The game's not made for everyone

 Made for someone

Given that the development of video games are such a huge and expensive production, it's both beneficial to the growth of a genre and the potential profitability of each product that every game be designed to be 'made for everybody'. It's a wonderful sentiment, encouraging interconnectivity and propagation of one's loves towards the masses, as well as the corporate desire to permeate absolutely everywhere but in the effort of positivity I'm going to choose to ignore that angle to all this. Games are meant to be celebrated and shared which it's why it's great for them to become as inclusive as possible with all of the accessibility options which are slowly becoming more commonplace. (Very slowly, mind, but some progress is better than none.) Because entertainment should be laid out as everyone's feet for them to enjoy and all that smiles and happiness talk which we all love so very much. Now here's the counter.

Not every game is made for everyone. Obviously. Or the concept of genres wouldn't exist. But even more specifically than that, sometimes games aren't made for new comers and genre experts to enjoy in equal measure, largely because such a balance always comes with drawbacks. You can't make such a game too in-depth and systems heavy for fear of alienating new comers (Trust me, I've been trying, and failing, to force myself into learning Homeworld for more than a year at this point) and you can't make it too basic and bare bones for risk of being boring to genre fans. The in-the-middle balance is typically recognised as the ideal game balance; but not every game is suited to fit that. Sometimes you'll have games that strive off in the direction of alienation driven to explore one extreme or the other, and I wanted to consider a collection of games that I believe, in some sense, were designed specifically not to foster genre new comers. (Or at least; games that significantly leaned towards the learned and experienced.)

Pathfinder: Kingmaker was perhaps one of the biggest wake-up slaps in the face I had leaning towards this realisation. Because any CRPG fan can enjoy the plethora of great genre titles out there in this impromptu resurgence of this unique game style, but not everyone can role up to Pathfinder: Kingmaker with that same carefree attitude. Just as how Baldur's Gate 2 is fundamentally designed not to be played out of order with 1, even if you ignore the story, the gameplay is set-up to be literally next step in terms of difficulty; Pathfinder wants you to know exactly how to play this style of game from the get-go. You are encouraged to build effectively, to the point where the game itself will actually take over the levelling unless you know exactly what sort of character you want to be at endgame. No, this isn't the blind autolevelling system you can expect out of Mass Effect or those sorts of RPGs; Pathfinder picks your life path for you.

And it is for good reason. Pathfinder: Kingmaker adapts a module designed to see players through an entire campaign, and wants you to bitterly earn every scrap of progress you make in fire and blood. Even from the early game you're facing the sorts of bosses that will drain every last spare item you have to take them down, and end game mega-bosses who will simply eat you up and spit you out. At normal difficulty levels (I always play in levels that most accurately match the scaling of the table-tops) Kingmaker is easily one of the most difficult CRPGs on the market right now, but by that same merit also one of the most exhilarating. In the same way that Dark Souls (Yes, forgive the reference, it's pertinent.) forces players to climb a mountain so they feel the weight of their trials on the otherside; Kingmaker drags you through hell so that you earn your kingdom and every moment of peace. That sort of challenge just isn't possible to present in a game designed to coddle newcomers and can only really be presented from a title that expects you to be familiar and will punish you raw anyway.

Another game I want to highlight is 'Stellaris', although to be fair to this assessment could broaden out to most every single 4x game on the market. Most of them. Because 4X as a genre has gotten to the point where those who love it recognise it, and those you don't can't really be persuaded into it. Some games like Stellaris, therefore, tend to lean towards the more intensive crowd with systems and interfaces piled ontop of one another and only really offers a perfunctory sort of tutorial to explain it all. It's hard when looking at these sorts of game to differentiate between titles that genuinely don't try to bridge the gap beteeen newbies and experienced genre lovers, and games that just have a really vapid and weak tutorial (like I would say Kenshi does. And yes, I think Kenshi just about counts as a 4X/RTS/ survival hybrid game) but I think Stellaris and similar games can recognise the divide and choose to go the other way.

Which does not mean that every game of this genre does, however; and though they are the rare exception I do recall some 4X strategy titles that are built specifically to cater for new crowds. I think Civilisation as a series has always kept itself accessible enough for just about anyone to find it's charms if they want to, and Humankind is said to be welcoming. I consider this to be the ideal balance; great games to introduce people to the genre, just as good games for them to enjoy once they're inducted into the fold. The best of both worlds. Although I'm sure there's got to be some game I don't know about from this genre which pushes even that to it's pure elitist extremes. (No, I'm not claiming that game to be Homeworld; I wish I could withstand it long enough to be able to make that determination.)

Which brings me to the general state of platformers and how they currently are; because pretty much no platformer made today is taking into account a newcomer to the genre. One might argue that there is no feasible reason for them to, given that Platformers are so intrinsically tied to gaming that they are somewhat second nature to any gamer, but that is a wad of hand-wavey logic when you break it down. Modern platformers can actually be pretty challenging to people who aren't intuned with that style of play which can result in them being a little hard to penetrate. Hollow Knight, for example, requires tough reaction times, pinpoint dodges and complex movements. (Although HK is kind enough to introduce these elements carefully as the game progresses.) I think that it's actually difficult to make a newcomer's platformer without it feeling hopelessly outdated or simplistic; which is why we just let Platformers carry on their evolution to become more specialised and tough.

So not every game is made for everybody, and is that a good thing? I'd argue; yes. Some of my favourite games out there are the one's designed to batter you down and destroy every once of confidence you believed you had, so that you can slowly build it back up in a pantheon of challenge and strife. To me that is a fun time. And does that make me a weirdo? Yes, to a good number of people out there who like totally different experiences. Just as we all hold different thresholds for entertainment, does it make sense for there to be differently catering entertainment products. Some made for the consumption of everybody, and some made for the consumption of the genre lovers. That's how you nail into a niche, afterall.