonable complaint. You’re complaining that the story doesn’t include one particular niche element of interest to you and comparing it to having shit thrown in your face.
Yes, but I was under the entirely reasonable expectation that I would indeed get my niche thing (that being three or four lines of dialog), given the game’s overall setup, mechanics, advertising and franchise. It wasn’t just not included, it was actively averted as hard as possible.
Would you not be disappointed in the same circumstances?
I exclusively use a VPN with everything and have done so for years. If steam has an issue, they have yet to inform me lol.
On a serious note tho, there is an issue if you use a VPN to access store prices for a country outside your own. Regional pricing means that some people game the system and Valve rightfully cares about that.
You don’t have to, your regional price is linked to your account’s regional setting so that if you move you can legitimately change your region but VPN doesn’t affect it at all.
I was watching The Spiffing Brit’s exploit video of Spore. It definitely made me wish for a modern Spore game. To be clear, the visuals don’t need to be much better just better lighting and it’d look modern enough. If they overhauled the gameplay systems then it could be a 10/10 game.
Most games are better about this now, but subtitles, difficulty options, and the ability to turn off flashing lights are critical to the point I can’t play for long, sometimes at all without them.
Thank you for saying difficulty as an accessibility feature. So many people think difficulty is something inherent to a game’s design but completely miss the fact that difficulty is subjective.
Every game should have difficulty options. No exceptions.
I completely disagree. Difficulty is not an accessibility option. It’s a cheap way out of fixing more complex problems, but ultimately easier difficulty just means that you won’t have to interact with the game as much to get through it. No problem if the parrying lacks clear indications when you can just take the very weak hits from the enemies instead of learning the parry system.
But for most games, it doesn’t really impact anyone if you add a difficulty slider, so game developers just do that instead of dealing with accessibility issues in their core systems.
And then there’s the souls games. These games would become objectively worse by adding a difficulty option. When overcoming impossible odds is the core principle of the game, then adding a slider to make the odds mildly inconvenient instead of impossible will actively jeopardize that very principle!
In fact there are countless stories of people with severe disabilities who found new hope in clawing through the souls games. They let go of their learned helplessness precisely because they realized that what their playing is hard and failing over and over again is an important part of the process.
That being said, the souls games do deserve some criticism in some aspects regarding accessibility. There’s a lot in the UI and feedback department that could be done to improve accessibility without having a negative impact on the game itself.
And as a last point, there are plenty of ways in which you can tweak several difficulty aspects of the souls games. Mavic is way easier than heavy strength builds which is way easier than dex builds. So, if you just want to go sight seeing, then why not use cheats and magic?
Yes agree.
I cant get into elden ring because I'm not learning anything when i die.
The odd time i get a dodge, or, parry or combo to work right, i can't repeat; so i'm obviously not picking up the right cue or the timing. Maybe it's steamdeck controller lag or something.
Or maybe i'm just too old - i spend half an hour here or there.
I just can't do 5-15 hour long playing sessions anymore which might be what it takes to learn this stuff.
I'm not sure they should change it to make cues more obvious though - there are just some games I'm going to be shite at.
I don't want it to be Moonstone on the amiga, turned into dull as shit within a few hours.
I disagree with the idea that every game should have a difficulty option. If the difficulty is there just for the sake of challenge, then difficulty options should be there because in that case it’s not all that different than setting self-imposed rules for additional difficulty. But when difficulty serves a bigger purpose I can absolutely understand keeping a standardized experience.
For example in ARC raiders the ARC are so dangerous that they’ve pushed people underground and going topside is this risky endeavor. But if the ARC were pushovers you get this narrative dissonance where the enemy is supposed to be so dangerous that humans can’t thrive but when you fight them they die instantly so why can’t humans thrive? ARC also pose as a balancing act to the game because if the ARC weren’t dangerous the game would just be PVP with looting. You have to take ARC seriously even if you know how to deal with them because of how easily the script can be flipped on you. ARC raiders obviously doesn’t really have difficulty options because of its multiplayer nature but it does show that difficulty can have a narrative impact and difficulty can impact how you approach the game. If the game was easier it would arguably end up as a worse experience.
And difficulty can also be used to make you feel a certain way. This is why I’ve argued against Dark Souls needing difficulty options (and to be clear, I’m talking about ONLY Dark Souls 1). There’s a reason some people call Dark Souls a cathartic experience, because that’s what the game is going for. Lordran is a world in despair. The end of an era is coming and the world has been plunged into decay. The denizens of Lordran have fallen into despair, given up and hollowed. And Dark Souls wants you to feel that. Dark Souls wants you to feel the despair and find the will to continue despite that despair, lest you become one of the hollowed people of Lordran. The game is challenging specifically to make you feel like you’re being treated unfairly, like you’re against impossible odds, like you’re supposed to fail, like there’s no point playing and just give up and never play again. Because when you eventually overcome that unfair and impossible scenario you’ve failed a dozen times all the emotional tension gets released and you achieve catharsis. If you don’t feel the failure you can’t feel the catharsis thus by making the game easier the game loses a part of what it is.
Dark Souls is not just a game, Dark Souls is a piece of art. We give other art the respect to be their own thing. People accept Kafka novels are hard to read. People accept The Downward Spiral is hard to listen. People accept Requiem for a dream is hard to watch. But when Dark Souls is hard to play we complain? I say let art be art. If we want to treat games as art then every game can’t have difficulty options. Some games can, will and do use difficulty in a way that elevates their artistic vision. In my eyes denying games the tool of difficulty is to deny that games can be art.
And not everything is for everyone. Do you think (former) drug addicts would be comfortable watching Requiem for a dream? Would you argue the movie needs a cut that is suitable for addicts?
How is that a strawman? It’s literally my point translated to the movie medium. If it’s okay to demand easier options for games that deliberately use difficulty for artistic purposes why wouldn’t it be okay to make similar demands in other mediums?
If you have a specific trigger you may want to research the movie ahead of time for content. Resources like does the dog die help. Depending on your exact needs you may be able to use other tactics like watching with a friend.
With games this is different in a couple big ways.
Difficulty is tuneable after the fact. The developer had to make choices about the numbers and implementing them in a way they can be scaled isn’t necessarily more work. Lazy scale the number difficulties are still more accessible than single difficulty.
Games are often too long to reasonably ask a friend to help you re-edit it by dealing with a specific mechanic every time. It’s also likely that a friend may not enjoy waiting around for their time to shine.
With movies, there are still accessibility things that people do rightly complain about, like the sound mixing. Whispery actors mixed purely for movie theaters is an accessibility problem, even if it’s not typically framed that way.
If you have a specific trigger you may want to research the movie ahead of time for content. Resources like does the dog die help. Depending on your exact needs you may be able to use other tactics like watching with a friend.
And if people don’t want a challenging game they can research beforehand and decide not to play it. Or they can get a friend to help or they can find mods for the game or they can watch a playthrough. But with games instead of working around the vision (like you’ve suggested with movies) we decide that developers should compromise their vision.
Difficulty is tuneable after the fact. The developer had to make choices about the numbers and implementing them in a way they can be scaled isn’t necessarily more work. Lazy scale the number difficulties are still more accessible than single difficulty.
I think you’re mixing up difficulty for the sake of difficulty with difficulty for the purpose of something else. You can tune difficulty for the sake of difficulty and I don’t an issue there. I don’t think you can tune difficulty that’s designed to evoke a specific feeling or guide the player in a specific way. Take the Asylum demon from Dark Souls. It’s supposed to be near-impossible to beat the first time you see it because the game is telling you to do something different. If you turn the difficulty down and it becomes beatable then you’re actually skipping the rest of the tutorial the game designed for you. And of course environmental difficulties are even harder to tune. You can make Sens Fortress deal less damage but if you can’t avoid the traps you’re still going to end up knocked off and have to start again.
Difficulty is much harder to research. It’s relatively easy to find if there’s depictions of drug use in a movie.
It’s much harder to tell how hard or easy a game is. I’m reasonably experienced with games, and every time I start one I still waffle over difficulty.
Dark souls often has both its difficulty and the importance of its difficulty to the experience overblown. You can still have encounters like Asylum Demon and Sen’s Fortress alongside difficulty settings.
The art of gaming is in its storytelling, not it’s arbitrary mechanics that gate access to that story experience
What kind of storytelling? Because if we’re talking about just the story it might as well be a movie or a book. It needs to have interactivity and that interactivity needs to support the story. So if the story is about hardship how can the player feel that when nothing is hard? To come back to the ARC example. How would it make sense that ARC have pushed humans underground when you as the player don’t fear ARC?
It doesn’t have to make sense. Gameplay mechanics and the in game world and story are two different things.
Again, difficulty is subjective. What is “hard” for one is easy for another. So let the player decide how hard they want their experience of the story to be.
It doesn’t have to make sense. Gameplay mechanics and the in game world and story are two different things.
Why are you even playing games if it doesn’t have to make sense? Clearly you care about the story but don’t care whether the gameplay supports the story? So if the gameplay adds nothing to the story why not just watch a youtube playthrough instead of playing it yourself?
Again, difficulty is subjective. What is “hard” for one is easy for another. So let the player decide how hard they want their experience of the story to be.
Difficulty is subjective but it has to be consistent if you’re trying to use difficulty to evoke an emotion. Imagine there’s a game that wants you to feel like you’ve overcome a serious challenge. How can the game do that when on the first sight of challenge you turn it into easy mode and skip the process of making you feel that way?
Because I enjoy playing games and experiencing the story they have to tell? How is that hard to understand?
You can enjoy playing the game AND enjoy the story they have to tell, I also enjoy games that don’t have a story but have fun gameplay, but the two do not have to be tied at the hip and they shouldn’t.
You seem to fail at understanding what “difficulty is subjective” means. Who are you to determine what is a “serious challenge” for the player? Everyone is different. What is a serious challenge to overcome for one is a cakewalk for another, unless the player has the ability to adjust the difficulty to their liking and capabilities.
Who fucking cares if someone puts it down to easy? If that is the challenge they are comfortable with then let them have that option. Fuck off with that elitist bullshit.
Because I enjoy playing games and experiencing the story they have to tell? How is that hard to understand?
But you don’t care when the gameplay enhances or detracts from the story? You’re okay getting shot 1000 times and nothing happening but that one bullet during the cutscene is all that it takes?
You can enjoy playing the game AND enjoy the story they have to tell, I also enjoy games that don’t have a story but have fun gameplay, but the two do not have to be tied at the hip and they shouldn’t.
I absolutely enjoy games that have no story to tell. I agree that gameplay and story don’t need to be joined by the hip. But I think you shouldn’t chainsaw them apart if they are joined by the hip.
You seem to fail at understanding what “difficulty is subjective” means. Who are you to determine what is a “serious challenge” for the player?
I completely understand that difficulty is subjective. I am not the one who determines what is a serious challenge. The game developers are the ones who decide that. Who are you to tell game developers how they should make their game?
Everyone is different. What is a serious challenge to overcome for one is a cakewalk for another, unless the player has the ability to adjust the difficulty to their liking and capabilities.
Which further proves my point that the developers should have fixed difficulty when they use difficulty to guide the player or evoke a feeling. How can they do that when they need to make it work for everyone?
Who fucking cares if someone puts it down to easy? If that is the challenge they are comfortable with then let them have that option. Fuck off with that elitist bullshit.
I’m sorry a game was too difficult for you and you got your feelings hurt and now are trying to turn the entire world around your hurt feelings instead of accepting that you are the one with the problem, not everyone else. Was that elitist enough for you? Fuck you for calling me elitist when you can’t even understand the point I’m making.
I completely understand that difficulty is subjective. I am not the one who determines what is a serious challenge. The game developers are the ones who decide that. Who are you to tell game developers how they should make their game?
Thanks for confirming that you absolutely do not understand it one iota. It is not the developer that determines it. It is the player because, again WHAT IS DIFFICULT FOR ONE IS EASY FOR ANOTHER. You’re the one playing, not the developer. Is it challenging FOR YOU, or is it not? Thus you, the player, determine what a “serious challenge” is or isn’t.
Which further proves my point that the developers should have fixed difficulty when they use difficulty to guide the player or evoke a feeling. How can they do that when they need to make it work for everyone?
No, it disproves your point because the experience is different for every individual. A fixed difficulty just ensure that some players will have a cakewalk while for others it will be impossible due to things like disability preventing them from having the physical capabilities of surpassing the arbitrarily set difficulty settings.
The point is that they SHOULDN’T DO THAT BECAUSE IT IS LAZY STORYTELLING AND ARBITRARY RESTRICTIVE FOR PLAYERS WITH DISABILITIES.
Jesus you’re a brick fucking wall. It’s pointless to attempt having a conversation with you. I understand your point. I fully disagree and think your point is elitist and arbitrarily restrictive to players with disabilities, like myself.
Somehow you understand my point perfectly well but can’t address a single point I’ve made. We’re not discussing my arguments here, we’re discussing the bullshit you threw in my way to duck away from my argument. How about you actually address what I originally said if you’re so god damn certain you know what I’m talking about? I’ll spell my points out for you and then you can knock them down.
Argument one. It creates a ludonarrative consistency in games where the world is supposed to be harsh and unforgiving.
Argument two. It can be used to evoke a certain feeling in people.
And I want actual arguments and not this “I don’t care about those things so those arguments are irrelevant” bullshit you used before to cop out making an actual argument.
Jesus Christ you’re one stubborn fucking mule. Conversing with you is pointless. You fail to understand the point about disability being an accessibility feature.
Congratulations on still missing the fucking point.
None of your points fucking matter if the player doesn’t have the accessibility available in order to be able to play the game in the first fucking place.
Thus, difficulty as an accessibility feature.
God you elitist assholes are all the fucking same.
No, you didn’t. I’m truly sorry you lack the reading comprehension to understand this. Continue thinking you did though because trying to argue with an elitist is as useful as arguing with a brick wall.
Yep, you keep talking out of your ass and ducking at every criticism. No wonder you demand easy mode for everything, you can’t stand the slightest amount of pushback.
You are failing to see that people with some sort of disability are already against impossible odds, not only in the game but in life. They already know that feeling you talk about, why not let them partake in this piece of art? It will still be a challenge.
If your worry is that normies would exploit this and not “earn” their victory, it also does not affect your experience of the game at all. Just like nobody is going to force you to do a SL1 run - that’s a choice-, why not have that the other way arround? :)
You are failing to see that people with some sort of disability are already against impossible odds, not only in the game but in life. They already know that feeling you talk about, why not let them partake in this piece of art? It will still be a challenge.
That is just opening up a whole other can of worms. Would you argue sim racing games should cater to people with disabilities? Should puzzle games cater to people who don’t have the capacity to solve puzzles?
If your worry is that normies would exploit this and not “earn” their victory, it also does not affect your experience of the game at all. Just like nobody is going to force you to do a SL1 run - that’s a choice-, why not have that the other way arround? :)
I love how you instantly assume the kind of person I am. Yeah, it would be my choice to do a SL1 run, the game isn’t designed around doing SL1 runs. The game is designed around evoking a specific emotion that requires people to be challenged enough to feel like they’re overcoming a challenge. How do you feel like you’ve overcome a challenge when you just turn off the challenge when it gets too tough?
Not everything is for everyone, of course. But I argue that everything, any game genre should be accesible for anyone who wants to try, and like with anything else, people will filter themselves out if it’s not for them.
I love soulslikes, I love the struggle. but I also happen to be intimately familiar with disability, and I know that disabilities and people with disabilities are all different. A blanket accesibility solution like difficulty opions would just level the barrier of entry for some people with a disability. That’s what I’m arguing should exist. So more people get to experience this piece of art. ¯_ (ツ)_/¯ that’s just my take.
Also, I’m not assuming you to be any kind of person, it’s just the most used argument against difficulty options I’ve seen.
Not everything is for everyone, of course. But I argue that everything, any game genre should be accesible for anyone who wants to try, and like with anything else, people will filter themselves out if it’s not for them.
I don’t think difficulty is on the same level of accessibility as say being able to turn off epilepsy inducing lights. Difficulty is more of a soft accessibility option because people can learn to overcome difficulty. It’s very rare to have difficulty that is simply impossible not to overcome. I get the people with disabilities angle but I also think they should be treated like people and as people I’d like them to experience art as it is. When it comes to something like Dark Souls, where the difficulty and hardship is so intertwined with the story, world and the metaphors about life itself, I think the piece of art would become less if the difficulty was reduced. I want people to experience Dark Souls like I did because it literally changed my life. I let the difficulty beat me so down that I changed as a person and I know that if I had had the option to turn on easy mode I would’ve 100% turned it on and rob myself from the chance to grow as a person. This is why I’m so adamant that difficulty options are not for every game because sometimes you can find something profound only after you’ve been pushed out of your comfort zone.
Right. So explain with real world examples of how higher difficulty actually prevents people with disability from playing a game. Make me understand because so far you’ve done nothing but say general statements and dismiss me.
Granular difficulty options also help. Things like being able to make the parry timings easier or harder than that rest of the difficulty.
If your difficulty presets are turning a bunch of levers at once, letting folks make their own can be very helpful.
There’s also things that aren’t often considered difficulty, but that can definitely make a game harder for some folks.
With Witcher 3 the only way I was able to play it successfully was modding it to be able to ignore a bunch of mechanics I found tedious. Things like ignoring carry weight, turning off item durability, lengthening potion duration, having items scale to my level, and hoovering up loot. Inventory management is often exhausting for me.
It’s not an easy fix this can break a game’s economy, and I think I had separate mods to reduce the impact of that.
In a similar vein, games that have sounds for everything. I have to play with sounds off in games I enjoy, and some sounds are used to foreshadow dangers that I end up unaware of because I can’t deal with the sound of crickets or bees or a random humming that are always present. (Shout out to Satisfactory for the incredibly granular sound control, overwhelming at first, but once it was set up it is great.)
Remapping keys. I have function (and not always voluntary) but no feeling in part of my left hand, and an essential tremor that appears randomly. I need to disable some keys because I will find my character suddenly crouching/running/attacking or whatever at really inconvenient times, and with some games the controls are so touchy that I can’t aim or move in a straight line.
Not colorblind, but some games have some very headache inducing colour choices, I have sympathy for those who can’t see colour A font on Colour B background.
Imagine sending someone hatemail because they like rocky road while your favorite is salted caramel. Who cares whats in their bowl? Why care? Eat your own fucking ice cream, losers.
And for the translation, they probably just made it a reference to how your only dialogue options in the game are ever yes or no, so when the one NPC asks you an open-ended question, you sound like a weirdo.
I played Metroid Prime for the first time recently and Samus Aran is an absolute badass. She crash lands on a planet and kills every single thing she encounters. If you read the logs of the space pirates you find scattered around they basically say “oh fuck the hunter is here, she’s coming for us next”.
The atmosphere is almost a little survival-horror-esque, but the experience is more like doom: you’re not locked in here with all these monsters, all these monsters are locked in here with you.
bin.pol.social
Ważne