Search the Community

Yeah, it's not gonna break my heart if they don't make an easier version of e.g. Cuphead (which I love the look of but from the sound of it it'd be a pointless purchase for me )... not everything's for everyone, there are plenty of other games out there to try after all. But if it's a big-budget game then it seems in the developer's best interests as well as the consumer's to have a couple of different difficulty settings. More potential customers for the developer, and if someone wants a hard game they don't have to play the easier settings if they don't want to (as web says, there are almost always going to be plenty of ways of making an easier playthrough without changing the game as a whole).

I'm not a capital-G Gamer. I'm also prone to stress and (like most of us I guess) have limited time to play, so although a challenge is often part of playing a game, I have 0 desire to pay £50+ to play something that I have literally 0 chance of finishing and that will be actively not-fun and just function as a reminder that I'm not good at video games. If there was a game that looked like it was totally my aesthetic but looked a bit too difficult, if I knew there was a softy babey mode then it'd definitely increase the chances of me buying and enjoying it. Any threat from monsters etc would just be relative to my lower gaming skill/experience. Re: the artistic integrity thing - I can kind of understand the argument, but with e.g. a novel that some people might find intimidating, there are options; I personally wouldn't want an abridged version of a book (ugh), but they exist, or you can flick through and skip/skim bits (hello, Paris sewers chapters of Les Miserables ). Also, an eBook of Anna Karenina is probably 99p as opposed to £59.99. If you buy a game that is simply too difficult, you're down a lot of money for something that it just isn't worth your time to try and finish, which is a surefire way to destroy any artistic appreciation of it.