Maybe you haven’t been convinced by a good enough argument. Maybe you just don’t want to admit you are wrong. Or maybe the chaos is the objective, but what are you knowingly on the wrong side of?

In my case: I don’t think any games are obliged to offer an easy mode. If developers want to tailor a specific experience, they don’t have to dilute it with easier or harder modes that aren’t actually interesting and/or anything more than poorly done numbers adjustments. BUT I also know that for the people that need and want them, it helps a LOT. But I can’t really accept making the game worse so that some people get to play it. They wouldn’t actually be playing the same game after all…

    • This is the best practice, especially for AskLemmy but it also applies to news and other media threads. It’s best to put your personal thoughts and opinions in a top-level reply, while keeping the post body to clarifications or summary of the posted question or media.

  • Pronouns. I get that they matter a lot to some people, and of course it’s super annoying (if not worse) to be referred to in the wrong way, but I find it unreasonable to demand being referred to something outside of the gender binary, simply because that’s the way language works.

    I am aware that English has used “they” for a person of unknown gender for ages, but for one, I don’t think it’s something that you should demand people call you when they actually know your gender, but also I really hate that this is making its way into other languages like my own, that has never had this convention. Inventing entirely new pronouns is just ridiculous, I have a hard enough time to remember your name.

    I am also aware that language evolves, but this is not evolution, it’s forced, and if one group of people can try to force a change they prefer, I’m as much in my right to resist it if I don’t like it.

    People are super passionate about this though and in fifty years I’m sure I’ll be seen as a fossil for not getting with the times now - in fact I’m sure certain people see me like this now.

  • I don’t think any games are obliged to offer an easy mode.

    That’s a valid stance. It’s ok to make art which is not intended for everyone, or even the majority.

    However, if you’re charging people money for it and they are surprised by the difficulty and can’t enjoy it as a result, I think that could be a potential ethical issue. But if you make it clear it’s a difficult, challenging game, then I see no problem.

    • I generally agree, but I will say, it’s damn hard to get back into games like this after time passes.

      The most extreme example would be Super Mario Maker, where some custom levels need game knowledge from a wide array of the various games, so if you don’t know that in SM2 you can pickup snowballs, you might get stuck for a while.

      A normal example would be like Vanquish, where if you take a break near the end of the game the sheer level of technical necessity the game requires can make it very difficult to get back into it.

      But those are extreme examples. Another example would be something like Mario Kart or Super Smash Bros., where everyone has their sort of muscle memory with these games. I played Melee competitively and I came back to the game and it was like riding a bike, or a Souls game, while hard, is just one boss at a time and the game itself doesn’t have too much technical growth.

  • There isn’t really a “right” side to that one. If developers want to disappoint some potential customers and leave money on the table by not creating an easy mode, that’s their prerogative.

    • Maybe? I feel like the developers have the prerogative to decide to include it or not, but with the way the discourse has gone it certainly feels like I’m in the wrong here.

      • Point 1: If adding an easy mode legitimately degrades the “hard core” game, that’s one thing. But unless you were on the development team, how would you know if it had?


        Point 2: I don’t think it’s wrong, but I do think it’s… let’s say unskillful in the Buddhist sense. Not immoral so much as clumsy.

        People who self-identify as gamers and tie their sense of pride/self-worth to their gaming prowess are cringe. It’s cringey to not want there to be easy modes when nobody’s forcing you to play them.

  • I think TTRPGs should be unbalanced. Balance is a construct of games, and the fictional worlds the players will interact with are less immersive when everything is predictably tuned and equal. I think the fiction of a rogue being about as good as a fighter at combat is stupid. I think rust monsters and undead creatures that hurt your stats are way better than dire boars and skeletons who just shoot you with bows. I think that when rocks fall, things should die. These all contribute to the fantasy world seeming more dangerous, more ‘real’, like a spectral hand isn’t shielding you from the worst the world has to offer.

    I also recognize this is my dark fantasy bias yapping away

    • You might be interested in GNS theory. TTRPGS try to do three things at once, be a Game, tell a Narrative, and Simulate a world. Different games will prioritize different aspects, some people want a fair challenge where they build a character according to the rules laid out to face a challenge, other people want everything to serve the story, even if it means fudging mechanics or breaking with realism, and then some people just want the simulation to be as realistic as possible.

      Like many things with TTRPGs, it’s table dependent and emphasizing any of those elements over the others is totally valid as long as everyone’s having fun.

    • I’m with you. If a world isn’t dangerous there’s no reason to engage with it critically imho. If you want to grind out tactical combat or explore a power fantasy video games or board games do a better job, what they can’t do is appropriately punish or reward you for being clever. Or handle unexpected interactions.

      But I’m a minority. I prefer disreputable thieves slinking through an ancient dungeon spinning lies, setting traps, and brokering deals to “I use ability-5, roll my 2 dice, apply bonus modifiers, and kill the challenge appropriate goblin”.

  •  Zozano   ( @Zozano@lemy.lol ) 
    link
    fedilink
    English
    44 days ago

    I don’t know if I’m on the wrong side necessarily, but it’s something I’ll get flamed for, especially here on Lemmy.

    I don’t believe all WW2 Nazi’s were “evil”. I understand the historical conditions and arguments of the assertion for “no good Nazis”, but I also know human nature, and how people are ignorant, fight for different reasons, or are otherwise uninterested in ideological bullshit.

    I’m anticipating a certain flavour of reply, and I won’t be responding to those comments. Bring on the down votes and claims that I’m also a Nazi.

  • Oh, I’m also on that side of the “game difficulty” argument. I mean, I don’t care much about what’s offered in single player games. I usually play on the default settings. But one time I got into an argument with someone who said he should be able to unilaterally adjust his iframes and parry window in PvP, and that guy can fuck himself.

    I think I have an undue emotional response because a lot of the time it feels like the other person didn’t even try. It’s like someone who goes to a restaurant and just immediately pours salt all over the dish. Just try it like it was delivered first.

    Or they usually eat pizza, but they order this soup dish. And then they get mad they’re burning their hands when they try to scoop it into their mouth. Use a spoon. Stop blaming the soup and use a spoon.

    I guess more broadly my problem is I don’t believe other people are any good at introspection and emotional regulation. People just feel things and make up justifications. We all do that some of the time, but I think some people are just always in that mode.

  • It’s hard for me to know whether or not I’m on the wrong side of an argument. When people turn into bastards and brigade on me whenever I make an opinion on things. It’s hard to tell sometimes because, maybe their asshole-ness just validates what I expressed and I’ actually in the right. Who knows.

  • Opinions change, but sometimes the discussion doesn’t come up a second time. There are more than a few positions I’ve taken that I’ve since changed my mind about, one of which is certifications. While not necessarily a requirement in IT, having one would be immensely helpful right now, and so would having any kind of degree. Not only would it assist with a job search, but I’ve also been looking into moving to another country, and these things are almost always listed as something they look for during approval.

    I’ve also been on the wrong side of whether or not to change career paths.

    I’m trying to get back into gaming, and one of the things I appreciate most is a true, authentic experience that the developer intended, not something that was trimmed down or made easier for the sake of bringing in the most money or using other gimmicks to increase player count. I used to think it was best to include an easy mode, but after experiencing it, I can see it’s really not the same game, like you said. This was a relatively recent realization, too, one that I didn’t know I was on the wrong side of until I saw it firsthand.

    Distro choice is another issue. I didn’t want to admit that I’ve fallen behind on that one, but I’m trying to get into some of the gaming-specific distros now after seeing what’s available.

    I’ve been doing a lot of self-reflection, and these are just a few of the things I’ve realized I was wrong about. It’s not that I needed to be convinced of anything; I just couldn’t admit it for whatever reason. I’m trying to work on a lot of things right now.