I'm sure I'll love it too. I really loved the first RDR. (even the ps2 red dead revolver, although not as much)
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.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.
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.