A little while back I talked about how using a guide for a game isn’t such a bad thing. You don’t always have the time to “git gud”, so why not use the resources that are freely available online to help you? I’ve also recently mentioned that gaming is the only form of entertainment that actively prevents you from accessing more unless you prove you are deserving of it. There are exceptions of course, with walking simulators allowing pretty much everyone to access the full story regardless of ability level. Then we have the likes of Star Fox Zero…
Now, I haven’t played Star Fox Zero. Hell, I didn’t even have a Wii U to play it on. But I am very aware that a lot of people didn’t like it due to it having a poor control scheme. I’m also aware that a lot of people didn’t like it because it included an invulnerable mode, that made it near impossible for you to fail. It seems that a lot of gamers weren’t happy that some people would be able to experience the game’s story without the struggle that comes along with it. This isn’t the only game to do this, in fact a number of recent Mario games have had a similar option in which repeated failure allows you to play through a level whilst invulnerable. I have seen comments that dislike this feature too.
But why? Why does it matter if people who find the game challenging have a way of engaging with content later on? There seems to be this idea that games’ endings, regardless of their supposed target audience, should only be accessed by gamers who have earned it. To them, I ask this question: Did you earn the right to see the end of that movie you watched? Could you skip past the scenes that you didn’t like? How about that book you read or listened to? How is gaming such a specialist form of media that you can’t enjoy the story unless you earn it?
Games tell some genuinely fascinating stories and I don’t see why those stories shouldn’t be enjoyed by everyone. Anyone can enjoy Firewatch, why can’t everyone enjoy Mass Effect? I’m not for a second saying that difficulty should be removed from all games, by all means keep Dark Souls difficult, but why couldn’t their be a “casual” mode that removes some of the challenge so a less skilled player can enjoy the world? Most players would go for the challenge, but some would appreciate a way to explore the world without being brutally struck down at every turn.
A great example of this is in Furi. This is designed to be a very challenging boss rush game (with a cracking soundtrack I might add) in which you will be defeated over and over. But if you want to experience the story, then you can select the “Promenade” difficulty, in which the bosses practically lie down for you. Trophies/achievements won’t unlock in this mode, but you can still discover the plot at a leisurely pace. If a game that is designed with difficulty in mind can do this, then why can’t others?
“Hardcore” gamers! You can finish your games on the hardest difficulty you like, and well done to you for doing so! Seriously, beating some of these games on their hardest setting is a huge challenge and overcoming that is one hell of an achievement. But don’t lock others out of this hobby due to some elitist nonsense. Embrace the weak players! Discuss the plot with them! Tell them about how crazy the game can get! Maybe they’ll grow to be interested in the challenge side of the hobby. The great thing about this is that it would actually increase the diversity in games that are released. Many mock the number of similar games that are released these days, but is that perhaps because some of these games are so accessible? Would their be more Souls like games if there was a way for more people to enjoy them, thus opening up to a greater number of potential customers?
Down with elitism in gaming! Up with accessibility options! Would letting everyone play be such a bad thing really?