[ SECRET POST #4516 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #4516 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.



__________________________________________________



02.
[The Secret Etiquette Of Lady Takashima]


__________________________________________________



03.
[Avatar: The Last Airbender]


__________________________________________________



04.
[Harry Potter]


__________________________________________________



05.
[Sekiro: Shadows Die Twice]


__________________________________________________



06.
[Stephen Fry as Inspector Thompson in Gosford Park]


__________________________________________________



07.
[Dragon Age/Dragon Age: Origins/DA4]


__________________________________________________



08.
[Queer Eye, S03 E01 "From Hunter to Huntee"]


__________________________________________________



09.
[A View to a Kill]











Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 03 pages, 58 secrets from Secret Submission Post #647.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 1 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

[(Anonymous)]

It is universally acknowledged that getting to the end of a souls game is an achievement. that is the value a game like souls has. There's no way to get around it. if you got to the end you have accomplished something and everyone knows it. An easy mode inevitably lessens that.


But the actual value of the accomplishment wouldn't be changed at all by adding an easy mode. So, in other words, the real problem that you're pointing towards is that it would be less impressive to other people.

[thewakokid]

Yeah, for the most part that is probably the main thing. It's a competitive thing.

Like beating your own previous best time in a run by 20 seconds should feel like more of an achievement than beating someone elses best time by 3 seconds, but we all know that's not the case.

It feels better to be able to say "I did this" to someone else and have them acknowledge it than it ever does to simply /know/ you did this. So I'd agree that's probably a big thing in it.

But there is another thing to it. Maybe a lesser thing, but... well when I heard how hard Darksouls was I decided then and there I was not going to play it. I don't like being frustrated, and the game sounded like torture. so I a avoided it.

Then recently I decided "Hell, there is a quadriplegic who just beat sekiro. Maybe I should toughen up and see what I can do" so I played Darksouls. And I LOVED it. I was frustrating, no doubt but I got something out of it. I felt like a true and utter badass. I don't like excessive challenge so I avoided it but when I was ready to push myself I found I was capable of more than I had thought.

If the game had released all those years ago with an easy mode, I'd have played it with an easy mode, I know I would have. And I wouldn't care about it in the least. It would be just another game in my completed list. It would have meant nothing to me.

So while I agree a big part of it is the prestige of being recognised for playing these games at a certain level, there is also a certain innate reward in not being given the opportunity to cheapen the experience, if that makes any sense?

[(Anonymous)]

I just fundamentally don't think those are good justifications for why it would be actively wrong to add an easy mode.

And it's definitely not really an explanation for the vitriol and criticism directed at people who do want that feature, or for people who use cheat codes to complete the game.

[(Anonymous)]

There only needs to be one justification.

1. The devs don't want to, in order to maintain the integrity of what their brand and intellectual property stands for, difficult and unforgiving gaming.

I think, after they've made that clear, continuously angrily demanding that they go against their own creative vision is actively wrong. All else is irrelevant.

[thewakokid]

That is also fair.

I remember the one of the bayonetta or DMC guys saying "I don't see a problem with adding an easy mode to my game" like it meant anything.

I'm like, "Sure, good for you, and I do enjoy your games, but we're not talking about your games right now."

[(Anonymous)]

Yeah, if the devs went "we're adding easy and Super Easy Store Lore modes to all our games now" I'd just shrug and be ok with it.

Their whole capital-T Thing is the unforgiving stuff though. At this point I respect them sticking to their guns about it, even if I don't care for their games.

[(Anonymous)]

1. The devs don't want to, in order to maintain the integrity of what their brand and intellectual property stands for, difficult and unforgiving gaming.


That's a valid reason for not doing it but it doesn't make the people who want it wrong, either.

I think, after they've made that clear, continuously angrily demanding that they go against their own creative vision is actively wrong.

I disagree in the strongest possible terms.

[(Anonymous)]

Then that's where we'll have to be stuck.

For the record, the key word there to me is "demanding." If it were simply "wanting" it to change, no issue here. To me it's the difference between wishing there were more of your kink in fandom and demanding people who don't want to write it, to write it for you. Or berating them for not doing it after they've signaled disinterest. One's fine, the other is not.

Don't like, don't read. Don't like, don't buy.

[(Anonymous)]

I agree that people shouldn't be rude or hostile about it, of course.

But I think the difference between "demanding it" and "wanting it to exist and not wanting to play the game unless it exists and saying so" is pretty miniscule.

[(Anonymous)]

Really? I think the difference is vast.

Me stating that I refuse to read fics that have my NOTP in it, lemme know when that changes and meanwhile I'll move on with my life, is way different from me going to the author and being like, "you're -ist unless you write my ship. So do it already, assholes."

That is... simply not miniscule to me.

[thewakokid]

No, it's not actively wrong to want it.

It's actively wrong to DEMAND it. And to pretend like making that demand is you being the morally right person who is only trying to stand up for the poor little handicaps. That's what I'm seeing most people fight against.

And the Vitriol about using a cheat to beat it... was mostly aimed at a journo who wrote an article saying "I used cheats, it's no big deal" but then ALSO wrote an acticle "These are some tips to beat the game!"

You can cheat the game or you can get paid to pretend to be an authority on how to play the game properly. Doing both is shitty.

[(Anonymous)]

It's actively wrong to DEMAND it. And to pretend like making that demand is you being the morally right person who is only trying to stand up for the poor little handicaps. That's what I'm seeing most people fight against.

so basically, what's wrong is that people talk about it in a way that's annoying to you?

You can cheat the game or you can get paid to pretend to be an authority on how to play the game properly. Doing both is shitty.

How do you determine what the "proper" way to play a game is? Where does this idea come from that there's a proper way to play the game? Even if you disagree with this person about how they play the game, how does that justify vitriol towards them? What's shitty about that? How does any of this make sense?

[(Anonymous)]

I get this. I'm more confused by people who seem to not get this.

It's the same reason you (in theory) don't allow doping and steroids in competitive sports. Because that cheapens it for everyone involved. Of course the roided guys are going to beat the other guys or have it much much easier. So then the title means far less than it did.

"B-But the only way I can do this activity is if you allow all that stuff." Then maybe find another sport? Start performance drug league? Make your own games that allow whatever, and stop demanding the championships that existed, cheapen the meaning of their titles? Or content yourself with watching other people play?

Not all of us get to be super Olympians and that's OKAY. That's WHY being an Olympian - meaning qualifying at all to compete - is such a huge deal. BECAUSE not everyone can be one. If they just let anybody ever compete and call themselves technically an Olympian that means nothing then.

[(Anonymous)]

my dude this is a videogame

playing a story mode game by yourself on easy inherently does not affect anyone else at all. thats the entire point of solo story mode games.

it's not comparable

jesus you just compared playing a souls game to training to be an olympic

and that's coming from someone who really likes souls games

[(Anonymous)]

That's why it was a metaphor and not me going "it's totally exactly like this bro!!!!!z"

It's the principle of the thing. The integrity of the brand. The point that what gives titles and achievements meaning is literally that not everybody can get them.

You missed that whole point, I guess.

[(Anonymous)]

there is nothing prestigious about beating a soulsborne game nor does it have integrity. I have the reflexes of a dead cat and I’m about to complete bloodborne because i spammed spin2win and dumped so many point in VIT I just tank hits till the thing I’m wailing on dies or I do first. That’s hardly the pinnacle of achievement.

[(Anonymous)]

Yeah, and there are ways to cheese other titles and achievements too. That doesn't mean there should be an official easy mode that is marked out and officially supported by the original system.

And I'm someone that doesn't even like those games, because I have no interest in grinding away at them. But even I can understand what the devs were going for. All the clamoring to make them do the opposite of what they're trying to do is extremely entitled.

They just don't wanna write your ship, man. Leave it be and find another author who will. Everyone will be happier for it, I promise.

[thewakokid]

You still had to work for it. You still overcame your weaknesses (Reflexes) just as I overcame mine (Full blown dispraxia) You still had the same bosses, doing the same damage with the same attacks, you did it your way, I did it mine, but we fought the same enemies who were doing the same thing.

[(Anonymous)]

it's inherently a bad metaphor, sorry.

the reason you're not allowed to dope or do steroids in competetive games so it doesn't give you a unfair advantage over other players. If your just playing by yourself, no one cares (other then like health reasons)

your comparing the prestige of playing a hard single player game versus someone else playing the same game but in a different but ultimately in a way that doesn't effect you.

it's like getting made someone is using the elevator when your using the stairs. even if they're like in a wheelchair. they're still reducing the prestige of the stairs, brah

[(Anonymous)]

Huh? It's not getting mad someone is taking the elevator when I'm using the stairs. How is that any better of a metaphor?

We're discussing people demanding easy modes be put into games where the creators of the games don't want them, not people getting mad that people play easy mode in other games. The Olympics thing was a better example of this, in that the IOC showrunners are the ones who get to decide what to allow into the games they control the structure of. The analogy was not about competition, it was about people who want to change systems that the current creators and participants find meaning in.

If someone wants to put on rocket boots and brag they beat Usain Bolt's time in the 100 meter, they can do that. But that won't be officially recognized or sanctioned by the IOC because that's pretty obviously cheating. Likewise, you can cheat in games easily. Or cheese them in obviously unintended ways. You go for that on your own and it doesn't ruin anyone else's experience. But demanding that the devs in this case acknowledge you or create an official rocket boots league is super entitled.

[thewakokid]

If the game is played for the challenge and the prestige of beating a difficult game, and the game is then made that you an play it without the difficulty, they yes that does affect the experience.

Now if you're talking about how you using cheat codes doesn't affect my experience, then that's fair. I wonder what YOU feel you got out of the game but that's your problem.

But you demand that the game be made in such a way that people changes the options available to the difficulty, that DOES affect my experience of the game.

Again, see above, about how "I beat dark souls" is a fundamentally different experience to "I beat DMC"

[(Anonymous)]

No it doesn’t. “I beat Devil May Cry” might be considered more impressive than beating soulsborne because we don’t know what difficulty they cleared it on. Bloodborne/Dark Souls has one difficulty setting and one setting only. That means anyone who beat it experienced the same game with the same settings. that means the most skillful player beat it at the same player who decided to grind and abuse exploits that’s available in the whole game. Some body who beat Devil May Cry on Dante Must Die is skilled. Someone who beat soulsborne by choosing to farm for EXP is not.

[thewakokid]

"because we don’t know what difficulty they cleared it on"

That is exactly my point. We don't know what a person who beat DMC overcame. we DO know what a person who beat DS overcame. How they did it is sort of irrelevant. You know how much grinding you'd need to do you beat Ornstein and Smough without breaking a sweat?

I don't because I didn't have the patience for that. I don't care if you used patience and cunning tactics or raw skill and speed, you still beat O and S, that is something to be proud of.

[(Anonymous)]

This is a bafflingly bad analogy.

You realize that, like, the Olympics and professional sports leagues are not the only venues in which people play organized sports? Not everyone who plays basketball, or goes running, or whatever, is trying to be an Olympian or a professional basketball player. There's generally a huge number of different levels of competitive and non-competitive ways that people play sports, and there are often huge rule differences across those different levels, because not everyone needs to, is interested in, or can compete in the same way that professionals or Olympians can. A casual baseball league might have very different rules than Major League Baseball, and that's OK, because they're not at all doing the same thing. Someone who's playing in a casual baseball league isn't doing something wrong, or somehow weakening The Spirit Of The Game, by doing so. Sports leagues actively do what you're saying that they don't do, and it's a good thing, too. If the creators of Sekiro or Bloodborne don't want to add an easy mode, that's obviously their right, but it doesn't make the idea morally wrong somehow.

Also, adding an easy mode wouldn't lessen the accomplishment of actually beating the game on the harder mode at all. It would still be just as difficult an accomplishment. So I don't get all that part of it, either.

[(Anonymous)]

I get this viewpoint and I don’t. People act like there is a certain level of skill in soulsborne games and there is to an extent. But there also isn’t. There are numerous ways to make the game easier without the standard “git gud response” due to having RPG mechanics. You can grind out to have max stats and that’ll basically carry you the whole game. Sure it would take forever and infinity and obscene amount of patience but I wouldn’t cal the person who does that skillful. It’s the downfall of all games with RPG mechanics. Not good enough the regular way? That’s okay. Just grind forever and eventually you’ll beat it.

Sekiro got rid of the RPG mechanics which is where I think a lot of the complaints came in. People who weren’t good at soulsborne games to begin with lost their cushy safety net of stats and equipment and weapons to carry them through the game.