Easy modes for Hard Games

The stick and the carrot, or the carrotstick?

Over the years a certain debate has begun to pick up steam when talking about games, and it's whether or not every single game should feature some sort of difficulty scale with an 'easy mode' in the pursuit of being accessible. And no, this conversation isn't all going back to Game Journalists making demands about how all games need to be catered towards making their jobs easier, (although there are some instance where that might be true) but more from a fraction of the gaming public who feel ostracized from certain games simply because they can't cross the threshold of skill required to be involved. But then what is the solution? Pressure developers into creating easier modes for their games despite themselves? And should they even have to? I thought it might be fun to look at this issue from both sides and see where I fall on it. So that's what I did.

Hard Games Should have easy modes. 

The biggest draw of gaming and the gaming medium is it's propensity to entertain, and the biggest barrier in the way of that is accessibility. Whether we take that in terms of hardware accessibility, from scarcity or expense, software accessibility, from lack of preservation, or just natural accessibility. These are the  chasms that we have to bridge over on our journey to bring entertainment to as many as possible. Sometimes this means making special provisions for the colour-blind, the visually impaired, the audibly impaired and so on and so forth. In the instance of the matter at hand; that means adapting the game to be playable by everyone of any level of skill, so that potential fans aren't turned off from a game they might love due to lacking the natural reflexes of another fan. Difficulty modes and adaptive gameplay make for experiences that all can enjoy and aren't exactly exclusive features to only casual games. Take Resident Evil 4 for instance, a decently tough and intense game at it's highlights, that's a game wherein resources will become more plentiful the more you struggle with the journey, letting people experience more of the content. Or how about X-Com Enemy Unknown, one of the most challenging tactical campaigns in gaming, they have difficulty modes all the way to the point where you can make several mistakes and still make a good shot of winning.

In particular this conversation relates to Dark Souls and the way in which it's reputation as a difficult game drives some more casual players away from it in the knowledge that there is no path catered for them. If they don't have the time commitment or don't want to take on that stress, they'll be barred from enjoying a franchise that many others consider to be one of the best ever made. By asking for an easy mode, it's not as though people are asking to be let off easy, they just want to feel as though they're still having fun when playing games and living the fantasy they come to the gaming world for. Why can't there be an easier mode wherein enemies don't hit as hard as they would, or the player naturally has more health, or the number of in-game enemies is reduced, or some combination of the three? What could possibly be the harm in letting more people play your game?

In my personal experience, I've never been especially great at tactical games, particularly those that require you to take control of an entire army such as 'Empire at War' and 'Divinity Dragon Commander'. I just don't have it in me to remember every single unit weakness and pair off team to team across a huge battlefield, so I end up resorting to overwhelming force like a coward. That being said, it's the grace of games like those, in offering easier difficulty modes where AI isn't quite as aggressive as in other modes, that I'm allowed to play these games anyway and really understand their unique allure. Without easy difficulty modes, I'd never have enjoyed Stellaris or Civilisation in the way that I have, and isn't it a crime for two incredibly formed series' like that to be cut off from potential fans? I certainly don't feel like I've experienced some lesser version of either of these games and putting the power of making the game as difficult as I'm comfortable with allows me to adapt and improve and, maybe, rise to the challenge of the hardcore levels one day.

Hard Games shouldn't have easy modes

There's several different ways to approach the creation of entertainment and satisfying your consumers, sometimes it's by making them contented and happy but, and this goes especially true for interactive mediums such as gaming, sometimes challenging them is the point. Don't get me wrong, most of the time it's never really a sound strategy to make a game that intentionally frustrates players unless you're actually making a troll game. (Cat Mario-for instance) That doesn't mean, however, that a game can't place itself outside of your comfort level, as long as it then gives you the space and resources to develop and reach that level. Games such as that, and my mind goes to some of the tougher rougelites seeing as how that's what I've had recent experience with, fall back on intrinsic development within the player and meticulously craft themselves in order to make that satisfying. It's by no means a simple proposition, and it would be nigh on insulting to say that difficulty games with an easy mode are the result of lazy developers, but a final game which can put up solid walls and let players, through determination and skill, crack them is always going to feel more rewarding then one which is just a sandbox for destruction and power fantasies. Those titles are fine, but they don't tell an intrinsic journey that ultimately improves the player by the end, not just the avatar they're controlling.

Bringing this around to Dark Souls, there we have a game which almost perfectly encapsulates this whole philosophy with gusto. At it's core the famous gameplay of Dark Souls shoots at being unforgiving, but blameless. Through tight controls, comprehensive inertia, telegraphing enemies and just consistent rules of play across the board, never once does it intentionally put you in a position where failure is it's fault, it's always your own. Is this stressful? At times. Can this be frustrating? If you let it. But in it lies a challenge, that if you give yourself the chance to preserve, learn and improve the game will give you your hard earned victory. Pulling away the consequences for losing, making mistakes less punishing or making the struggles less full, softens that eventual victory. Where's the relief in victory without the challenge to get there. And, I know it's kind of low blow, but struggle is sort of the entire point of the Dark Souls game as a work of art. It's not a power fantasy of blowing through this dark medieval world, but a journey from the bottom of the foodchain as a wastrel to the point of becoming a Lord. Thus an 'easy mode' would sort of betray the nature of the very game you're playing. 

When I've come to tough games I recognise the feeling of being frustrated, but what differentiates that from games with sliding difficulty scales is that those sorts of challenge games are typically built specifically for the climate of challenge that's presented. Cuphead is created so that a single slip up has the potential to throw you back most of a level, and making compromises along the chain threatens to scar the integrity of the whole gameplay experience. Does this make it so that these games aren't for everyone, yes it does; but there's nothing wrong with that. If I want to play a more casual game because that's just the mood I'm in then I have that option, there's no need to force myself to play something I don't want to. Does that limit the growth of these sorts of games somewhat? Perhaps, but it also, inexplicably, builds upon their allure, because everyone loves the bragging rights of saying that they took on and beat a game considered to be one of the toughest.

At the end of the day all anyone's wants to do is to spread their love of games to new experiences and try out the new hotness that everyone else says is great, but it can feel demeaning when you're just not in the demographic for that sort of game. Although, one could go so far as to say that's just the natural breakdown of consumers; some products are better suited to some types of people over others, there's nothing you can really do to please everyone and trying to often results in some of the most confused games of all time. (Resident Evil 6, for example) Maybe equating this situation to spreading oneself too thin seems odd to you, but I've always held the belief that when designing art it's of foremost import to be true to the work and catering for the audience should never override that. Does that mean some games are supposed to be prohibitively tough and there's nothing that should be done about it? Maybe, but that doesn't exactly sound right either. It's an argument of tug and pull that perhaps lacks a 'please everyone' option, but how do you fall on the conversation? Let me know in feedback.