Jim Sterling on Game Difficulty

[ReaverKane]

He makes three points:

• His first point is that sure there's artistic vision and developers should do what they think is best for the game, but if a person mods the game to be made enjoyable to his personal tastes, even if it becomes easier, it's also none of our business...
  
  And he's right! Entirely and absolutely right!
  
  But there's a caveat! That does NOT APPLY to games like Warframe, or other MMORPGs. These games have a degree of competition and a balance must be struck, because unlike Sekiro and Dark Souls this is an online multiplayer game. It's not only quite hard to match make, but there's also the problem of how things are structured.
  
  If the game is built for separate difficulty modes (which Warframe might become), that's ok, and will probably increase the enjoyment of many people, not the ones that need an easy mode, but those that need a hard mode.
   
• His second point is that many games nowadays use difficulty to promote microtransactions, and that's becoming a cancer in the community. And while this is true to an extent in Warframe (especially recently with frames locked behind Syndicate standings, Orb Mothers and their RNG rewards), most of the time the RNG and difficulty in Warframe isn't really used to make sales, but more to extend play time, which is a poor use. Good examples are stuff like ephemeras, the Wolf's hammer, or Condition overload, all things that have miniscule drop rates from already pretty gated content, but that aren't available in the store.
   
• His final point, which is made in the outro, is that games shouldn't be challenging for the sake of being challenging. And Warframe has been struggling a bit with this concept...
  Warframe isn't really a game that can be called hard, there's too much power creep, and their solution is usually to just create absurd obstacles, that need more power creep to be defeated, or simply "cheese" tactics. It's an incredibly imbalanced and frustrating approach, because with one level up in a survival, the enemies can go from dying in ones-hot and needing 10 shots to kill you, to killing you in one shot and requiring 10 shots to die, the scaling is absurdly broken, and what's more, there's nothing to gain from that "challenge".
  Warframe has been trying hard to please the "hardcore" people, but failing incredibly, because they don't see that throwing "annoyances" at us, like longer waves, one-life, and immune enemies that are given immunity by an enemy that you might or might not have line of sight to deal with, doesn't make the game challenging in a fun way, it makes it frustrating and unfair.

Yeah i'm speaking specifically about Arbitrations now, since it was the best example of how DE doesn't understand challenging content. My first thought at the "difficulty" changes were that it looked like something a spiteful toddler came up with...

Toddler: "You can die only once!"

Tenno: "Ok, that sounds reasonable!"

Toddler: "Oh yeah! You need twice as many waves to get a reward too!"

Tenno: "Oh man, that's going to be boring!"

Toddler: "Boring? I'll give you boring!! I'll add a floating dodgy drone that hides behind walls while making everyone near them invulnerable!"

Tenno: "Gosh darnit! That'll force me to take something that goes through walls i guess!"
Toddler: "You think you're clever, heh? Ok then, all objectives are nerfed as well, defense targets are mobile, you get less life support, etc. Everything is twice worse than normal!"
Tenno: "That's going to be a pain, but doable!"
Toddler: "You think so? Well, the rewards will also be only Endo, Ayatans, and a bunch of mods, of which only one is really good!"
Tenno: "Aw come on now!"
Toddler: "Gotcha! 😝"

TLDR: The video was nice, i agree with Jim's viewpoint, that each person enjoys games differently, but MMORPGs need to have special consideration because there's an element of inter-player competition, even in coops like Warframe, that require a balance between difficulty and rewards. Sadly, DE is TERRIBLE at making content rewarding.
 

[Aldain]

Just now, Artekkor said:

And then my PS2 died and i've never played another Armored Core game ever again. Just seen trailers and what not of newer games, but i'm pretty sure all of them are dirty console exclusives which means our reunion is not meant to be.

The funny thing is since Fromsoft has completely forgotten the entire series exists that most of the devs behind the Armored Core series have left the company, gone to Marvelous and are currently making a spiritual successor exclusively for the Nintendo Switch named Daemon X Machina.

I couldn't make that up if I tried (thankfully I have a Switch and am currently drooling over the eventual launch of DxM).

But yeah comparing Soulsborne to Armored Core difficulty is a huge difference, honestly I'd say t the Armored Core series was harder, especially Last Raven on the PS2. Reflexes were everything in AC and bringing the right tool was only half (if that) of the battle, compared to Soulsborne where it all comes down to knowing how the enemy behaves it is a walk in the park by comparison because BOY the A.I. in AC games didn't have nearly as many exploitable behaviors (though some were cheesable).

Overall though Game Difficulty is something that in my opinion needs to be flexible, especially for anything that appeals to a wider audience, Soulsborne and Fromsoft know their playerbase and that's fine, but too often these days Soulsborne is held a some universal standard for difficulty when in reality difficulty and the options thereof should be something appreciated and better received as far too often the changes between modes are minimal.

By the way, you wanna see a fanbase lose its mind over optional difficulty modes? Go to the Fire Emblem fanbase and say "Casual mode was a great option for new players" and watch how fast they turn rabid, its a fun time.

[(PSN)Hiero_Glyph]

2 hours ago, --END--Rikutatis said:

I follow Jim Sterling, sometimes I enjoy his videos (and opinions), others it's just a load of BS like his horrible critique of Hellblade: Senue's Sacrifice (which went on to become one of the most unique and creative games ever made).

This video is definitely in the latter category for me, of pure bullS#&$. He's basically defending the opinion that it'd be alright for Sekiro, Dark Souls and similar games to have an easy mode. Doesn't surprise me, Sterling is like super casual and admitted to having trouble learning Sekiro in his review. And then he proceeds to say it was alright for a freaking PC Gamer writer and staff to publicly admit in an article he wrote for the site that he used cheats and hacks to beat Sekiro and doesn't mind admitting it. Like, really? Gamers who are upset with a big gaming news site to encourage cheats and hacks are elitists? Jesus, that video is pure trash. The entire videogame industry is super casual to the extreme, there's very little available out there outside of ranked PVP for people who genuinely want a challenge out of videogames. The entire Dark Souls/Sekiro experience revolves around the notion that the game is brutal and you'll need to adapt and learn. That's the creative vision of From Software, explicitly stated several times by the devs. It wouldn't be Dark Souls anymore if you could just turn on easy mode. 

Does a reprint make a painting less beautiful? Does an edited for tv movie make it less conveying to the audience? Does a radio edit make a song not worth litening to?

I'm not going to say that difficulty makes a game better or worse, but sometimes making something enjoyable for the masses is just a benefit for everyone as it does not detract from your pure experience and allows many others to enjoy a slightly modified version.

[Paradoxity]

1 hour ago, (PS4)Hiero_Glyph said:

Does a reprint make a painting less beautiful? Does an edited for tv movie make it less conveying to the audience? Does a radio edit make a song not worth litening to?

I'm not going to say that difficulty makes a game better or worse, but sometimes making something enjoyable for the masses is just a benefit for everyone as it does not detract from your pure experience and allows many others to enjoy a slightly modified version.

In most cases I'd agree, though in the specific instance here I don't. Soulsborne games are 'hard'. It's their thing, it's the one thing that makes them stand out. If, knowing that- and there's no way to pretend to not, since it's not like they're major new AAA releases and the meme is far from new, at this point- a person gets them and then  gets mad at their difficulty... well. 

Cuphead could at least be argued to have been new and no one knew how challenging it'd be. For a soulsborne? Nah. Asking for an 'easy mode' is silly- if it looks too hard, don't futz with it and buy a game more to your taste.

[(PSN)GrandisSupernus]

8 minutes ago, Artekkor said:

Here's the thing: there's a lot of games out there with difficulty settings. And in some of those games higher difficulties are actually pretty brutal. And yet... Are any of those games remembered for being difficult?... As far as i'm concerned: they're remembered for anything but (if at all).

And then there's everything that FromSoftware put out in the recent years. And one thing that i noticed is that Soulsborne games are celebrated for one thing and one thing only: difficulty. Not vague, puzzle-like lore made from item descriptions, not tight and responsive combat systems, not careful and delicate approach to simple game design choices, like item and enemy placements.
Difficulty is the only thing that Soulsborne has as a uniquely distinct... i would call it "personality trait".

Any other game, any other developer - sure, go, i don't care. But not these 3. Because then they wouldn't be what they are. The special flavor, the special soul that they have just would not be the same.

There have been plenty of other games that prided themselves on their difficulty, but they didn't make a big impression the way Dark Souls has. How many people still remember a game like Ninja Gaiden Black? It had difficulty, sure, but not a lot of staying power. In the case of those games the difficulty really was the only draw. I'm not trying to be arrogant when I say that the Dark Souls series isn't even that hard. It's not universal, of course, but Dark Souls is fairly approachable and has a fairly consistent difficulty curve. I find games like VVVVVV or I Wanna Be the Guy WAY harder than Dark Souls. The main difficulties a player faces is a) going the way you weren't supposed to go yet and being unfairly punished as a result, b) precision platforming with DS's awkward jumping controls while being assailed by enemies, or c) and most important, just trying to rush the game before you're prepared.

But it's an RPG! You can level up and become stronger, and the game doesn't force you to bang your head against an area you don't yet feel you're prepared for. With every success you get a little tougher, a little more able to face that next challenging area or boss. The reason many people find the series so hard is that they lack patience, and so are used to just plowing through a game instead of taking their time. Twitch streamers will often have people screaming at them in the chat for leveling up beyond the recommended level for a boss in order to make it easier, but that's a strategy the game itself encourages. And as Jim Sterling points out, Dark Souls is a game in which many different character builds are possible, so certain areas could be harder or easier depending on the build you have (and again, using certain builds where you have gaming peers watching will get you insulted if it's "playing the easy way", regardless of how much fun you're having).

But if you're honestly claiming that the difficulty is the only reason that Dark Souls and other From Software games have staying power, then you're not seeing what a lot of other players are seeing. Because while the initial difficulty can seem prohibitive, it's not the challenge alone that keeps those games so interesting. It's the lore, the backstory, the world, the characters. There aren't too many games where you systematically destroy the legendary gods of your world, now fallen into pitiful weakness, infighting and madness. There are mysteries to be solved, character backstories to uncover, new items to acquire and use with their own curious item descriptions that flesh out the world. Bloodborne has better cosmic horror than most H.P. Lovecraft stories (and significantly less racism), and while Sekiro goes a different route by having you play an existing character rather than your own, it is making progress towards your goals and solving the mysteries that surround you that drives many players forward.

Other games might have some or most of those things, but they aren't as interesting or interwoven as the Soulsborne series, and while the difficulty will always be a draw for some people, for others it's just a facet of the game that they merely accept if they are to experience the worlds that those games inhabit.

Most importantly, it's a moot point, because From Software hasn't added an "easy mode" to any of their games yet and probably never will, because that has been their vision for the games.

[Vox_Preliator]

Yup, Sekiro and other "Souls-Likes" don't need an easy mode.

But they would be better were there more accessibility options, including things that decrease the "difficulty."  And arguments about how "it's supposed to be played" are moot when mods and colorblind options already exist: That ways to tailor and customize one's experience such that more enjoyment is had exist at all shows that "how it's supposed to be played" is just plain inferior to "how I want to play it."  And if I'm "cheating myself" then well I guess that's my burden to bear and not anyone else's, now ain't it?

Though I don't really have a horse in this race, as the last time I played a From Software game (Except 3D Dot Game Heroes, that was fantastic) it was Dark Souls 2, on PC, using Keyboard and Mouse, with no mods or patches, at a resolution that made most text illegible.  While I now know that was basically the worst possible way to be introduced to the series I'm not particularly motivated to give them another shot when I've already got such a backlog of other games that I know I'll enjoy.

[SteelOverseer666]

19 minutes ago, (PS4)GrandisSupernus said:

There have been plenty of other games that prided themselves on their difficulty, but they didn't make a big impression the way Dark Souls has. How many people still remember a game like Ninja Gaiden Black? It had difficulty, sure, but not a lot of staying power. In the case of those games the difficulty really was the only draw. I'm not trying to be arrogant when I say that the Dark Souls series isn't even that hard. It's not universal, of course, but Dark Souls is fairly approachable and has a fairly consistent difficulty curve. I find games like VVVVVV or I Wanna Be the Guy WAY harder than Dark Souls. The main difficulties a player faces is a) going the way you weren't supposed to go yet and being unfairly punished as a result, b) precision platforming with DS's awkward jumping controls while being assailed by enemies, or c) and most important, just trying to rush the game before you're prepared.

But it's an RPG! You can level up and become stronger, and the game doesn't force you to bang your head against an area you don't yet feel you're prepared for. With every success you get a little tougher, a little more able to face that next challenging area or boss. The reason many people find the series so hard is that they lack patience, and so are used to just plowing through a game instead of taking their time. Twitch streamers will often have people screaming at them in the chat for leveling up beyond the recommended level for a boss in order to make it easier, but that's a strategy the game itself encourages. And as Jim Sterling points out, Dark Souls is a game in which many different character builds are possible, so certain areas could be harder or easier depending on the build you have (and again, using certain builds where you have gaming peers watching will get you insulted if it's "playing the easy way", regardless of how much fun you're having).

But if you're honestly claiming that the difficulty is the only reason that Dark Souls and other From Software games have staying power, then you're not seeing what a lot of other players are seeing. Because while the initial difficulty can seem prohibitive, it's not the challenge alone that keeps those games so interesting. It's the lore, the backstory, the world, the characters. There aren't too many games where you systematically destroy the legendary gods of your world, now fallen into pitiful weakness, infighting and madness. There are mysteries to be solved, character backstories to uncover, new items to acquire and use with their own curious item descriptions that flesh out the world. Bloodborne has better cosmic horror than most H.P. Lovecraft stories (and significantly less racism), and while Sekiro goes a different route by having you play an existing character rather than your own, it is making progress towards your goals and solving the mysteries that surround you that drives many players forward.

Other games might have some or most of those things, but they aren't as interesting or interwoven as the Soulsborne series, and while the difficulty will always be a draw for some people, for others it's just a facet of the game that they merely accept if they are to experience the worlds that those games inhabit.

Most importantly, it's a moot point, because From Software hasn't added an "easy mode" to any of their games yet and probably never will, because that has been their vision for the games.

Interesting perspective. Thinking back on it the reason I was interested in the very first Dark souls originally was not how hard it seemed to be, it was the whole package. The story, the world design the big badass bosses, the loot and progression, and yes of course that oh so sweet feeling of triumph at the end of a good fight. I think if any one of those parts were missing Dark Souls wouldn't have performed quite as well as it did.

Also the way I found dark souls originally was not through peers but because I googled "Games like Zelda".

Edited April 16, 2019 by SteelOverseer666

[Alaeacus]

35 minutes ago, SteelOverseer666 said:

I guess we will just have to agree to disagree that this is relevant to Warframe.

I am okay with that. 🙂 Have a good day!

I mean, it's only relevant in that Sekiro, Dark Souls, and Warframe are all video games.  Those minor similarities are warrant enough to compare them, but it really won't give you any worthwhile data considering they are all VERY different in both execution and goal.  

[taiiat]

normally just puking a link makes my eyes roll because you didn't actually start a discussion.
i'll make a rare exception for Jim Sterling, though. 

 

tl;dr - having Difficulty choices isn't awful, but it's a dangerous slope that has to be taken care with. i don't think removing much of the game from the game really serves well, even if someone might want that. mostly, because people do tend to have an attitude of that if they lose or don't get maximum win in any situation, that the game is broken. perhaps you see the problem that can come here.
i would never want a game to try to sell itself to everybody. it makes for a terrible situation where you end up becoming a significant amount of Interactive Cutscene or Timer Simulator. being flexible is nice. but like i said, you can overshoot into a different Country in the process.

and then since the subject is Sekiro - it's a From Software game - they all already have a Difficulty setting. it's directly built into the Gameplay. collect more items, level up Stats and get Skills/Abilities... all of that is the Difficulty Setting.
if someone wanted more than that then i guess......... just as long as they understand/recognize that it's not missing from the game in the first place.

[(PSN)Hiero_Glyph]

7 minutes ago, Paradoxity said:

In most cases I'd agree, though in the specific instance here I don't. Soulsborne games are 'hard'. It's their thing, it's the one thing that makes them stand out. If, knowing that- and there's no way to pretend to not, since it's not like they're major new AAA releases and the meme is far from new, at this point- a person gets them and then  gets mad at their difficulty... well. 

Cuphead could at least be argued to have been new and no one knew how challenging it'd be. For a soulsborne? Nah. Asking for an 'easy mode' is silly- if it looks too hard, don't futz with it and buy a game more to your taste.

The thing about art is that it can be enjoyed by anyone. Sure, you may not understand the nuances of the brush strokes, the pigments of the paint, or the interpretation of the artist, but that doesn't mean you can't still enjoy a painting for what it is.

While video games are an experience, YouTube and Twitch have made that experience approachable for everyone. But it still doesn't provide something that gamers can experience for themselves. Having a cinematic mode would allow players to experience the game and maybe appreciate it when they would otherwise not. Heck, it could even encourage them to try it the way it was intended to be played since it would be much less intimidating afterwards.

Would a no achievement, cinematic mode really hurt the game? Doubtful; but it may make it something that is far more approachable and appreciated.

__________

To put this in Warframe terms, imagine if you could hunt an Eidolon with an AI guide, get no credit or rewards for the mission, but have the experience to use as reference for future hunts. That would be so much more useful than a YouTube walk-through and it would make the entire experience far less intimidating since that player didn't need to ask others for help or need to be carried. It also serves as a tutorial of sorts which helps to foster interest from new or more casual players.

[--END--Rikutatis]

38 minutes ago, (PS4)Hiero_Glyph said:

Does a reprint make a painting less beautiful? Does an edited for tv movie make it less conveying to the audience? Does a radio edit make a song not worth litening to?

I'm not a musician, but I am a visual artist and work with film as well. And I'd give a firm "yes" to both of your first two questions. A reprint will definitely make a painting less beautiful, because it will completely lack the textures of the paint and canvas from the original, and I won't even get into the issue of color management here. Same for an edited for tv movie, I'd argue that in most cases, any edit below a director's cut is already compromising the original creative vision of the movie. 

 

10 minutes ago, (PS4)Hiero_Glyph said:

...

Would a no achievement, cinematic mode really hurt the game? Doubtful; but it may make it something that is far more approachable and appreciated.

As I said above, yes it would. It would compromise the creative identity of this series. The devs have a very clear vision of how they want players to interact with their games. That's their artistic vision. Would they make more money out of a cinematic mode? Most likely, yea. And for this I am truly glad there's still a few game devs out there who still worry more about their creative vision than what makes the most money, like From Software and CD Projekt Red. 

[--END--Rikutatis]

1 hour ago, SteelOverseer666 said:

...

Sadly I seem to have to ask this alot in this thread but...Did you watch the whole video? If you didn't why are you taking part in a discussion about said video?

Yes I did, and I'm commenting on Jim spending a major part of the video defending opinions and positions, specially from a major gaming news outlet, that I find completely wrong. Am I only allowed to participate in your discussion if I have an opinion that you agree with? 

Edited April 16, 2019 by --END--Rikutatis

[FlyingDice]

Barely related to WF at all, and Sterling is a hack. He's also the sort of obnoxious casul who thinks that the fraction of a percent of games that still bother to have meaningful difficulty should be forced to cater to inept maroons who can't be bothered to learn to play.

[SteelOverseer666]

24 minutes ago, --END--Rikutatis said:

Yes I did, and I'm commenting on Jim spending a major part of the video defending opinions and positions, specially from a major gaming news outlet, that I find completely wrong. Am I only allowed to participate in your discussion if I have an opinion that you agree with? 

Nope I welcome all opinions as I am trying to form my own on the subject.
It just came across like you didn't watch the video because you say:
"But not all games need or should have easy modes,"
When that is essentially what Jim says in the video. He says he does not think Dark souls or Sekiro should have an easy mode.
That is why I didn't think you watched the video.
Did not mean to offend and I hope you continue to contribute to the conversation. 🙂
 

[(PSN)Hiero_Glyph]

21 minutes ago, --END--Rikutatis said:

I'm not a musician, but I am a visual artist and work with film as well. And I'd give a firm "yes" to both of your first two questions. A reprint will definitely make a painting less beautiful, because it will completely lack the textures of the paint and canvas from the original, and I won't even get into the issue of color management here. Same for an edited for tv movie, I'd argue that in most cases, any edit below a director's cut is already compromising the original creative vision of the movie. 

 

As I said above, yes it would. It would compromise the creative identity of this series. The devs have a very clear vision of how they want players to interact with their games. That's their artistic vision. Would they make more money out of a cinematic mode? Most likely, yea. And for this I am truly glad there's still a few game devs out there who still worry more about their creative vision than what makes the most money, like From Software and CD Projekt Red. 

As you noted you would qualify as an expert so of course you would notice the subtle differences. But to my kids they would be inspired by just the image alone as they do not understand how to create things in such a way. Let me change the example since you seem a bit too experienced in this area.

Have you ever seen an image of the Pieta by Michaelangelo? Well I've seen it in person and it is truly breathtaking to witness. Now does my personal experience make the images less impactful to others? Absolutely not, but those images did interest me enough to want to see it when I was in Rome. And I can wholeheartedly tell you that the images pale in comparison to seeing it in real life. But without those images I probably would not have cared to see it at all.

The point being that by not making the format more accessible you risk alienating a larger portion of people who would probably enjoy the experience, modified as it were. And better still, by giving those people a sample you may interest them enough to want to experience it in its original form.

[--END--Rikutatis]

34 minutes ago, (PS4)Hiero_Glyph said:

Have you ever seen an image of the Pieta by Michaelangelo? Well I've seen it in person and it is truly breathtaking to witness. Now does my personal experience make the images less impactful to others? Absolutely not, but those images did interest me enough to want to see it when I was in Rome. And I can wholeheartedly tell you that the images pale in comparison to seeing it in real life. But without those images I probably would not have cared to see it at all.

The point being that by not making the format more accessible you risk alienating a larger portion of people who would probably enjoy the experience, modified as it were. And better still, by giving those people a sample you may interest them enough to want to experience it in its original form.

Yes, I can understand your example for sure. It's a good point you make. 👍

 

[(PSN)GrandisSupernus]

1 hour ago, SteelOverseer666 said:

Interesting perspective. Thinking back on it the reason I was interested in the very first Dark souls originally was not how hard it seemed to be, it was the whole package. The story, the world design the big badass bosses, the loot and progression, and yes of course that oh so sweet feeling of triumph at the end of a good fight. I think if any one of those parts were missing Dark Souls wouldn't have performed quite as well as it did.

Also the way I found dark souls originally was not through peers but because I googled "Games like Zelda".

To be fair, that is a pretty good search term. Almost guarantees you'll find something of quality!

[WindigoTG]

4 hours ago, blazinvire said:

I mean it's interesting, but it's also a volatile subject if you get into the psychology of it, because people don't want to feel like their achievement is 'cheapened' by someone else taking an easy route to get to the same point.
Like the difference between someone earning a million dollars and someone winning the lottery, or inheriting money.

Someone who has earned a million dollars would have had developed a skill set and worked up a personality traits allowing them to get somewhere in life and earn money. And they would have an acute awareness of where they are in life, how did they get there and where they are going. They wouldn't care about someone else lucking out once, they would be busy earning their next million, and another one after that. While a person winning a lottery would lack all those skills and traits, and general understanding of where they are in life and how does the world works, and would most likely end up burning throgh their lucky million and end up nowhere and broke.

So that analogy doesn't work, like, at all.

 

A random beardo with a controller, on the other hand, by the end of the day would get nowhere by playing a game, so I guess I can see you point of people getting upset about others getting equally nowhere with less effort.

[WindigoTG]

4 hours ago, Artekkor said:

not tight and responsive combat systems, not careful and delicate approach to simple game design choices, like item and enemy placements.

This is exactly what these games are being celebrated for, because this is exactly what makes their difficulty work.

There's a lot of far more difficult games out there, but the difficulty in those comes from bad design and general Bravo Sierra, so no one cares about those.

[Numerikuu]

10 hours ago, blazinvire said:

If you want to bring this to Warframe, one could consider using the meta frames like Nova the 'Easy Mode', or using Spore Saryn in Sanctuary as Easy Mode.

People don't seem all that upset about such things, considering how common they've become.

False. More often than not these days if people see a Saryn or Mesa, or both in the group? They leave. I'm not surprised. I do too. As do all my friends. We'd like to play the game, thank you very much. Not sit there with our thumbs up our asses while they both wipe the map with ease.

Saryn is literally right back where she was a couple years ago in terms of press 4 to win, only now it's press 1 to win with the occasional 4. I've had to stop using her because I feel guilty using her because of how ridiculously strong she is right now.

Edited April 16, 2019 by Numerikuu

[DatDarkOne]

8 hours ago, taiiat said:

and then since the subject is Sekiro - it's a From Software game - they all already have a Difficulty setting. it's directly built into the Gameplay. collect more items, level up Stats and get Skills/Abilities... all of that is the Difficulty Setting.
if someone wanted more than that then i guess......... just as long as they understand/recognize that it's not missing from the game in the first place.

For those players that have played previous From software games like Tenchu series or even Ninja Gaiden series, they wouldn't see Sekiro as a difficult game.  To me Sekiro goes back to the Tenchu style and adds more combat elements, which I love the hell out of.  

I remember one game reviewer even saying that Ace Combat 7 was too hard.  I literally laughed so hard at this.  I just couldn't take that review serious.  Why, because you just can't jump in the game and magically understand dogfighting tactics and gain situational awareness instantly.  It's something that is developed.  

As for a difficulty setting being added to Warframe, I would love to have it if it can be implemented well.  By well, I mean so that it doesn't cause problems in match-making groups in random Pubs.  I don't see how it would be a problem at all in Solo mode.  It's the random group aspect that could potentially cause issues.  

[Ryusuta]

Jim Sterling is an odd sort. Sometimes he really hits the nail on the head. Other times he really clearly has NO idea of what he's talking about. And then there are times like this where he just sort of pontificates and says nothing really noteworthy at all.

[(PSN)Silverback73]

11 hours ago, blazinvire said:

I mean it's interesting, but it's also a volatile subject if you get into the psychology of it, because people don't want to feel like their achievement is 'cheapened' by someone else taking an easy route to get to the same point.
Like the difference between someone earning a million dollars and someone winning the lottery, or inheriting money.

Some people play videogames to achieve something, some play to have fun, sometimes both, but not always.

It's curious that people are against the very concept of choice, like that'll cheapen their experience somehow.

Choosing Easy Mode is a choice.  Choosing to continue playing the game is a choice.

If Easy Mode does not exist, forcing you to persevere on 'Medium Difficulty', is it considered an 'achievement' to finish the game then?

If Easy Mode does exist, and you wish to beat the game on 'Medium Difficulty', you have to make the conscious choice to remain on Medium Difficulty until the end, is that an achievement?

Resisting the temptation to switch to Easy Mode, is that not an achievement?  Are people not confident in their own ability to stay the course?  If they are not, is that truly the game's problem?

If you want to bring this to Warframe, one could consider using the meta frames like Nova the 'Easy Mode', or using Spore Saryn in Sanctuary as Easy Mode.
People don't seem all that upset about such things, considering how common they've become.

If you want this in Warframe, keep Operators immortal but have death of your frame result in permanent loss of the frame and weapons. Hardcore mode.

 Bring the excuses.  IDC.

[DatDarkOne]

49 minutes ago, (PS4)Silverback73 said:

If you want this in Warframe, keep Operators immortal but have death of your frame result in permanent loss of the frame and weapons. Hardcore mode.

 Bring the excuses.  IDC.

Ha.  That would trigger so many people. I like it.  

[cmacq]

15 hours ago, MystMan said:

You watched the video... but did you listen?  He said repeatedly he doesn't care. 

It's a single player game.  People who find a single player game too hard will use cheat codes or hacks. Nobody gave a damn if others beat original Doom using iddqd. It's none of our business what others do in their own game. If a developer puts in difficulty levels, that's ok.  If they don't, that's ok. 

Warframe is an online game, this topic does not and cannot apply to online games.

Yeah Right. Like D3 doesn't have difficulty settings....