The Backlog Check-in Vol. 65: 3/30/19: April Fools Edition

User avatar
isthatallyougot
Posts: 1304
Joined: Fri Jan 19, 2018 9:52 am

Re: The Backlog Check-in Vol. 65: 3/30/19: April Fools Edition

Post by isthatallyougot »

canedaddy wrote: Thu Apr 04, 2019 10:28 pm Yeah, izzy, it's still there for me... at least until GTA VI: Vice City '86 comes out. :P
I'm sure I'll love it too. I really loved the first RDR. (even the ps2 red dead revolver, although not as much)
Phaseknox wrote: Thu Apr 04, 2019 11:27 pm With Sekiro: Shadows Die Twice it does seem that in addition to incredible worlds with brilliant gameplay, systems, depth and atmosphere that From Software's calling card also includes making games ridiculously hard. I heard that Bloodborne was more reasonable than the Souls games in terms of difficulty, so I was under the impression that it was only the Souls games that they made ridiculously hard - but apparently Sekiro (an entirely new IP) is just as hard as the Souls games proving that From Software now wants to be known as a developer that makes ridiculously hard games. I guess that from this point forward we shouldn't expect anything from From Software that's not ridiculously hard, because they only want to make games for Souls fans now and no one else. That's a shame because (like you said) they make games with incredible worlds with brilliant gameplay, systems, depth and atmosphere, but unfortunately they can only be enjoyed by those who want punishing difficulties from their games.

I disagree that someone wanting an easier setting in a From Software game would be like you saying that you wish Animal Crossing offered more blood, guts and carnage. There are so many ways that things could be made more reasonable in terms of challenge in From Software games that didn't change the content that they offer at all. Why couldn't everything remain exactly as it is in their games just with enemies and bosses taking less damage to defeat? How would that change anything other than making the challenge more reasonable for those less patient or skilled when it comes to games? I do agree that creators aren't under an obligation to try and please everyone as that would be an impossible and absurd request like you said, but they should want to please everyone who wants to play their games. That's what most developers do by offering different difficulty settings in their games. They make it so that everyone who wants to play their games can, I don't see what's wrong with that.
This very topic regarding the idea of easy mode in Sekiro just came up on gaf, and I had a lot to say about it. Acknowledging that games are art, are creations, I do not understand the idea that the creators have any obligation to anyone other than themselves, in being true to their vision. Of course creators want to be acknowledged and want to have success, but the moment they start trying to "be loved" is the moment they have failed. What is art, any type of art? From novels to paintings to songs to film and on and on, what is authentic art? I would argue that it is expression and it is expression that someone feels compelled to express, if it's genuine. There is a movement from within, an urge to capture a thing, a vibration, an energy, a concept, and to bring that expression from within and let it out, to convey that energy. Because art is unique to the creator(s), they have the responsibility to be true to themselves, otherwise they have abandoned the "truth" or vision they wanted to express.

I cannot wrap my mind around the idea of wanting creators to cater to me specifically. What value is there in that? Do you ask a film maker to edit their film because you find it unacceptable? Do you ask a writer to rewrite their work because you find it impenetrable? Do you ask a painter to change their color-scheme because their work doesn't resonate with you? Do you complain to the musician that their drum beat was not what you wanted? No one does any of this for artistic expression in the world - only in gaming do we hear these cries. In other forms of media, people simply move on to things they do enjoy, and that is, to me, a quite reasonable response to encountering something that doesn't click with you. You simply look for things that move you, rather than challenging the creators to adapt to your personal whims and preferences.

Some would argue that games are different because of interaction, but I do not see it that way at all. All types of art demand interaction, demand engagement. Sometimes the interaction is purely mental, sometimes it's mechanical, and sometimes it's a combination of the two. But every type of expression is a give and take between the creator and the one experiencing the creation. Should dense philosophical reads be rewritten because someone finds them impossible to wrap their minds around? To me such ideas are nonsense. Not everything will speak to everyone. But if you are drawn to a particular expression or creation, yet you find it challenging on some level, perhaps it is not the creator that needs to amend their vision, but the one who is experiencing it that needs to expand themselves if they are really drawn to it.

The short of it for me is that creators don't owe it to us to dilute their work in order for it to be more palatable to some. The vision is lost, and they're no longer creating from a genuine place at that point. They're just pandering to appease, and nothing of real artistic value comes from that.
Image

Dragon kick your a$$ into the Milky Way!
User avatar
Phaseknox
Posts: 1760
Joined: Sun Jan 07, 2018 7:20 pm

Re: The Backlog Check-in Vol. 65: 3/30/19: April Fools Edition

Post by Phaseknox »

isthatallyougot wrote: Fri Apr 05, 2019 9:41 amThe short of it for me is that creators don't owe it to us to dilute their work in order for it to be more palatable to some. The vision is lost, and they're no longer creating from a genuine place at that point. They're just pandering to appease, and nothing of real artistic value comes from that.
I agree, but no one is asking From Software to alter, change, or dilute their work. They're simply asking for optional difficulty settings in addition to the main one just like almost every game offers. I don't understand how additional optional difficulty settings can dilute or diminish the original vision of a game if it's available and offered as the main game. It's there for people who want to play the game exactly as the creators intended it to be played, so what harm is there giving others the option to play it in a way that makes it more enjoyable for them? I always thought that having options was a good thing.
User avatar
isthatallyougot
Posts: 1304
Joined: Fri Jan 19, 2018 9:52 am

Re: The Backlog Check-in Vol. 65: 3/30/19: April Fools Edition

Post by isthatallyougot »

Phaseknox wrote: Fri Apr 05, 2019 6:24 pm I agree, but no one is asking From Software to alter, change, or dilute their work.
That is exactly what people are asking for.

Let me ask you this question. Do you think FROM is aware of optional difficulty settings in games? Obviously this is a rhetorical question. They've been in the industry for a very long time. They know that a game can be made with variable difficulties.

So assuming this, let's ask ourselves why, then, did they omit the option of changing difficulties? They've put so much care into crafting the worlds, the lore, the art, the sound, the systems, the mechanics. Even the people clamoring for difficulty options can see this - that's why they want to play their games. So if they've given so much to their work, why would they omit this element? I think it would be absurd to say it's an oversight. And if it's not an oversight, it must have been a creative choice. There must have been a reason (and there most certainly is) for structuring things in this way. They didn't just throw the game(s) out there to the world without any thought - clearly. There was great attention given. Their works are labors of passion / love.

Given that this is a creative choice, you're asking the creator(s) to custom make a game for you personally. (not just you - everyone insisting upon variable difficulty) Where does this slippery slope end. The people who don't like the art can ask for that to be altered, the people who don't like the narrative...you get my point. Why should any creator cater to you (or me) or anyone personally? Why do they have any responsibility to people who don't like their creations as they designed them?
Image

Dragon kick your a$$ into the Milky Way!
User avatar
Phaseknox
Posts: 1760
Joined: Sun Jan 07, 2018 7:20 pm

Re: The Backlog Check-in Vol. 65: 3/30/19: April Fools Edition

Post by Phaseknox »

Fair enough.
Post Reply