I'm in act 2 and while Im in love with the game, I can agree. The game could be impossible for people who aren't already very good at platformers. Benches are very sparse and money is always an issue. I hope Team Cherry make the game more reasonable through updates.
I have no idea what people were expecting to be honest. Hollow Knight was already known for being an extremely difficult game with punishing anti-fun elements like runbacks and corpse runs. Which game had everyone played that got them so hyped for Silksong?
There’s a reason I stayed away from HK, and I will be staying away from Silksong too. Game looks great but I won’t be able to beat it and I won’t have any fun failing to do so.
I think the big difference is that HK had a smooth difficulty curve as you slowly unlock new abilities. Silksong by comparison picks up where HK left off and is immediately hard which makes it hard to approach for new players. Early game areas feel as hard as late game areas from the first game. That's throwing everybody off who is either new to the franchise or hasn't played Hollow Knight since it came out checks notes 8 years ago
NoneOfUrBusiness@fedia.io
on 08 Sep 11:13
nextcollapse
Early game areas feel as hard as late game areas from the first game.
Are you sure about that? It's been a while since I played Hollow Knight, but other than Hunter's Marsh I think Sillksong has been comparable to or slightly harder than equivalent parts of the Hollow Knight. The enemies are tougher, but you also get more tools to deal with them so it evens out. Mostly thinking of the projectiles here, but the mobility difference also can't be understated; you can abuse dash attacks in Silksong in a way you never could in Hollow Knight. Also I haven't quite (or at all really) gotten the hang of it but the game might've been designed with parrying in mind, which would allow you to avoid a lot of damage because many of the harder enemies are warrior types.
Ya, Hollow Knight's first areas like forgotten crossroads and greenpath were a lot easier. There werent any mechanics you have to worry about other than jumping and attacking, and most enemies you faced just walk slowly towards you. Bosses were also fairly straightforward.
By comparison Silksong has you fighting tougher enemies that could deal 2x damage, and quick bosses right off the bat like Bell Beast which kills you in 3 hits. Healing taking your entire bar also makes platforming more difficult because newbies will often be low HP and not have enough silk to heal.
Yes, Hornet is way faster and stronger than the knight but that kinda assumes you're good at dashing and pogo jumping, which many people fail at in the start.
Ya, Hollow Knight's first areas like forgotten crossroads and greenpath were a lot easier. There werent any mechanics you have to worry about other than jumping and attacking, and most enemies you faced just walk slowly towards you. Bosses were also fairly straightforward.
Compared to what areas in Silksong? Because Moss grotto and Marrow seem to have roughly the same range (and difficulty) of enemies as forgotten crossroads and greenpath. I think you also have somewhat rose tinted glasses regarding the starting areas of Hollow Knight because most enemies weren't walking slowly towards you. I'd say it was more of a 50/50 split between walking enemies and flying enemies with some flying enemies shooting projectiles and flying projectile shooters are much harder than the one projectile spitting regular enemy in the first 2 areas of Silksong.
By comparison Silksong has you fighting tougher enemies that could deal 2x damage, and quick bosses right off the bat like Bell Beast which kills you in 3 hits. Healing taking your entire bar also makes platforming more difficult because newbies will often be low HP and not have enough silk to heal.
I think the comparison here isn't as one to one with Hollow Knight. Silksong is much faster paced. Hornet is more mobile and heals faster (and heals more at once), so bosses killing in 3 hits might not be that much harder because it's easier evade attacks and healing is faster. Bosses killing in 5 hits in Hollow Knight might end up being harder than Silksong because healing is a much slower and deliberate action and you might not get a time to heal with an unfamiliar boss.
From my experience grotto and marrow have been comparable to crossroad and greepath. It gets harder after marrow but Hollow Knight also got harder when you got into fungal wastes. Maybe the pace change makes you feel like it's harder than Hollow knight but so far I haven't felt like it was noticeably harder than my first Hollow knight playthrough.
I mean...it's kinda silly to go into Silksong without playing Hollow Knight yeah? Unless Silksong has something at the beginning that sort of catches you up to speed OR is like a Souls or Final Fantasy where it has nothing to do with the previous game entry.
But If I were a fan of the series I would hope the game ramped up difficulty and didn't hold my hand for the sequel. That, in my opinion, would be a worthy purchase. I had playing sequels that kind of "reset".
It’s the latter of the two. The focus is on a side character from the original game, but takes place in an entirely different map/kingdom. You don’t need to have played Hollow Knight, but there are little lore pieces that tickle the brain if you have (and didn’t just skip over all the dialogue). I’ve been really enjoying the game so far, and there’s only one runback that’s felt REALLY tedious, but it’s on what I’m assuming is an optional boss based on what I’ve played so far.
Gradually_Adjusting@lemmy.world
on 08 Sep 09:09
nextcollapse
Every time a hard game gets made, we have to have this debate? Maybe the real easy mode is just not trying to please everyone.
MyDarkestTimeline01@ani.social
on 08 Sep 09:16
nextcollapse
I have to agree. Although I would have said “the real easy difficulty is realizing that not every game is for you”. And sometimes that includes really popular games, ones that everyone else seems to be enjoying. And that’s ok.
That’s fair, but I also don’t see a problem in voicing criticism about aspects of the game I don’t like. Especially if I do like the game as a whole. People should not see that as an attack on their personal enjoyment of the game.
MyDarkestTimeline01@ani.social
on 08 Sep 10:25
collapse
Sure, and as a consumer of a product, you are within your rights to do so. But I think that a lot of times there’s an underlying thread of entitlement that comes with a lot of the criticisms. The tone suggests more ,“how dare you make something I can’t play” and less “I’m not suited for this challenge”. There’s surprisingly little in the way of complaints about the game design that read as things that fit the theme and game vision. There are a few, but most aren’t.
And full disclosure I’m speaking from the standpoint of someone who while interested in a lot of the “git gud” genre games, can’t cut it 90% of the time. It took me realizing that I just wasn’t who those games were for before I was able to look at some of my options and realize they were just me and my sour grapes.
caseofthematts@lemmy.world
on 08 Sep 09:20
nextcollapse
Yea. I wont dismiss this criticism as hate, but I will dismiss it as dumb. The game was designed to be a challenge. Not everyone is up to that challenge, that’s fine. The game isn’t meant for you, then.
My friend can’t play the Dark Souls games. He’s really interested in the setting and has given a few multiple attempts, but the difficulty curve just isn’t for him, so he just doesn’t play them.
Not everything that makes the game harder or more challenging to play is good game design though, and a game shouldn’t get a free pass just because its developers stated “well the game being hard is part of our artistic vision”. It’s fine to criticise things, even - or actually maybe especially - things we like. We don’t have to be binary about things, we can like something while still recognising its flaws.
Excessive runbacks for example is something that is primarily concerned with disrespecting your time as a player and even FromSoft seem to have realised that they’re not a good addition or a fun way of increasing difficulty seeing as they introduced Stakes of Marika in Elden Ring. Hell, even Ninja Gaiden went away from boss runbacks starting from the second game, and that came out in 2008!
caseofthematts@lemmy.world
on 08 Sep 09:51
collapse
I can’t say I’ve gotten to some of the examples people have mentioned as “annoying; bad design”, so I’ll leave judgement until I get there. But there’s nothing inherently wrong with runbacks if it’s part of the design and the boss is the culmination of that.
Stakes of Marika are definitely there to appeal to a wider audience. I personally don’t care for them, as for most areas in DS I enjoyed trying to claw my way back to the boss unharmed. It was like a puzzle.
It’s fine to criticise things, but I personally think “make checkpoint outside of the boss” the criticism is not a good one. At the end of the day, that’s all personal opinion.
A lot of DS1 runbacks were true runbacks where you could just run past everything. Once you’d worked out the running, they weren’t too irritating, but some were a bit long. In DS3 a number of runbacks had unavoidable enemies on the way where you could mess up and eat a hit and then be down an Estus charge.
The main two problems are:
boredom. Punishing you for failure by forcing you to walk through a section of level again for a couple of minutes isn’t fun for anyone. It’s not “stakes”; it’s boring. Repeatedly dying to the challenging boss is not boring because you are constantly trying to improve, learn its moves, and beat it. Running through the same path is boring. Anything boring is bad game design.
Risk of unrelated mistakes. This is more subjective, but for me there should be some separation between different challenges; there should be a feeling that after you have convincingly solved one challenge, you shouldn’t have prove yourself against it again too much. Doing so is, yes, boring again, but also frustrating. Things that are frustrating (to some) can be good game design, but I don’t want to be frustrated. Whiffing a roll you’ve done successfully many times and being set back on an unrelated challenge is, to me, annoying.
caseofthematts@lemmy.world
on 08 Sep 10:51
collapse
You’re getting voted up for your opinion, and I’m getting down for mine. Strange. Things you say are unfun for you are fine for me, like I said in my post, I do believe it’s personal opinion.
I’m not denying that there has to be design intent in here, but I take great issue with people stating “runbacks are unfun” as a matter of fact. Again, if it’s taken into consideration with time and how the boss mechanic works, that’s simply how the game is designed. I respect everyone’s opinion and their thoughts being the opposite, but I don’t think it’s a universal truth that must be upheld with every game.
Again, maybe I’ll feel differently regarding Silksong specifically as I get further. So far I don’t take umbrage with it’s runback design.
EncryptKeeper@lemmy.world
on 08 Sep 11:09
nextcollapse
I think he’s being upvoted and you’re being downvoted because boss runbacks have been around for a long time and both the industry and community have since come to a consensus that they’re just objectively bad game design. They don’t add anything of value to a game and their existence is a detriment to the experience. I don’t think you’ll find a single person who holds the opinion that they’re fun. People like yourself may tolerate them, but a tolerable inconvenience is not the same thing as fun. You’ve actually gone exceptionally out of your way to avoid calling them fun.
Like with anything, not all personal opinions are going to be held in equal regard. And your take here is going to be an outlier so I wouldn’t be surprised if you continue to get this reception.
caseofthematts@lemmy.world
on 08 Sep 11:31
collapse
I haven’t gone out of my way. While I haven’t used the word “fun”, I did say I enjoyed most runbacks in Dark Souls as a sort of puzzle. Being downvoted for a subjective opinion is absurd, especially when the person I’m responding to also has a subjective opinion. But nice to know my opinion has less value.
Anyway, I don’t really want to go in circles with this since I feel like both sides here have said what they want to say.
I’ll just leave with an example of a mechanic I find unfun and wish would go away, as a sort of olive branch of understanding that opinions are opinions. In Breath of the Wild and similar games, I hate the weapon/item degradation mechanic. I understand their design goals with it, and I understand how removing it from those games would change quite a bit of how they want the game to run, but I’d be much happier if it were to disappear completely.
I haven’t gone out of my way. While I haven’t used the word “fun”, I did say I enjoyed most runbacks in Dark Souls as a sort of puzzle. Being downvoted for a subjective opinion is absurd, especially when the person I’m responding to also has a subjective opinion.
I think we all know that the up/down votes are people agreeing or disagreeing with you. So having more downvotes than upvotes means that more people disagree with you than agree with you.
Also, if you complain about downvotes, that usually deserves a downvote from me.
EncryptKeeper@lemmy.world
on 08 Sep 14:45
nextcollapse
It’s only subjective in that it’s not entirely impossible for at least one person out there to enjoy the mechanic. However at the same time there has been a general consensus made that it’s not a good mechanic. Your opinion may be the equal of any one other persons opinion, but what I think you’re not understanding is that is that it’s not the equal of the many opinions of the majority of people. If you expect your one opinion to hold the same value as the collective opinions of everyone else, you’re setting yourself up for disappointment.
as a sort of olive branch of understanding that opinions are opinions.
That’s not a great example to your point because the weapon degradation mechanic of BOTW is also widely regarded as a bad mechanic. It’s the most disliked mechanic in that game.
caseofthematts@lemmy.world
on 08 Sep 15:42
collapse
I think I approached the discussion wrong and perhaps wasn’t voicing what I was thinking properly. Regardless, I’m clearly not in the majority of opinion, so I’d like to just bow out of this discussion and wish everyone has the fun that they want to have.
caseofthematts@lemmy.world
on 08 Sep 20:30
collapse
I’ve spoken to others about this subject due to this and none of them have reflected the comments here. I don’t even know most of the people I posed the question to. I suppose this forum (and the forums or social media these posters frequent) hold their opinion as more of a fact than I was led to believe.
Regardless, everyone can feel how they want about this. I’ll just play Silksong and have fun on my end of the table.
Well, some opinions are more valid than others, even when there is subjectivity… of course, I would say that.
“Design intent” is not an excuse for unfun mechanics. Design intent matters - for example if you’re complaining that it took you 50 attempts to do a boss and you’re frustrated, but other people are completing the same bosses in fewer attempts and enjoying it, the intent of the designers and the spectrum of opinions is absolutely critical. But this isn’t that.
Someone else in the thread made a great example: would you be so “design intent is all important” if the designers put a 1-minute unskippable cutscene before the boss? To me, and I think to almost everybody, that would be fuckin awful. Everyone hates unskippable cutscenes you have to sit through repeatedly. How does that differ, really, from a typical 1-minute runback?
Gradually_Adjusting@lemmy.world
on 08 Sep 10:18
nextcollapse
It’s undeniable that the challenge is part of the mystique for some games. I note with great respect the fact that Celeste offers accessible difficulty tweaks. I beat that game and it was a great experience.
Both choices can be good, when made with intention and care, and when motivated by specific goals as a creator.
With dark souls, at least the ones I’ve played, the difficulty can be tweaked by engaging with the world, learning the progression system and the character options that suit you. For example I didn’t beat DSI until I tried playing a magic user, because I’m slightly bad at those games. DSIII was easy enough by comparison to beat as a straight up STR build, but that’s beside the point. Difficulty is a design choice, and the conversation around it is tiresome when it ignores the aims of the creators.
Let me start by saying I have a few thousand hours in Hollow Knight and I do for the most part enjoy the Git Gud type of games.
There are entire genres of games that I can’t enjoy because they’re too open/chill and if they had a hard mode I would probably really like them. This is the same problem the other way.
Maybe wait and some modders might make the QoL parts you want available, maybe never play it, maybe watch a streamer do it. But not every game has to be fun for everyone.
Gradually_Adjusting@lemmy.world
on 08 Sep 13:12
collapse
There might also be a generational divide taking shape. People my age grew up with “Nintendo hard” and the industry was all about making games seem longer by making them extremely difficult to beat. Our options were to get better, cheat, or give up.
These days the industry is all about mass appeal, and all the problems that we see with games having massive budgets and having to make sure as many people can like them as possible. Indie games have different incentives, and so when a game comes along that was made with priorities that aren’t in step with what we’re used to, it tends to ruffle feathers.
I know my kid doesn’t have any sense that games should be difficult, or that a challenging game can be satisfying. Even FromSoft games are trending towards less difficulty, despite having the fans who famously chant “git gud”. Bigger studios might know something my generation doesn’t get about younger gamers - maybe games like Silksong are having their swansong, so to speak. I hope not, but it’s hard not to notice once it’s been pointed out.
“Nintendo hard” isn’t about difficulty it is about entire games being based around knowledge checks, like having to remember to pre-swing when you jump particular gaps or get knocked into the gap in og ninja gaiden for instance.
Gradually_Adjusting@lemmy.world
on 09 Sep 05:02
collapse
When you’re a kid with no understanding of game design, no internet, and no subscription to magazines that explain it, all those dirty tricks that we now rightly put to much rubbish did have the power to make you think “I suck at this”. They didn’t have to be clever back then to give us this insane need to be punished by game designers just the right amount so that we can finally just try really hard, get really annoyed, stick with it way too long, and eventually get to say “yes, fuck you, I win!” For a certain kind of kid from that generation, that’s almost a healing fantasy.
The thing is, there is no reason not to add accessibility settings.
Hollow Knight and Silksong are beautiful games with an intriguing world, great characters and lots of areas to explore. There’s no reason to gatekeep games like these from people that just can’t beat them because they are too hard.
Just add a simple accessibility menu where you can scale health, damage and loot drops. It’s almost no work to implement, players can still try the regular difficulty and turn it down when it’s too much and speedrunners can make their lifes more difficult. Everyone wins.
Goretantath@lemmy.world
on 08 Sep 11:34
nextcollapse
The accesibility is called getting a controller that works for your disability, then training to beat it.
Not every disability is magically cured by a controller.
Gradually_Adjusting@lemmy.world
on 08 Sep 12:06
collapse
The thing is, I can’t personally think of an accessibility setting that would serve the intended function without removing the sense of having finally met the challenge. I struggle with difficult games too, and I don’t always complete them. That struggle and uncertainty is part of the journey though to me and if there was a difficulty tweak available as soon as I got frustrated the first time, it would erase those stakes (for me).
I mentioned Celeste as a positive example. I did feel a satisfaction with completing that game, but if not for the highly emotional personal journey of the narrative potion of that game I don’t think it would have been as satisfying. At every point I knew there was an easy way out, and staying frustrated and gradually getting better was a conscious choice without any real stakes attached to it other than my own self-satisfaction. The was never any worry that I’d fail to complete the game. Those stakes do make eventually winning feel real.
So I just can’t think of any suggestions for this. It’s elitist or ableist I realise, and I’m not happy with that. The creator certainly was aware of games like Celeste, and they had plenty of time to consider those options. Before casting any judgment or making suggestions on their behalf, I’d be really interested to hear what they have to say about the choice. Do they think the struggle has to be as firmly set as it is for the triumph to feel as elating? I can’t read their minds, so if there’s an interview where they address that I’d be all ears.
To each their own, I always think of difficulty and challenge as proportional and relative to the individual. You can just as easily turn the question around the other way: how can you feel any satisfaction beating a Souls game using magic and summons and level ups and items when there are people who have beat it at Level 1 hitless and using a dance pad instead of controller? What’s “appropriately challenging” is way too individual for the bluntness of a single difficulty setting.
And coming up with solutions isn’t even that hard. Add some sliders to adjust the length of parry windows and i-frames on dodge rolls and whatnot and you’re probably a good part of the way there. Gameplay intact, people still go through the same motions they just have a chance now even if they don’t have the reflexes or timing for frame-perfect inputs.
Gradually_Adjusting@lemmy.world
on 08 Sep 13:51
collapse
I hate to answer a rhetorical question directly, so please forgive that; my satisfaction would have been much greater, if I was able to achieve those things. I have a realistic sense of what I was able to do given the challenge that I faced and the skill I was able to muster, and although more success would have been sweeter, I am able to be content because I have a shared context with other people who faced the exact same challenge.
I know many have been unhappy with what they are able to accomplish in games with no difficulty settings, and I see it as a choice by the creator to set people apart. It’s a harsh choice that seems most appropriate in grim and harsh stories.
Those who say it is passé argue so very convincingly, but I can’t hide that it appeals to me. It speaks to something primitive, perhaps anhedonic. I was wondering if it’s a generational preference more prevalent among people who grew up during the era of “Nintendo hard”, and if single-difficulty games will fade away in time completely. Maybe this game should have been called Swansong, if so.
NoneOfUrBusiness@fedia.io
on 08 Sep 17:12
collapse
In a game like Hollow Knight (and Silksong), I can't help but feel such a crude setting would end up doing more harm than good. I mean, let's take health for example. Increasing your health wouldn't help much if you can't handle what the game is throwing at you; the few extra masks the game gives you only really help if you can handle the difficulty but need mistake tolerance, otherwise enemies will still hit you and you'll still fail at platforming and fall into spikes. Fundamentally the difficulty of a game like Hollow Knight comes from a lot more than just damage numbers, so a naive difficulty scale would only give an illusion of accessibility that would fade away at the first difficult part, and in that case it's better for everyone involved if the inaccessibility of the game is easily apparent.
the few extra masks the game gives you only really help if you can handle the difficulty but need mistake tolerance
Increasing mistake tolerance already increases accessibility, even if you still have to manage a tough platformer part.
Of course the options given are just examples to get it done quickly. Accessibility options can be a a lot more nuanced, even going as far as altering level structures to provide pathways for players that can’t platform.
The point of my post was that for all I care the difficulty options can go all the way to invincibility, one hitting every boss and skipping every platformer segment. It does not reduce my enjoyment of these games if other people can play the game in a way they want to.
NoneOfUrBusiness@fedia.io
on 08 Sep 21:01
collapse
Accessibility options can be a a lot more nuanced, even going as far as altering level structures to provide pathways for players that can't platform.
Sure, but then we're way past "there's no reason not to add X."
drosophila@lemmy.blahaj.zone
on 08 Sep 18:57
collapse
I’m reminded of when Elden Ring first came out and we had a little panic attack about how much harder it was than other souls games.
Then like a year later it was widely considered to be the easiest Fromsoft game (if you’re just doing the required content).
Gradually_Adjusting@lemmy.world
on 08 Sep 19:21
collapse
Time will tell. These games all have so much talk about how certain builds are “cheese” or how the ashes make the game too easy or whatever - that’s all just dumb. The game itself is the difficulty settings, sometimes.
It seems too early to say how Silksong will be remembered, and Team Cherry still only had two games under its belt so it’s arguably too early to judge them. Will their next game be totally different and a massive risk, or do we have a Vivaldi on our hands, doing masterful variations on a theme?
PonyOfWar@pawb.social
on 08 Sep 09:20
nextcollapse
I like the game, but I definitely think it deserves some criticism. I really don’t get the thinking behind not placing a bench directly in front of every boss arena. The run-backs don’t make the game harder, just more frustrating. It’s also something I disliked in older Souls games, but thankfully they realized the problem and fixed it in Elden Ring. And some mechanics are just baffling, like benches that are locked behind a paywall, which you have to pay every time you want to access the bench. Why on earth would they do this, with currency already being as sparse as it is?
The paid one time bench thing etc is for a narrative reason, the main point of the story as far as I played is about the church scamming people on every occasion. Money won’t be an issue once you reach act 2, I always have more money then I can spend even after buying out all merchants I’ve seen.
As for no benches in front of bosses it’s to discourage throwing yourself at the boss without reflecting on where to improve. The long runs I saw people complain about also were mostly like 2 screens. Worst bossrun so far was probably the judge which was only like 2 screens when you think about it.
I really enjoy the game so far, I’m about half way through act 2 I’d say so maybe it gets super hard later, but right now I think it’s very balanced between a bit challenging but not frustrating. I do feel that the game was created with players like me in mind, someone who did all pantheon, steal soul mode as well as all achievements in hk but is a little bit rusty from the long wait.
Poopfeast420@lemmy.zip
on 08 Sep 09:47
nextcollapse
Worst bossrun so far was probably the judge which was only like 2 screens when you think about it.
I think you can theoretically get the fleas to move in right before the boss room, but I don’t know how many of them you need to find for that to happen. Maybe killing the boss is also a trigger, so in that case this won’t work.
I do feel that the game was created with players like me in mind, someone who did all pantheon, steal soul mode as well as all achievements in hk but is a little bit rusty from the long wait.
I feared they might do something like this, but don’t think they did. I finished Hollow Knight twice, last time was almost six years ago, never did any Pantheon or challenge stuff, same with other Metroidvanias. The game is difficult, but don’t think it’s unreasonable (I’m also in Act 2, maybe the beginning).
Oh wow I didn’t know the fleas moved there. Mine are still in greymore, maybe I should talk to them again sometime. I did get an achievement that I have half the fleas so I’m still missing a lot.
Ye I also don’t think it’s unreasonable, like I said I’m super rusty from not playing hk for quite a while. I do feel like a lot of people just forgot how hk played. I’m having a blast with the game so far, it’s lovely.
pivot_root@lemmy.world
on 08 Sep 14:18
nextcollapse
Worst bossrun so far was probably the judge which was only like 2 screens when you think about it.
I found that run back to be infuriating at first, but it quickly stopped mattering once I realized that you don’t need to kill everything on the path over and are for the most part better off just running past the enemies.
As for no benches in front of bosses it’s to discourage throwing yourself at the boss without reflecting on where to improve.
I like self reflection, especially when I died 10th time from the same boss… Self reflection like why I am torturing myself with this shit?
Poopfeast420@lemmy.zip
on 08 Sep 09:43
nextcollapse
like benches that are locked behind a paywall, which you have to pay every time you want to access the bench
I found this in one small area, which was probably done for the flavor, since it makes thematic sense there, but otherwise it’s always been permanent unlocks.
:::spoiler spoiler
First is in a house, that you need to pay to enter, with a bench and vendor inside.
The ones I originally meant are below the Citadel, there are a few rooms, with two or three benches each, but you have to pay 15 every time to use the bench for a short time.
:::
Dunno which one of those you mean, that can be made permanently free, or if there’s even others I forgot or haven’t found myself.
I have been running around the citadel, and with more fast travel options there I’ve gotten in the habit of constantly going back to belhart and making rosary necklaces. Sekiro had a similar mechanic with gold pouches. Also in this stage of game I’m finding a lot of silkeaters, so if I take a wrong turn at alburquerque and don’t want to get locked into a fight or weird platforming area I can just recover my beads. It gets better kids. Keep playing.
I think we don’t have enough language to talk about difficulty in a productive way.
You could keep all the boss mechanics the same in a game but add a 1 minute unstoppable cut scene at the start and the game is “more difficult” because it takes you longer to learn boss patterns and experiment with different strategies. But that feels very different to narrowing the windows to react or expanding the move set of a boss which feels different again to changing the values so you need to grind more/fewer levels or resources to pass it.
“Runback too long” and “git gud” sound a lot like people talking past eachother, but maybe thats just an artifact of the journalist reporting rather than the discussion itself
I think we have the language and you just proved it, but often people are just not reading or thinking enough about other perspectives before talking, and so do talk past each other like this.
I like your comparison to an unskippable cutscene; these are, I think, universally reviled at the start of boss fights. For some reason I don’t think long runbacks are reviled in nearly the same way, yet repeatedly running through the same area with no challenges (jumping off the staircase for the shortcut to Ornstein & Smough in DS1 does not count ffs!) is not really any less boring.
The ideal runback to me has a few enemies that you can soon work out how to run around. You actually get a feeling of having accomplished something, but don’t have to get perfect at defeating those enemies, nor waste time doing so (running will always be faster than fighting, pretty much).
I think “git gud” is just a knee-jerk meme though - there is no reason to believe that someone saying it has engaged in the slightest with what has been said to that point; they’re just trolling.
acosmichippo@lemmy.world
on 08 Sep 13:56
nextcollapse
they are related and compound each other. it’s harder to “git gud” if you have to do a bunch of runbacks too.
yea, that’s entirely valid. I love these games (Metroidvanias) because of the exploration and worldbuilding. The combat is a way to advance further into that world, but it’s just a means to an end to me. Make it too tough, and you’re preventing me from enjoying the parts I like.
I played a good 4 or 5 hours of Silksong so far and loving it. It’s a little tough though, and I think it could use a nerf.
Poopfeast420@lemmy.zip
on 08 Sep 09:39
nextcollapse
I think the game is difficult, probably a bit more difficult than the first game (which I haven’t played in over 5 years, so I might be wildly off), but I don’t find it unreasonable.
I know a lot of the time it’s my fault that I died, because I’m someone who likes to trade damage with enemies, which just isn’t really possible in this game, but I can’t stop doing it.
As for runbacks, I think there are a few weird ones, that can be terrible, depending on if you found/unlocked the nearest bench, but otherwise I don’t remember anything truly awful.
spoiler
For example the Chapel of the Beast in Hunter’s March I think, if you didn’t unlock the trapped bench, that’s pretty close (even then it’s still kinda long, although you’re basically just running).
The fight against the gatekeeper, at the entrance of the Citadel, can have a long runback from the worm area. But the fleas, along with a bench, also move directly in front of the boss room, theoretically you might be able to do that before you fight the boss.
cerebralhawks@lemmy.dbzer0.com
on 08 Sep 09:49
nextcollapse
I don’t mind difficult games. I recognise that they exist as a kind of pushback against mobile games and casual games that have risen in popularity. I don’t mind that they exist. Likewise, I strongly believe that gaming is for everybody, but not every game has to be for everybody.
I think it’s perfectly fine, though, to ask the question: if the game — any hard game, to include the Dark Souls game and its spinoffs (e.g. Elden Ring) and knockoffs (e.g. Breath of the Wild) — had an easy mode, where virtually anyone could win it eventually, would that truly make the game less fun for people who like hard games? What if the game were hard by default, and easy mode cost $5 extra? That way, you would never be presented with the option, but those who want it can get it for a slight upcharge. (Maybe less on a $20 game, I’m thinking the $5 would be for a $70 game.) Case in point: Final Fantasy XV was never hard. But for 49¢, you could buy a “DLC”/“mod” that made gas cost half — 5 gil instead of 10 for any fill-up — and also made hotels (which give a big XP buff) half price. So one early-game strategy was equipping a ring that would not pay out experience when you camp, and saving your XP (which is normally paid out every time you sleep) until you could afford a room at the XP-doubling Galden Quay resort hotel, gaining you several levels by then. With the DLC/mod, you could afford it much sooner, and you could actually do it a few times, setting you up for later parts of the game. It wasn’t an easy mode, but it did soften the grind a bit, and it wasn’t presented as an option in the game. You kinda had to know about it and go look for it.
I actually think there’s something to that. Making a game and selling parts of it never really goes down well with players. But most players can’t beat hard games. So what if instead of new games being $70 or $80, they were $50 or $60 still, but people who want help can buy things that will make the game easier. Let those players subsidize the ones who are good enough to beat it without them, incentivising them to get better. Ideally, to get better at that game so they uninstall the helpers, beat it without them, then when the next one comes out, they’re ready.
I don’t hate hard games. But I’m not going to pay for them. If they make their money off people who have that much time on their hands, that’s fine. It’s a sound business decision. But I also think a game can’t say “we wish we made more money” while intentionally excluding players who maybe have full-time jobs, families, or other valid reasons to not learn the perfect button combinations and ultra-precise timing some of these games require. I think if they could find a way to include those players while not putting off their base, they’d have a winning solution on their hands. And no, we’re not gonna quit our jobs or neglect our families to “git gud” like we live with our parents and are half our age.
slimerancher@lemmy.world
on 08 Sep 10:28
nextcollapse
I agree with most of it, except I think it’s fine for developers to make a hard (or very hard game) if that’s their vision. Not every games is for everyone. And if developers are fine with targeting just a niche, there is no issue with it.
That being said, I do have issue with players / gamers saying there should be no easy mode. Adding an easy mode doesn’t take away anything for anyone who isn’t playing easy mode. All it takes away is their ability to brag that they finished a game half the people can’t finish. There are ways for developers to handle even that. Give some special achievement or something for those who finish on non-easy mode, but that’s again up to developers, and I am fine if there isn’t one.
cerebralhawks@lemmy.dbzer0.com
on 09 Sep 10:46
collapse
Rockband was a good example of achievement-gating the higher difficulties. You got an achievement for beating the game on Medium, Hard, or Expert. And doing it on one of the two higher ones would unlock the ones below if you didn’t already do it on those difficulties. So if you were good enough to beat it on Expert, you got three or four achievements. Now I know you’re probably thinking “wait how do you beat Rockband”? By completing the Endless Setlist, which is unlocked when you beat the story mode. The story mode just unlocked the higher tiers of difficulty. The Endless Setlist was all the songs. Six hours and 20 minutes minimum. Oh, and when I said “three or four achievements”? The fourth one is if you do it without pausing or failing (at any difficulty Medium or higher). That one was called the “Bladder of Steel Award.” Yes, I own it. You food prep in advance, you do it on vocals, and you time your bathroom breaks very carefully (and drop a deuce in advance as well). But those three achievements for beating it at difficulty? Those are per instrument. I only have the gold (expert) vocals award. I may have the bronze (medium) bass award, but I never got any for guitar or drums.
That’s just one example of difficulty and incentives. I like how Deus Ex 1 did it, too. On Easy, you did more damage and took less. On Hard, you did less and took more. On Medium, it was balanced. On Realistic… everyone takes more. That was how I played. I wasn’t getting hit. I played a sniper. Even on Easy it was hard to one-shot enemies with a good gun and a headshot. For some reason that didn’t kill them. On Realistic, a shot to center mass with my .30-06 will drop any human enemy. A shot to the head will drop the augmented ones. So that’s how I play… played. It’s not on Xbox and it’s not on the Mac. My Mac can run it through Whisky, but I haven’t played much more than parts of the first level, so I’m not sure what the compatibility looks like later.
Wow, that’s some dedication. Salute to you for actually getting those achievements.
That’s an interesting way to play Deux Ex, never tried the sniper walkthrough, will give a try if I went back to it.
cerebralhawks@lemmy.dbzer0.com
on 09 Sep 20:50
collapse
Well, you know the 30.06 ammo is kinda hard to come by, so I didn’t use it all the time. I’d avoid combat on Liberty Island and just hoard ammo. I modded a mod for it and made a few changes — like after UNATCO “cuts through” the NSF “like a hot knife through butter,” with my mod, they don’t loot the bodies. So I do. Bit of a reward for getting through without being detected. So then I trade the pistol for the silenced version. The mod that I modded, Shifter, makes unique versions of each guns with a stat or two buffed. I could tell you where the pistol is (Lebedev’s bed on the plane) but I forget where the silenced pistol was. May have been in the canals in Hong Kong — so, not worth waiting for. I mean as opposed to slapping the weapon mods on the regular one. So for most guys I’d shoot with the silenced 10mm. Sniper’s really only good at range. But, that one mission, where they drop you on top of the 'ton (the hotel in NYC, supposed to be Hilton, but… copyrights) I take everybody out with the sniper rifle (it’s like 8 guys tops) before dropping down to street level. I can’t remember if it’s when you go to Dowd to get the plans to scuttle the freighter, or when you go back to NYC to send the singal from NSF HQ. Been way too long since I played, but really only a year or two. I wish they’d put it on Xbox.
I don't mind difficult games. I recognise that they exist as a kind of pushback against mobile games and casual games that have risen in popularity
You got that backwards: difficult games are as old as arcades. If anything, casual games exist as pushback against difficult games, not the other way around.
Yes indeed, when arcade games were the norm devs specifically designed for absurd difficulty ramp ups and cheap deaths to finagle another quarter out of you.
cerebralhawks@lemmy.dbzer0.com
on 09 Sep 10:38
collapse
I grew up with Atari and the NES. I think it’s actually both ways. I don’t think casual games were ever really a pushback against difficult games though, I think they were just trying to reach a wider audience. Take Subway Surfers for example, it’s probably the best example of the casual (phone) game. Anyone can pick up and play it, and if you fail, you just start over. IIRC you had to watch an ad first though? I dunno, I got hooked on it and I bought the coin doubler for $5 which also removed the mandatory ads (not the ones you can opt to watch to double some prizes or open ad-gated prize boxes though). That’s all I ever paid for it — far less than any paid game. Of course you can’t “win” at it either, it just goes on forever. On consoles, you also have Animal Crossing and the like. Games that never end but you can’t lose, either. Like you can get stung by wasps or scorpions or bit by tarantulas (though the latter two encounters are rare), but you just pass out and wake up in front of your house with nothing lost. But no, I don’t think casual (e.g. Animal Crossing) or accessible (e.g. Subway Surfers) was an active “push back” against the “NES Hard” trend of hard gaming.
Of course, arcade games weren’t just hard to be hard — like Subway Surfers and other phone games, they exist to get you to spend money. An arcade game that isn’t generating revenue isn’t desirable to people who operate arcades.
ExtraMedicated@lemmy.world
on 08 Sep 10:06
nextcollapse
I haven’t played this yet, so I don’t know anything about what difficulty settings it may or may not have But in general, I see difficulty settings as an accessibility feature.
I liked the way that Ender Magnolia did it, where, at a save point, you could adjust several settings to customize the difficulty. I was able to temporarily make it slightly easier just for a few bosses that I lost my patience for.
Mandragora had the exact same difficulty system, you could adjust enemy HP, Damage and even Stamina cost at every bonfire. Great accessibility feature.
Difficulty is subjective. Creating multiple levels of difficulty either takes tremendous effort to do well or, as is the case with most games, an adjustment to some numbers that is less an increase/decrease in difficulty and more an increase/decrease to the tediousness of combat.
Puzzle games with difficulty settings alter the complexity of the puzzles. Action games can alter the encounters themselves (how many, of what kind of enemies and their placement in the arena), or even changing the enemy behavior to be more/less complex. Yet this kind of difficulty adjustment isn’t common at all anymore.
ModernRisk@lemmy.dbzer0.com
on 08 Sep 10:51
nextcollapse
People have nothing better to do than complain, I suppose. Don’t like the game? Don’t play it. The game is good, imo.
I think it’s fine to litigate that again if the same criticisms go unaddressed in a sequel. It took how many souls games before From ended up putting checkpoints right before bosses? When they finally did it, they had their most successful game to date.
ModernRisk@lemmy.dbzer0.com
on 08 Sep 16:20
collapse
Every single game that’s hard, gets the same “it’s so hard” complaint. Well of course it is, isn’t that one of the appeals of the game? Reminds me Sekiro when it got out.
Anyway, we both got our own opinions and that’s that. Lets agree to disagree, I suppose.
The game was designed for people to have played the first one first. I think the difficulty curve works best if you consider Silksong as a direct continuation of the first game, picking off where the main story left off rather than the extra challenges they added through updates like godhome.
Quazatron@lemmy.world
on 08 Sep 11:09
nextcollapse
Regarding difficulty: I’ve lived through the 80’s, where difficulty was ramped up to make the game last longer, as you only had precious few kilobytes to fill with content. I’ve grown to hate difficult games.
It is your right as creator to go that way if you wish, but it is my right as player to hate your guts if I buy your game and it kills me over and over again in the first minutes.
qweertz@programming.dev
on 08 Sep 14:54
nextcollapse
If you dislike impressionist art, would you still go to a museum exhibition on that topic and then get angry at the curators?
If it is clear that the topic is Impressionist art, I would not go. If I buy the ticket to see Expressionism and get Impressionism instead, I would fell upset.
(Actually, I’d go either way, I love art)
Anarch157a@lemmy.dbzer0.com
on 08 Sep 15:16
collapse
Another 80s child here. The difficulty of ganes of that era was to extend tge game duration and made them seem longer. They were designed that way to eat quarters at the arcade, the original “games as a service”. What happened with home computer and console games at the time was that developers used the same paradigms for “buy to own” games that they used for arcade, thus the idea of limited lives, game over screens, high dificulty, etc.
Honestly, Hollow Knight 1, and what I’ve played so far of Silk Song have frustrating runback only if you feel that exploration should carry no risk. And also if you feel the consequences–dropping your resources and needing to abandon them–are game ending.
The devs make no attempt to hide the fact that the father afield you get, the more dangerous it gets, but that you can get stronger if you make the most of what you’ve already explored.
Resources are unlimited in the world, so you can always get back to where you were even if you abandon your cocoon/shade. You can also go back and spend the resources before you lose them.
Once I realized that venturing too far off carries a growing risk, I started looking out for the telltale signs that I’m entering a boss room. When this happens or even when I just feel like I’m going to lose all health, I just venture back and spend at the nearest shop or just prioritize finding a bench. Where I don’t heed the warning and go in anyway, I take it as my fault I can’t recover my shade/silk before I once again prioritize finding a bench.
All that said, at least so far I’ve found that whereas in Hollow Knight, if you die in a boss fight you’re not equipped for, you MUST abandon it or try again. In Silk Song, the silk cocoon actually helps with the fight: instead of also trying to kill you, it’s extra health that you can save until mid-way through the fight. Also, some boss rooms don’t lock the entrance (at all or as quickly) so you can die closer to the entrance and safely recover your stuff.
After starting Silk Song, I went back and started replaying the original and some changes like this are actually actually a quality of life improvement over the first 😂😂😂.
(I’m just irrationally mad that they removed the cheeseable pogoing. It was so cheeseable but I get why they tweaked the mechanic to become harder to use in exactly the same way. I’m actually using the other offensive abilities more.)
NoneOfUrBusiness@fedia.io
on 08 Sep 17:01
collapse
(I'm just irrationally mad that they removed the cheeseable pogoing. It was so cheeseable but I get why they tweaked the mechanic to become harder to use in exactly the same way. I'm actually using the other offensive abilities more.)
Minor spoilers regarding crests
There's actually one crest that straight up brings back pogoing and another that give you something similar, but honestly Hornet's default dive is very underappreciated I'd say. It allows you to do maneuvers that you can't with normal pogoing, and even platforming isn't that hard when you get used to it.
A lot of comments tying runbacks to difficulty, when they have nothing to do with each other. I haven’t playing silksong but I played about half of the original and uninstalled it, despite the fact it is so many people’s favorite metroidvania and metroidvania is one of my favorite genres.
Not putting checkpoints close to boss fights is not difficulty. It is disrespectful of the player’s time, which is a problem hollow Knight was full of.
ampersandrew@lemmy.world
on 08 Sep 11:41
nextcollapse
I liked Hollow Knight, but yes, it kind of was. Frequent destinations were far away from fast travel, and there was a low level area that they transformed into a high level area later in the game specifically so that crossing the map wouldn’t be a cake walk. I’d argue that earning the power to make an area like that into a cake walk is a core part of the fun.
It’s been a few years, but mostly I just remember needing to go to the shop over and over again from various points in the map and it being a long trek. I don’t remember a custom fast travel point, so either I never got it, or it came so late that I didn’t remember its utility.
Agreed, the highly specific gate locations were what ultimately made me abandon the game, in combination with various other factors (sheer difficulty, etc.).
Not putting checkpoints close to boss fights is not difficulty.
You're pointing a finger at the Soulslike genre here, not only HK. Some games may abandon it, but this is common enough to be called a genre stable.
Just like the "hit hit, dodge/parry, hit hit" combat pattern, losing/recovering currency, enemies respawning on bonfire use… etc.
I think this whole genre is wack, TBH. I don't even find it difficult, I just think what they test is perseverance in the face of misery and tediousness, which's a bizarre thing to test in a video game. It's almost as if it's straight up telling you: this is a serious video game, no room for fun here.
Meanwhile, Ninja Gaiden proved you can simultaneously have extreme difficulty AND fun like one million years ago.
To be fair Ninja Gaiden Black did also have boss runbacks. It’s one of a handful of small complaints I have about what is otherwise a very close to perfect game (Chapter 9 in the military base being one of the others).
But NG2 did have boss checkpoints, yes, and was much better for it. Even the notoriously player-challenging Itagaki realised after one game that boss runbacks sucked, and this was in 2008 - Demon Souls wasn’t even out.
It’s true that I’d prefer it in no games, but it’s also less frustrating in straight soulslikes. The problem with HK is that it is a synthesis of metroidvania and soulslikes in the most time-disrespecting ways possible. Really most of my frustrations are with map design, and then they add not getting maps until you find the map guy (in samey environments I can’t remember well enough without a map).
What made me put it down was playing for an hour going through multiple zones without finding either a map guy or a bench somehow then dying. I’m pretty sure just being able to see the map would have been enough to keep me playing.
For this new fangled soulsvania genre there are numerous better entries that I thoroughly enjoyed. Ender Lilies and Blasphemus are the first 2 that come to mind.
Personally I think we’d all be better off not even calling them Soulslikes, for this very reason. Full-blown Soulslikes have so many more nuances and systems that add to the experience.
Yeah, huh, apparently HK is tagged on Steam as a Souls-like, but I disagree… just brutal difficulty in a melee-heavy game isn’t enough to merit that badge, but oh, well.
aesthelete@lemmy.world
on 08 Sep 17:02
nextcollapse
I think this whole genre is wack, TBH.
Agreed. I’m not sure why I would waste my time with shit like this when it’s just objectively not fun for me to play.
Different strokes for different folks, so if you like it more power to you, but I’d rather play games that are fun to play for me.
I only have a certain amount of time to play video games, and if I can’t make any progress at all in an hour or two, why would I bother continuing when an hour or two is usually all I have in a day to play your game?
I’ve decided not to bother picking up silksong because I found HK tedious, frustrating, and unrewarding.
People who enjoy such games are clearly masochist who don’t know what a good game is if it hit them in the face. Idk why these sorts of “gamers” even exist. I long for the halcyon era where good stuff like Mario, Zelda and Sonic were the staples of hardcore gamers.
You're pointing a finger at the Soulslike genre here, not only HK. Some games may abandon it, but this is common enough to be called a genre stable.
You should try Salt and Sanctuary, Sekiro, Bloodborne, The Surge, Lords of the Fallen, or Lies of P—all had boss runbacks, and that's ignoring HK, Silksong, and the original Souls games.
Apparently I shouldn’t. But if there’s a list of soulslike games that do it, and a list of soulslike games that don’t, then it is not in fact true for the genre and is instead true for specific games.
systemglitch@lemmy.world
on 08 Sep 13:46
nextcollapse
My partner loved that aspect of the game. Each to their own, that’s why it’s good games have differences.
acosmichippo@lemmy.world
on 08 Sep 13:53
nextcollapse
disagree. they are related and absolutely add to the difficulty of learning how to beat a new boss. it’s way easier to develop a strategy and muscle memory if you can retry the boss fight as soon as possible without having to redo other sections of the game first.
I disagree. Having a slight forced intermission between attempts both gives me pause to reflect on what I needed to do better, and presents a risk of not making it back to my death point, which keeps me mindful.
I like Silksong's runbacks a lot more than I've liked the ones in 3d soulslikes though. In Dark Souls for example the risk of losing your corpse felt really high, whereas in Silksong you very often have either a gate that unlocks a quicker route back, or a clever acrobatic solution that reliably avoids all the enemies.
You can make the case that it’s not a fun use of our time but how is it not tied to difficulty? Being able to get to the boss with enough health or consummables is certainly part of the intended challenge.
I’ll admit I don’t even remember doing runbacks in hollow Knight (or even having to fight any boss in the part of the game I played more than one or twice), but in other games where you have to run to the boss you normally just run past everything without fighting it and go into the boss with full resources. No challenge - just running past everything, which not only wastes time but also totally breaks immersion for me.
In any case, my overall discontent is with all the time wasting added together than any specific thing.
I will say the run backs in Silksong/HK are better than, for example, DS1 for the reason you give. In DS you just run past enemies and it’s trivial. In the HK games running past enemies becomes a platforming challenge. Yeah, you can still do it, but you still have to engage with the enemy even if that’s just jumping over them. DS you just run past them and they almost always too slow to engage with you if you’re sprinting.
LettyWhiterock@lemmy.world
on 08 Sep 17:08
collapse
I haven’t played silksong, but most games like Dark Souls and the like, getting back to the boss without taking damage is pretty easy. It’s not difficulty, it’s just time.
Also in Fromsoft games runbacks are a deliberate design choice that forces the player to take a quick break after dying to a boss.
Katana314@lemmy.world
on 08 Sep 16:05
nextcollapse
I never actually liked FromSoft’s themselves, but several Soulslikes I really enjoyed did away with runbacks, or always had checkpoints right before bosses.
I really just want people to start evaluating each design decision Dark Souls made on its own - stop worshipping the whole as being perfect, because it most definitely is not. So many of the knowledge checks (poise, anyone?) are just there for experienced players to lord over confused shrubs.
LettyWhiterock@lemmy.world
on 08 Sep 17:05
nextcollapse
I’m not really used to metroidvanias having runbacks honestly. Most I’ve played either have save points close to the bosses or just drop you outside the boss room if you die.
Have you considered that the run back is trying to tell you something? The game doesn’t want you to bash your face against the same enemy the same way. It may not even want you to fight that boss yet at all.
The run back is meant to be an incentive to think about your options. Do I have other areas to explore? What do I keep dying to? Am I overlooking an obvious weakness during a particular boss mechanic, or am I not using an ability as effectively as I could be to stay alive?
If you let the player immediately run back into a boss, they will veg out and do just that until they eventually get lucky and barely down a boss by the skin of their teeth. But that’s not how you should be approaching these fights.
Sometimes the most productive run back even involves a good night’s rest.
The other day, I fought the boss of the abyss in the dark souls 1 dlc. It took me 5ish attempts, and I changed my gear to have more magic resist after I got further in the fight and got merked by magic attacks. All spending 2 minutes between each attempt running back to the fog gate did was make me zone out and wish I could just get right back to it.
Btw, the original runback was mega man, where you get to try the boss until you run out of lives then you have to do the entire level again. Still way more interesting than running past everything in souls games.
Do you believe DS and Megaman could have been even more iconic if they had listened to players and made their runs back shorter?
My point is, it’s not like the designers didn’t know what they were doing, this is a very obvious aspect of their gameplay. And regardless of how minor inconveniences like this make us feel as players, we don’t know that it’s not precisely those lows that contrast with the highs to create the intended experiences which made those games cult hits to begin with. You wouldn’t look at a Rembrandt and say, “look how much of the painting is just black! You’re wasting all this space! You could add so much detail and context in there!”
I’m a firm believer that “given the opportunity, players will optimize the fun out of a game”. If players weren’t complaining about the run back, then they would be complaining about the empty flask drinking animation. Inconvenience is not a convincing argument to me. Just like any art, games are free to evoke any and all emotions. It only becomes a problem if the emotion they keep evoking is boredom lol. But even then, boredom is a valid tool on the artist’s palette; sometimes the only ones who are getting bored are the boring people.
I actually said I like the mega man version. I think the dark souls version is boring and doesn’t do anything of what you’re saying. I don’t even remember run backs from when I played half of hollow Knight because I didn’t even think the game was hard. It just wasted time in so many ways that I decided I’d rather play a different game that didn’t, but if people had to deal with the time wasting design that I remember and also do dark souls boss run backs then I’m not surprised they’re irritated.
Edit: and no I don’t think DS would be less iconic if you didn’t have to do boring runs between boss attempts…
I loved Ender’s Lilies and it had save points outside the boss rooms. I do not believe the game would have been more iconic if I had to run through several rooms of enemies before fighting a boss again.
The joy of victory came from overcoming a difficult fight, not from avoiding a tedious repeat.
I agree with this argument in Dark Souls. It isn’t quite the same in Silksong though. Upgrades are very limited. You can’t just swap weapons and go farm upgrades for it. You have one weapon and can’t upgrade until a few hours into the game, and after the one you can’t upgrade again until some future point. Health and silk upgrades are also incredibly limited, and you ability upgrade slots are equally limited.
In DS/Elden Ring, you’re supposed to go explore and spend your souls on upgrades. I’m Silksong there are very few real combat upgrades to be purchased. You can’t just level up or upgrade weapons to get more powerful.
I will need to play more of silksong to be able to comment fully, but I felt that, even though you could understandably say all the same stuff about Hollow Knight, I still do think that the only times I struggled in HK (on required content) I later found out about an upgrade that was available if i had looked that would have made the fight much easier (nail upgrade, ability, charm, more hp, etc).
No, not to the same degree as Elden Ring, i agree, but I do think HK’s exploration played a very similar role as it did in Elden Ring. In both games i would tell people to only bash your head against a boss if you want to hurt yourself, otherwise go explore.
Yeah, I just recently unlocked wall clinging. It feels like now there are several directions to go, but before there was largely just one. Also, because of the way charms are limited (only having two slots for each of three types) finding charms feels much less meaningful. You can only ever have two main combat charms, so you can never find something that’ll let you totally change things like you may in HK1.
Maybe it’s only the beginning (I’m about 12h in, so not that early) of the game that feels this way, but yeah so far it doesn’t feel like extra exploration will bail you out if you’re stuck.
AwesomeLowlander@sh.itjust.works
on 09 Sep 01:18
collapse
Have you considered that the run back is trying to tell you something? The game doesn’t want you to bash your face against the same enemy the same way. It may not even want you to fight that boss yet at all.
The run back is meant to be an incentive to think about your options. Do I have other areas to explore?
Would be a lot more effective if I didn’t have to go pick up my shade. Which often can’t be accessed without locking yourself into the fight again.
neon_nova@lemmy.dbzer0.com
on 09 Sep 02:04
nextcollapse
I wouldn’t mind checkpoints before the boss even if it’s not a bench and more of a “retry” option.
But the annoyance of run backs raises the stakes of the fight a bit. Like, “Please let me win this time so I don’t have to do another run back.”
But I was annoyed at a particular fight that started without warning and I had not really explored the new area yet, so I didn’t have a chance to find a closer bench.
kuberoot@discuss.tchncs.de
on 09 Sep 17:02
collapse
I disagree, runbacks are as much difficulty as having to recover your currency after death, or even having to recover your items after dying in Minecraft. It’s a punishment for dying, and a way to make you treat it seriously.
It can incentivise the wrong things, punish experimentation and make players stick with what they know, even if better options exist. You’re free to dislike it, and it has downsides, but dismissing it as “not difficulty” is just dishonest.
The crystal boss that you first encounter sitting on the save bench though, that’s was just evil 😆
Vanilla_PuddinFudge@infosec.pub
on 08 Sep 11:33
nextcollapse
git gud
Vanilla_PuddinFudge@infosec.pub
on 08 Sep 11:44
nextcollapse
Once you
Tap for spoiler
Get the run/dash ability
, none of this is even a problem. You can jump and glide over any normal enemy in the game back to a boss room in about two to three minutes.
BenevolentOne@infosec.pub
on 08 Sep 11:51
nextcollapse
So glad they fixed the slow/boring difficulty curve the first game had. I shouldn’t need to slog through 20 hours of gameplay before I feel challenged.
Binged it all weekend, it’s a great game, but folks whining about some of the game’s earlier challenges are unlikely to finish it.
codexarcanum@lemmy.dbzer0.com
on 08 Sep 13:50
nextcollapse
The runbacks don’t bother me too much so far. I do think there’s some skills in the runback, but it relies heavily on the level designer as well. An ideal runback:
is relatively short, you should have time to reflect on the boss, but not get sidetracked
has enemies that drop currency, so repeated runs slowly build you up (assuming you always collect your shade)
has enemies that train you on the bosses timings or counters (if the boss is parry heavy, put a tricky-to-parry enemy enroute back)
has a “speed route” that let’s you bypass most or all of the run once you’ve figured it out
These factors make a run both interesting game play and still a form of progression. A badly designed run lacks these factors, being just a slow slog to get back into the boss fight.
My biggest complaint so far is the double damage. Every boss and so many common enemies do nothing but double damage. Why even have 5 HP instead of 3? And it being 5 (and bind healing 3) have compounding effects with this problem. Taking a single hit on the way to a boss actually costs you an entire “boss hit” so runbacks are worse all around. Trying to heal mid boss only gets you “one and a half” hits back which takes a lot of silk to build up and probably is a worse deal for you than just using the silk to power more attacks.
Double damage would suck a lot less (and be a better mechanic) if you had 6 HP to start, or if you healed 4 at a time, or if bosses didnt always do 2 damage. There’s no tension to avoiding punishing hits because every move is equally punishing. It makes fights feel very conservative which is maybe intentionally meant to evoke Hornet as a careful hunter, using traps and plans to take down big foes.
I find the opposite though, she feels fragile and reactive. I wish starting damage was higher too. I had this issue in Hollow Knight as well, everything takes too many hits. Common enemies are spongy, bosses take at least 33% too long across the board. Especially it gets annoying since a lot of bosses so far get spammier and faster towards their final phases, so you spend so much time dodging the same attacks and looking for openings to chip hits in. Skills and traps don’t do enough damage to feel especially useful either.
I also hate, and this is another compounding factor, the complete lack of enemy HP bars. On regular enemies this is annoying (gotta count my hits) but on bosses it feels negligent. Bosses have multiple phases and take so long to kill, it would be nice to know if my last run was just a hit or 2 away from the end or if I still had a 3rd phase to plan for. It adds to the poor perception of skills and traps as well. Sting Shard and Thread Storm both seem to hit several times, around a half-dozen, but neither seems to do much more damage than a couple of regular hits.
Overall I’m really loving Silksong, the art and music are top notch. The DLC for HK convinced me that Team Cherry and I disagree about some fundamental ideas in game design, and HKSS bears that out.
pivot_root@lemmy.world
on 08 Sep 14:11
nextcollapse
Skills and traps don’t do enough damage to feel especially useful either.
There’s one trap that actually is pretty strong if you know how to abuse it.
I’m not going to spoil where or how to get it, but flying beetles that home in on the enemy and repeatedly bump into it to deal damage can be pretty busted… especially when they still attack during phase change animations that stop the player from moving.
I also especially like a particular early game trap for this:
trap spoiler
the cluster spike trap, because if you throw it well just before initiating a boss cutscene, it can activate and hit them 6-7 times while they are doing their initial taunt.
NuXCOM_90Percent@lemmy.zip
on 08 Sep 15:00
nextcollapse
I definitely agree that the constant double damage just feels horrible. Hollow Knight was always about balancing heals versus punishes (one reason I loved Dark Souls 2 so much) but you basically need to heal if you get tapped once and… yeah.
I think a bigger issue is that upgrades feel so much rarer. Part of it is that you have MUCH fewer equipped charms at any given time… so there is much less point in just giving you a new one every 10 or so minutes. And I am not sure if max health is lower but it similarly feels like I find a mask shared maybe every 2 hours or so which further lends itself to feeling weak. And no idea what the deal is with silk but a single pip when it takes like five pips to even do a heavy attack feels pointless?
And while some vendors do sell upgrades, it always feels like a struggle to afford them unless you are actively grinding because of the constant need to buy maps and so forth (something I hated in 1 as well, but that at least had a single currency). Although I did get a nice stretch where I just mopped up and bought out most shops so that is at least nice.
And same with the attacks. Apparently I may have actually ran past Threadstorm while exploring and never even noticed it? And that is the power everyone says to use.
I also hate, and this is another compounding factor, the complete lack of enemy HP bars.
IIRC, HK1 had a badge that turns these on. I’m not far enough into the new game to have found this yet, though.
codexarcanum@lemmy.dbzer0.com
on 08 Sep 16:18
collapse
I’m pretty early into the game as well, so I almost didn’t say anything. But even if theres a charm that adds HP bars later, I would be annoyed about it. Why wait so long? I’m over 10 hours in. Why take a slot with it? I get similar annoyances about the compass, but at least that one I can understand because maybe some people like the challenge of landmark navigation using just the maps. There is a skill there, and it is part of the skillset of Exploration (a major pillar of design in any metroidvania).
The yellow tools, in general, I’m iffy about the design of. So far I only have 3: compass, more shards, and auto-collect beads. Of these, auto-beads is the most obviously useful. You need many beads, and they get lost pretty easy. Shards are super common and don’t have many uses. But none of these are essential, and all of them get less useful the later into the game you get. The tradeoff is only meaningful early game, and seems to encourage a balance between memorizing the levels and grinding, neither are amazing activities.
Having the compass charm tied to ALL map markers would certainly up the utility of it, though it’s gating another feature behind both a purchase and a charm. I’ve also only found 1 semi useful trap\red-charm so far. Maybe having more traps and skills that required shell bits would put more pressure on needing them and make the charm that gives extras more appeal for a trap-heavy play style?
Again, I grant that maybe I’m too early in the game yet, but I feel like these systems should be coming together and cohering more after a half-dozen bosses and 10 hours of play.
The game is so much more massive than I ever expected. I can tell you that you're still super early in the game based on what you've found. There are many, many red tools and while you'll absolutely have favorites, there are definitely some that seem underwhelming until you find a specific situation or region where they excel.
There is a crazy huge amount of content and capability in the game, and if it seems like a slow burn for you now, IMHO that's because the game does a pretty good job of pacing new things so that you have time to evaluate and master each new piece of kit as it comes up.
The other thing about shards is that you have to sort of learn to find a balance with how much trap usage you employ; what seems to me to be the intended design (based purely on vibes) is that you mostly only use them against certain bosses/arena rooms or in situations where your needle can't easily work due to the terrain.
I thought similarly to you at first, with shards being a huge surplus and not necessary. I think this is an introduction period of sorts where you can get used to how the controls work and experiment freely. But then there were wide stretches of the game where I had a relative drought of them. Now that (I THINK??) I'm approaching the end, I've learned to use my shards reserve as a sort of measurement for whether I'm comfortable enough fighting in a certain situation. If it dips below half, I'm leaning too much on traps and need to take a step back and think harder about how to approach things with needle combat.
On the topic of yellow tools... I can definitely relate to the compass feeling mandatory, but there were several places for me where I had compelling reason to choose to forego it for something else. That was legitimately interesting and I don't have many other examples of games where that's possible. There are a bunch more yellow tools you'll find with more interesting effects as well. And eventually (being deliberately vague) you will reach a point where you won't feel like you're sacrificing as much to keep the compass equipped if you want. (Though there is also a point where you will have seen enough of the world that you won't need it, strictly speaking, because you either have the areas memorized or can navigate based on room shapes and major landmarks without your precise location.)
Godspeed, fellow hunter
pixeltree@lemmy.blahaj.zone
on 08 Sep 16:59
nextcollapse
I, uh, have kinda given up on progressing for the foreseeable future. I’m bad at platforming, and after struggling for probably around half an hour to get through one aection that was particularly difficult for me, I was met with a surprise boss fight. Nearest bench before that section. It’s brutal. It takes me about 5ish minutes to do that section now, but fuck I wish I were exaggerating. None of the other fights have anywhere near as nasty a runback and it honestly feels like they forgot a bench.
The game is hard and that’s fine, but that instance I feel ok bitching about and don’t feel like I’m a qhiny pathetic fuck for doing so, which is incredibly telling given how easy it is to make me feel like a whiny pathetic fuck.
I'm not entirely sure which part of the game you're talking about but if you're talking about the section I think you're talking about then you're probably trying to go the wrong way as that section get significantly easier once you have more powers.
If something feels unbelievably difficult chances are you're supposed to go elsewhere. There are quite a few points at the start of the game where you get a difficulty spike and that just means there's a different route to take.
pixeltree@lemmy.blahaj.zone
on 09 Sep 11:32
collapse
I checked with a friend, and I’m not missing anything sadly. It’s the boss at the end of the windy section, before you can go through the big fancy door.
Okay. I was thinking of another point. I just got to the point you were describing and after exploring every nook and cranny on the map there really isn't any other route. But I don't think the route to the boss is that dreadful.
spoiler how to quickly traverse it.
You can sprint jump the first 2 platform ignoring the first enemy. You then climb past the first shield enemy but instead of going right you scale the wall on the left. When you get to the top you can sprint jump to the bell that you can pogo off of and get on the platform with the cart in the background. From there if you want an easy passage to the far right wall wait for the black strong gust of wind. You then jump off and use glide. You will glide faster in the black gust of wind and it will skip the enemy there and get you straight in dashing length of the far right wall. Then you climb up and if you're confident with the 2 bell jump just go for that or wait until the enemy below comes up so you could kill it and then you've got all the time in the world to get the two bell jump done.
If you wait for the gust of wind it should take you about 45 seconds to get from the save point to the boss room
"Fragile and reactive" IMO is a fair take, but I think what the game is pushing you to do is become comfortable enough with your mobility to be aggressive while still avoiding hits. I don't know exactly where you are in progression, but you continue to tack on new capabilities to your kit that make it easier and easier to avoid things while still laying out damage.
I am sure there is enough room in the game design for people to take totally different approaches here, though. If you know a given enemy's movement well, you can absolutely be confident in using your silk for attacks instead of healing.
WolfLink@sh.itjust.works
on 08 Sep 21:38
nextcollapse
I agree with a lot of your commentary. A couple times so far a “good run back” has been the grind that let me buy some of the higher-cost items from shops. Sometimes it’s frustrating but usually once you get used to the path it goes quickly. There have been a few times where I didn’t realize there was a closer bench until after I already beat the fight lol.
Double damage would suck a lot less (and be a better mechanic) if you had 6 HP to start, or if you healed 4 at a time, or if bosses didn’t always do 2 damage.
Most of the bosses have 1-damage and 2-damage attacks. Also 6HP and increased healing are available relatively early (still a good way into the game but it’s a long game).
Skills and traps don’t do enough damage to feel especially useful either.
I have to strongly disagree with this. Especially when you start getting more traps/tools and upgrades for them, they get very strong and don’t require you to get dangerously close to the enemy like the basic attacks. Some of the bosses and many of the arenas I’ve gotten through mainly thanks to the consumable traps.
Common enemies are spongy, bosses take at least 33% too long across the board.
Like in most metroidvanias, you start off struggling against common enemies but as you get upgrades they become weaker relative to you. However I do agree that the trash mobs are a bit too tanky. Maybe somewhere between 50% and 25% less health would be ideal. I’m not sure I would adjust the bosses though.
Tangentially related but I agree. It makes the long run through sections of the campaign more bearable.
On a more related note, POE2 has checkpoints practically on top of the bosses during the story so you can bash your head against it as much as you want. The only time you’re punished for dying is endgame bosses.
yea agreed. in general though our attitudes with gaming have changed due to how many titles are available (over abundance) and the history of gaming, etc. we’ve become spoiled in ways. there needs to be a ‘penalty’ of sorts to encourage trial and error growth. get some true dopamine overcoming a trial.
there’s a place for all types of games and difficulties though. let the artists create their vision.
something that i think gets lost in the sauce in thrse discussions is whether fun is derived from playing or winning. people are comparing Silksong- and to get ahead of it right now i haven't played and am not criticizing either of the Hollow Knights- to old arcade and early console games and their legendary difficulty, but a lot of those games were meant to be complete and fun experiences even if you game over very early on. they also didn't have levels full of bespoke Stuff in them, it was the same few tiles and entities in different configurations., so being stuck on level 1 didn't mean you were missing out on a narrative and worldbuilding. with how the lines have blurred between games and narrative art forms in the last few decades, there are different incentives at play and someone stuck on world 1 of SMB isn't missing out nearly as much as someone stuck on whatever the first stage of Silksong is. it's all ultimately apples and oranges
The problem with “old difficulty” was that in arcades especially, and even on consoles by way of the industry being smaller and the same people working on both, were designed around quarter-munching.
Stuff was hard to get people to pay up.
I would have preferred modern ideas like bosses are hard because you have to learn their patterns- and to be clear, this is also present - but also the feeling that I’m not strong enough to do anything more than chip damage is a bit annoying.
I think there’s validity in all the arguments I’ve seen people making; but at the same time I’m glad the game’s not easy. I just don’t know if it always needs to be punishing through frustration.
(The thing that pisses me off the most are those
Tap for spoiler
Red flower buds you need to pogo off of.
Do they REALLY need to be over spikes every time? Does my downward thrust really need to be at an angle to bounce off them?? I started out being ok with that movement and I’ve never regressed so fast or so hard at anything in a game before. I swear I’ve lost more lives and to that than bosses; and by the game’s very nature that means a run back every time! Ugh!
So that’s why I say there’s a difference between “tricky” hard and “annoying” hard.
kadaverin0@lemmy.dbzer0.com
on 08 Sep 17:47
nextcollapse
I would have preferred modern ideas like bosses are hard because you have to learn their patterns- and to be clear, this is also present - but also the feeling that I’m not strong enough to do anything more than chip damage is a bit annoying.
This is why I stopped playing Elden Ring. I have no problem learning patterns for boss fights but the perpetual feeling that I’m fighting Godzilla with a badminton racket is obnoxious. Especially after I spent the last 20 hours of play grinding out equipment upgrades and levels. It doesn’t feel fun or rewarding.
Might I ask for which boss this applied to you? I only had this for optional bosses for which I was underleveled and never for required bosses.
I enjoyed getting the shit beaten out of me when fighting the Black Gargoyle in Caelid. I never struggled like that with the required bosses, except a bit for the final boss, which I enjoyed.
Cybersteel@lemmy.world
on 09 Sep 04:31
nextcollapse
I can’t recall a boss that can’t be dealt with just being overleveled? Maybe Malenia? But she’s human sized not a giant boss. Yeah the final boss kinda sux though but hey it’s the end of the game already might as well power through it.
Hmm maybe the DLC, some of those are damn nasty fuckers.
kadaverin0@lemmy.dbzer0.com
on 09 Sep 17:39
collapse
Maliketh. First phase I can handle but his second phase can eat my whole ass. I stopped playing after 40 or so attempts. I like a challenge. I’ve beaten every Soulsborne game aside Demon and Sekiro. But there is a point where my frustration overrides the fun I’m having.
Maliketh was pretty easy for me, but everyone struggles at different points.
If your still interested there is an item in Farum Azula (same place as Maliketh), that helps with the fight: Blasphemous Claw.
Maliketh has also pretty low Stance; heavy attacks and/or weapon arts can easily stance break him for a critical attack.
Or you could cheese him with Moghwyn‘s Sacred Spear and maybe the Mimic Tear, but that is probably overkill.
Buddahriffic@lemmy.world
on 08 Sep 19:49
nextcollapse
Some arcades were actually a bit more manipulative than that in that they’d get harder depending on how long it was since you last put a quarter in.
Mortal Kombat was one. I noticed this pattern on the snes version of MK3 (can’t remember if it was ultimate or not that I had): I’d easily win one fight, then get demolished by the next fighter. Then continue and that same fighter would be easy, only for the next one after that to be much more difficult. I didn’t have to put quarters into my snes but they just used the same tuning from the arcade machines.
Eventually when I played that game, I was spending much more time on the space invaders minigame lol.
ozymandias117@lemmy.world
on 09 Sep 04:07
nextcollapse
tip
If you’re having trouble with red flower buds, maybe explore a different area.
I found them much easier after I unlocked some other things
Thanks for the reassurance. I was starting to do just that, but I’ve only had about 6 hours in game so far and of that I feel like I’m moving pretty slow. So perhaps there is hope yet!
I know what you mean with the downward thrust. It just fucks with my platforming.
a bit of a spoiler not but not really as I only mention the name of the ability and what it does.
There's a Wanderer Crest that makes your downward attack like it is in Hollow Knight. That was a game changer for me.
Regrettable_incident@lemmy.world
on 08 Sep 14:59
nextcollapse
I recently started gaming again after a twenty year gap. Back in the day I used to go for high difficulty and complete everything. Now, I’m playing on easy difficulty setting. Partly cos I’m in my 50s, reactions are slower and my hands are a bit fucked up. Partly because I want to enjoy the story and the experience - if I get stuck on a fight and keep dying I get frustrated eventually and angry with myself for not being as good as I want to be. That feeling is not what I’m gaming for, so yeah, easy setting.
I haven’t played hollow knight because I’m told it’s frustrating and difficult, and, while the aesthetic really appeals to me I don’t wanna be frustrated. But I’m so happy for all the people who have been waiting for this and are enjoying it, sometimes we do get nice things!
I’m older also and am enjoying Hollow Knight a lot, it’s hard but I wouldn’t say frustrating, the game lets you say “Hmn this is not working out, I’m coming back here later after I get more skills or abilities” and it’s relatively non-linear for a metroidvania type game.
Part of why it was very popular is the difficulty straddled a good line between challenging and manageable enough to keep making progress. But every player has different experience levels, distractions or time-limits on how much we can dedicate to gaming so it should be standard to allow players to choose difficulty. However, in a game like Hollow Knight you might be able to adjust the difficulty of boss fights but that’s only part of the challenge, the rest of the challenge in inherent in the game’s layout and mechanics.
BlameTheAntifa@lemmy.world
on 08 Sep 15:38
collapse
For me, much of the fun is making progress. i never finished the first game because I kept getting lost and stuck and unable to progress for extended periods. In a From Software game I can spend weeks on a single boss and masochistically enjoy every moment because I know what I have to do. The problem I had with Hollow Knight was I kept finding myself completely at a loss about where to go or what to do. I would spend days retreading the same empty caverns looking for a clue or a new path and not finding any. When I knew what I had to do, I enjoyed it immensely, but progression was often too obscure and my interest slowly evaporated.
This is the “metroidvania” genre part of the game but, it’s not for everyone.
That being said, both Hollow Knight and Silksong make the exploration a lot more streamlined than in older metroidvanias with the map features. When you don’t know where to go, check your map and look for paths that lead to areas that aren’t filled in yet. When you get a new power, see if you can remember any locations where that might be useful.
NuXCOM_90Percent@lemmy.zip
on 08 Sep 14:46
nextcollapse
So far I have only found two or so runbacks that really bothered me. One is THAT BOSS (TLJ…) which isn’t actually too bad (once you figure out the safe path) but a single missed jump or tag by an enemy is 2 masks of damage. So just spend all your souls ahead of time and if you flub, end it all and respawn.
The other is a much earlier boss in Widow (?). The runback is actually zero danger and just a matter of holding R2 and running. My big issue is that there is an elevator right next to the bench. So you start the sprint back because you want to get it right this time and slam into a cage and have to wait for it to reach the top then hop back in to get back down and it just feels horrible.
But yeah. I actually like a good runback as a way to reset your brain and avoid getting on tilt against a boss. Elden Ring very much spoiled people by putting the bonfire right outside the fogwall for effectively every single boss and it just leads to making the same mistake over and over again until you warp away to do something else. But Silksong’s balance is definitely rough.
I haven't played Silksong yet, in part because truthfully, Hollow Knight was alright but not my favorite Metroidvania. The one thing I really disliked about the original was the runbacks. I remember getting stuck on one platforming section, and I could easily get to the halfway point where I kept dying to retrieve my money, but then drop it again because there was no turning back from this halfway point, had to keep trying to finish it. I wanted to just explore a different part of the map and come back to this section later, but sunk cost fallacy forced me to keep bashing my skull against it.
Which then felt like this mechanic conflicted with the exploration I expect from a Metroidvania. That's the real problem IMO.
You yourself admit it's a fallacy! This isn't exactly a "skill issue" situation, but in future efforts on these kind of games you might try being more thoughtful about when to take a break and spend accumulated currency.
Although as others have pointed out elsewhere in the thread, learning to accept not retrieving your stuff is sometimes necessary too. I lost around 1500 at a certain boss by getting too cocky trying to fight enemies on the runback instead of skipping them, and it took me a while to make peace with it lol.
If you do end up playing Silksong you should know that there is a mechanic specifically addressing this, where you can convert your currency into consumable items at a bit of a loss to keep them across deaths.
There are mechanisms in both games that allow you to remotely retrieve your body if you are desperate not to lose it. Hollow Knight is definitely less forgiving than Silksong in this respect though.
Exploration is a task that has inherent difficulty in the genre, it's uncommon to have actual points of no return as you describe, but if you can't see through a particular segment to the next checkpoint, yeah sometimes giving up will cost you. An actual point of no return probably means you're on the cusp of a sweet new ability though.
I am returning to Hollow Knight thanks to the Silksong hype. I had dropped it before because I was unsure where I needed to go to progress and was getting sick of running around the map trying to figure out which paths were actually available to me and which needed some equipment I didn’t have. Well, I did figure it out and basically have everything important unlocked so now I am enjoying it again.
If you do pick it up again, I have some advice. First, there’s a relic in an area called the Hive that will give you passive health regen if there’s a long enough gap between instances of damage. This means you can keep messing up a platforming section and as long as you don’t rush it you can heal back after messing up without needing new sources of soul. Second, there are some sections that are traversable with minimal equipment but become trivial with more. Deepnest was really annoying to me when I went through it and I frankly would have probably enjoyed it if I had one really helpful item unlocked (or even just a bit more health). Third, don’t worry too much about money. Normal enemies don’t give you much from farming and I think I’ve run out of stuff to spend it on mostly from other sources. So don’t be afraid to let it go. If you’ve unlocked the fast travel thing, just head back to vendors when you’ve noticed you accumulated a decent amount.
Like I said, I’m enjoying the game again after years away, but I really wish they had a better way of letting you know where you should go next and what isn’t available to you. Needing to go through zones again to check if something is now unlocked or not is tiresome. The pins help but they are not enough, and I didn’t think to reserve certain colors for certain types of obstacles the first time.
We should definitely talk about how levying criticism, especially thoughtful criticism, is treated as a personal attack by other people playing the same game. It’s a bizarre form of tribalism.
We should also talk about how “Difficulty is part of the game and if you find it too difficult then this game is not for you” is not a personal attack, but a perfectly valid response to said criticism.
HubertManne@piefed.social
on 08 Sep 16:19
nextcollapse
thanks. I hear a lot about this game and was wondering about it but Im a relaxagamer though so its good to know.
If the criticism is limited to “It’s too hard.” then I would agree. But that’s not a valid response to criticisms about specific design elements like “these power ups feel like they do nothing”, even if it’s a perception issue at hand you need to address the actual observation and not jump on with ‘git gud’.
I was learning a game a few months ago and struggling with understanding a specific character, so I went to the official discord and asked for advice, not complaining it was too hard, just asking for what kinds of strategies work and I was met with endless ‘try harder, scrub’ responses and literally no actual advice. I quit playing the game because the community was so up it’s own asshole.
And for sake of clarity. I don’t play HK, it’s not my preferred genre and my favorite game (that I can replay) is Noita so I am familiar with reviews that complain about difficulty. It’s fine for games to be hard and it’s also fine for people who find the games too hard to leave a review saying they found it too hard. That is part of informing buyers so people can only pick it up if they desire that kind of challenge.
It’s just a trend that is all too common in gaming. People like a game or a developer and become incapable of seeing an opinion that they disagree without taking it as a personal slight. It’s weird.
NuXCOM_90Percent@lemmy.zip
on 08 Sep 19:59
collapse
Part of that is definitely gatekeeping.
But a lot of it speaks to… people are REALLY stupid these days. You notice it a lot when buildcrafting comes up. If it is more complicated than “raise strength to the soft cap” then people start making up massive excuses on how it is too complicated to explain and you are a fool for asking and MAYBE to go watch their favorite youtuber and so forth. When I feel particularly trollish I make a “like bags of sand” joke but the reality is that they just do not have the ability to actually learn what they are talking about. They can barely even regurgitate what an influencer told them.
And that has more or less broken fighting game discourse online. Because it is no longer “oh yeah, so and so has a super easy 20 hit combo” and inherently has to be “your crouching light jab is a +4 but your crouching light kick is -2” because EVERYONE is an expert in frame counting and so forth.
Souls gamers more or less broke with Elden Ring. The base game is probably the most accessible any Souls game has ever been and most people learned fast they can just beat Malenia by doing an arcane bleed build or getting a big fricking hammer to stunlock her, but they felt like they were super cool for it (which is the point of a Souls game). Then the DLC came out. And people felt the need to shit on the games media folk saying “So… this shit is kinda hard?” before rapidly getting their poopy pushed in by silver knight equivalents.
And it very much broke people. The discourse went from “Git gud. But in all seriousness, Capra is a boss that is designed to make sure you know when to block and when to dodge” into “Git gud you fucking loser. I beat it with no problems”. And we are seeing similar discourse with Silksong as a lot of us talk about how some of the runbacks are REAL bad and get responded to with “That is just what Hollow Knight is”… even though there was like one bad runback in the entirety of that game (Mantis Lord… and Radiance is just a different kind of fuckery).
This excuse stopped working the day I opened a tough-as-nails game like Furi, saw it had a difficulty menu, said “That’s nice”, and went back to challenging myself against the bosses on default settings.
It’s such a huge cop-out of self control, and especially falls to acknowledge that the forms of difficulty in a game are often varied - and someone might suck at only one of them.
Steve Bannon recognized exactly this (with gamergate) and harnessed it for his fascist ends.
SonOfAntenora@lemmy.world
on 08 Sep 15:45
nextcollapse
We have this debate monthly since the last decade.
I don’t particularly like the way hollow knight handles saves, not the difficulty itself. It’s time consuming, not inherently hard…
Time consuming does not equal difficulty, remember this.
After you unlock godhome, you can practice against any boss youve fought once, so practicing against bosses is arguably easier than many other meteoidvanias, which is what you’re arguing the run backs prevent you from doing.
SonOfAntenora@lemmy.world
on 09 Sep 22:03
collapse
I don’t debate that but prior to this i have a lot of going back and forth, don’t you think?
It’s not about me liking it or not. I don’t even have that game. The point is that one should play games fitting ones abilities. There are people who will master this game, like I mastered Elite about forty years ago. Complaining about a game being difficult is either they overestimated their abilities, or they lack perseverance.
For the rest, there is always tictactoe or animal crossing.
LettyWhiterock@lemmy.world
on 08 Sep 21:02
collapse
Well whether you like it or not, you’re just insulting people for criticizing a game. Not even just for it’s difficulty, so you couldn’t be more off base.
Legitimately this mindset is why most gaming forums are so toxic. It makes it difficult to actually discuss problems with and opinions on games without people basically going “git gud.”
There is room to bring up the fact that some games are just not for everyone, but that also doesn’t invalidate the criticism they have.
Seems to me it’s usually “kids” that don’t mind difficult games. I’m in my 40s and I don’t have the time or inclination anymore to replay a boss for hours on end, but when I was younger I loved a challenge like that and would usually set difficulty to hard.
This is to be expected. Silksong gained so much hype that now you have a bunch of people trying it who are finding out it’s not their thing.
I know people these days are used to early access garbage being shoved out the door as a full release, and are ready to rush to the comments to explain why the game is wrong, but I promise you this is not one of those cases.
So far, every run back I’ve experienced in silksong has a purpose. If it’s not something you enjoy, I recommend not playing the game. But don’t be in that overlap of the Venn Diagram between people who are enjoying the game and people who are complaining they aren’t enjoying the game. Either stop playing, or finish it and then we can talk about its design.
faint_marble_noise@programming.dev
on 10 Sep 07:59
collapse
Name one with purpose, then.
There is the big cave with the boss. It is separated in two halves by a long ass platform. There are no enemies, exploration, rewards or challenges on the platform. The sole purpose of it is to make you run right and then left, instead of just facing the boss right away.
If it’s the one I’m thinking of, I barely consider that one a run back. It’s like 40s to get to the boss from the bench. And at that point I the game, I noticed myself start hitting the bounce plants much more consistently after having to do this run many times. Up until then I hadn’t been forced to repeat the same small section yet.
And (staying vague to avoid spoilers), the bench itself was particularly “surprising” specifically because of the long gap without any benches leading up to it, forcing you to repeat the same long platforming/combat sections over and over. Players would not have been “surprised” by it if they weren’t so desperate for a bench.
The_Picard_Maneuver@piefed.world
on 08 Sep 18:13
nextcollapse
I'm loving it, and the runbacks and difficulty just feel like standard metroidvania to me. Yeah, it takes time and caution, but that's just the genre.
Yeah the game’s definitely harder than HK was, but by no means impossible. It’s not nearly as difficult as say Elden Ring for a recent-ish example. The true ending final boss didn’t even take me as many tries as Last Judge or that frog fucker lmao
None of the runbacks are egregious either. There’s just about always a bench barely 30-40 seconds away at absolute most.
Groal’s runback is egregious. Even if you find the closest bench.
loudwhisper@infosec.pub
on 08 Sep 18:18
nextcollapse
If anything I find the walkbacks much shorter than in the original. There is always a bench 30s/1m away from each boss or tough platforming section. At least so far…
Yeah I am almost at the end of the act 1 (i think?) and so far the impression is that if something seems to have a long walk or having to repeat a hard parcour section, I didn’t find some hidden bench or shortcut to bypass said parcour section.
In general I can see this game being started as an expansion for HK, the difficulty is quite high and the curve steeper, but I can’t relate with most of the complains so far (the currency maybe a little, but it’s normal IMHO you can’t just shop everything at once from a new vendor you find).
Initially I was put off by the double damage, but the heal being short and x3 I think compensates for it (plus, you can do it mid air etc.).
janewaydidnothingwrong@lemmy.world
on 08 Sep 19:27
collapse
the vastly increased traversal speed also helps mitigate the walkback tedium
I imagine a non-insignificant portion of Silksong players never played HK and just jumped on the hype bandwagon. Which makes sense considering it was built up like it would literally pay off your mortgage and reunite you with your high school sweetheart.
HK can be trivialized pretty early on by stacking charms and upgrades. Silksong spaces out meaningful upgrades in a way that really forces you to learn the ins and outs of the game before you can start buildcrafting.
FWIW, all the final bosses are easier than HK’s true final boss. The difficulty scaling starts with a rough curve but evens out over time.
I think time has made people look at Hollow Knight through rose tinted glasses. When I picked up the game in 2018, I got to the Soulmaster and gave up entirely because of its runback, it was just too annoying.
I ended up finishing the game a few years later and absolutely loving it, but runbacks are to this day my main criticism of the game, and I know a lot of people agree about that.
For this reason I hoped that they’d make things better in Silksong, but at least now I know what to expect so it doesn’t annoy me as much as it used to.
I was all-in on Hollow Knight. Beat it multiple times, including Path of Pain and the Nightmare King. But I’m struggling with Silksong.
I went back and started up Hollow Knight again just to sanity-check myself, and, yes, it’s definitely an easier game. Many fewer enemies can hit for 2 health; there’s more variety in paths in the early game, so if you hit a wall in one direction you can try another; and you get access to upgrades that actually feel impactful relatively early instead of skills that use up my magic pool that I can’t spare because I need them because I’m always one hit away from dying.
My pet theory is that Silksong is actually just exactly what they originally pitched: DLC for players that have mastered the highest skill points in Hollow Knight. And maybe that would be fine if I were coming straight into it off of the back of Godhome. But it’s been years since I was playing those areas, and my skills have atrophied. It’s okay for a DLC to expect mastery from the start, but a standalone game should have more of a curve.
In most games, finally beating it would have me saying “thank fuck its over”.
In silksong, I’m saying “fuck yeah that was a good boss”. It’s a very different feeling, and one that I haven’t had the pleasure of enjoying in quite some time.
That said.
I think both hollow knight and silksong should have easy modes. It would be fine. It doesn’t hurt me any that someone else can have an easier time. People need to remember that video games are entertainment, and the sweaty “hardcore gamers” can fuck off with their usual judgemental elitism.
This is exactly it. I think the game is a goddamn masterpiece. The most infuriating fights feel like huge accomplishments, not just relief. Phenomenal game all around, but that difficulty curve isn’t for everyone. I can say the same about any Soulsborne game, love them to death but it’s definitely too much for some folks. Difficulty options are a good thing, if a compromise has to be made just have it disable achievements or w/e.
But_my_mom_says_im_cool@lemmy.world
on 08 Sep 19:32
nextcollapse
Why are these side scrollers premium price?? Seems like such a cash grab. That’s why franchises are going backwards into side scrollers, easy money, i avoid them
TimbukTuscan@reddthat.com
on 09 Sep 02:15
collapse
The game is 20 bucks. How the hell is that a premium price?
BananaIsABerry@lemmy.zip
on 08 Sep 19:50
nextcollapse
I'm guessing it's something like when you lose to a boss you have to travel a senselessly difficult and long way back to the boss to try again?
That's exactly it. The runbacks aren't too long in this game despite all the complaints, but some of them are tricky and can get annoying if you keep dying 10 seconds into a fight.
More like the Dark Souls formula of having to trek through heaps of enemies and traps to get back to the boss. Including the whole “lose all of your money on death” thing.
Modern from games barely have run backs anymore. Atleast in souls game you can bank your currency into stats or buy consumables, you can’t reliably do that in SS.
FooBarrington@lemmy.world
on 09 Sep 14:34
collapse
Yes you can! There’s plenty of places where you can turn prayer beads into consumable chains.
No, just those with bad level design. Nine Sols has plenty of challenging boss fights, zero run back. Same with Sekiro, and most newer titles.
WolfLink@sh.itjust.works
on 08 Sep 21:25
nextcollapse
There have been several boss fights so far where I die to the path to the boss more than the boss itself and it takes way longer to get to the boss than actually beating it.
That being said though, I do think there’s some merit to runbacks as an actual consequence for failure. I definitely strategize more cautiously because of it.
YiddishMcSquidish@lemmy.today
on 08 Sep 21:35
nextcollapse
Some of these mother fuckers never dealt with nosk and it shows.
Armok_the_bunny@lemmy.world
on 08 Sep 22:15
nextcollapse
I mean, there are some really bad runbacks, but yeah most of them are fine.
This is the only thing I wanted to know from reviews, for whether or not to bother with Silksong. I love difficult boss fights, but cannot be arsed to spend more than half a minute doing a tedious chore in order to actually redo boss fights.
Armok_the_bunny@lemmy.world
on 09 Sep 14:42
nextcollapse
The worst one I’ve encountered apparently has a secret bench somewhere that makes it much better, and the second worst (the runback that I think everyone is talking about) is about as long as the runback to crystal guardian I think.
faint_marble_noise@programming.dev
on 10 Sep 07:45
collapse
It is slightly worse then HK.
FooBarrington@lemmy.world
on 09 Sep 08:30
collapse
Most runbacks aren’t too bad, but fuck the Bilewater one. That shit was too hard and annoying. I had less trouble with the First Sinner than that boss.
The devs looked at blight town from dark souls 1 and thought 'we can do worse'. It really is a nightmare but somehow I killed the boss first try in the end
FooBarrington@lemmy.world
on 09 Sep 14:31
collapse
Lucky! I had to try more than ten times due to unlucky behavior in the waves before the boss, and finally managed to win only by using tools.
Along with unpausable cutscenes. My kid will cry exactly during your 10 minute cutscene, and I want to know the story.
mic_check_one_two@lemmy.dbzer0.com
on 09 Sep 00:06
collapse
I’m guessing it’s something like when you lose to a boss you have to travel a senselessly difficult and long way back to the boss to try again?
Exactly. Lots of bosses don’t have convenient save points nearby, so you’re forced to walk back from the save point every time. And many of the treks are either long or just outright annoying (cheesy enemies, obstacle courses, etc). It’s like the 5 Minute Long Unskippable Cutscene’s more annoying older brother, because this unskippable cutscene requires actual gameplay and focus.
Hot take here, but I don’t mind them. Exactly because they take focus. They tell me when it’s time for a break. If I’m not up for the runback, then I’m not up for aother attempt at the boss.
I haven’t played silksong, but I’m just going off other games in the past for my experience.
If you make it through the hallway of meaningless denizens that just waste time and get to the boss, then die to the boss… Why waste time going through the meaningless denizens again to challenge the boss?
I can see it on higher difficulties when you need to make sure you get through the meaningless denizens perfectly in order to preserve your health and resources to have a better chance of defeating the boss.
But when you just want to experience the story on lower difficulty why make the denizens less powerful to make the boss easier when you can instead just put the save point in front of the boss in instead of the denizens? You’ve already made it through the denizens, it’s not like you’re skipping content.
Because if you can’t make it through the denizens, you can’t make it through the boss. It’s a filter.
okamiueru@lemmy.world
on 09 Sep 06:30
nextcollapse
What a weird take. It’s about respecting the players’ time. Making it through the denizens to the boss is not challenging whatsoever. Why would you think it is? It’s just tedious, and bad level design.
curiousaur@reddthat.com
on 09 Sep 06:32
nextcollapse
If it’s not challenging, why are you complaining?
okamiueru@lemmy.world
on 09 Sep 07:18
nextcollapse
Think of runback as an unskippable ad. My time is limited, and that’s not the part I enjoy.
NewDayRocks@lemmy.dbzer0.com
on 09 Sep 09:35
collapse
It’s a balance between immersion and world building and tedium.
In silksong the run backs never seen so far that it is tedious. The save point is not right next to the boss fights but for the most part they aren’t egariously far. Plus the save points serve as rest spots for the multiple paths you take. A save point at every boss would be detrimental imo.
I dont think there is any conversation to be had about an easy mode or boss runbacks. Any time this small dev team spends on an easy mode is time wasted IMO.
If its to hard you can play another game. I see this the same as people demanding a complex movie be changed to be easier to understand. Its just a dumb complaint and im sick of seeing these people flood every comment section of every slightly challenging game.
Feathercrown@lemmy.world
on 08 Sep 23:09
nextcollapse
The difference between “I don’t like this” and “this is bad” is too often overlooked
thatKamGuy@sh.itjust.works
on 09 Sep 00:31
nextcollapse
I’m ok with there being a conversation on this topic, even if the arguments devolve to ‘waaah’ vs. ‘git gud’.
Ultimately though, I agree that a small dev team shouldn’t have to focus on a game-mode outside their vision - and any such demand for an easy-mode or other additions can and should be left up to mod makers.
It’s a single-player game, so in the end how the individual user wants to play is how they should be able to play.
NigelFrobisher@aussie.zone
on 09 Sep 06:49
collapse
They’re saying your taste in games isn’t valid and shouldn’t be catered for. Instead, theirs should be in every case.
NigelFrobisher@aussie.zone
on 08 Sep 21:33
nextcollapse
People forgetting that when you ran out of lives you used to have to go back to the start of the whole game.
would they still like it if there was a difficulty setting?
pressanykeynow@lemmy.world
on 11 Sep 10:09
collapse
Hard to say. We have many examples of games with only one difficulty that are glorified for their challenging combat. We have an example of God of War with cool and challenging combat on max difficulty that for some reason did not receive such status like Souls games. I think Elden Ring can be an example of a challenging game with “difficulty setting” that was did receive other Souls treatment. So I think “difficulty settings” can work if done not as an option at the start of the game but by adding game mechanics or strategies that make it easier. Technically that’s what Silksong does for the most bits with a crest for easier platforming, usable tools for combat and boss specific weaknesses(Moorwing fight is trivial at the right corner of the arena, Widow can only hit you with one attack if you stand at the corner, and so on).
all of the things you say are completely, 100%, unaffected by a difficulty setting.
The only thing a difficulty setting changes is that some people can say “I am better than you, I beat [game X] and you didn’t”
that’s it.
and even that is a complete illusion, see the prominent worst business man in the world, paying someone to make PoE ranks for him.
Also there are mods, cheats and plain lying.
This whole thing is excluding people, and for what? Literally worthless bragging rights.
pressanykeynow@lemmy.world
on 11 Sep 15:36
collapse
This whole thing is excluding people, and for what? Literally worthless bragging rights.
It does seem so. These’s also an issue with balancing different difficulties and receiving bad reviews if not done correctly but I think it’s minor compared to allowing more people to enjoy your product.
TimbukTuscan@reddthat.com
on 09 Sep 02:09
nextcollapse
And you’re forgetting that was a holdover from arcades designed solely to part people from their money.
angstylittlecatboy@reddthat.com
on 09 Sep 06:53
nextcollapse
As someone who isn’t necessarily big on the notion streamlining is “objectively” good game design… That more or less began to be disposed of the minute we had the technology, minus a few now-niche genres that rely on it. It was gradual, but mass market games as early as Zork in 1981, had save schemes.
EnsignWashout@startrek.website
on 09 Sep 20:21
collapse
People forgetting that when you ran out of lives you used to have to go back to the start of the whole game.
We remember. It was bullshit back then. It’s still bullshit now.
Edit: I beat those games on three lives. It was still some bullshit.
pressanykeynow@lemmy.world
on 09 Sep 23:28
nextcollapse
Why is it bullshit? If you couldn’t die nobody would play those games. The stakes were the reason to play.
NigelFrobisher@aussie.zone
on 10 Sep 00:48
collapse
It wasn’t bullshit. You could get through those games in about an hour and that set of levels was the game. Games like Sonic sunk or swam based on whether playing through those levels over and over to achieve a better run was actually enjoyable. Not to say that today’s much longer games aren’t valid too, but they don’t have to be as tight.
I think it’s a great game for veterans who like challenges like myself.
But I have to call out team Cherry for their interviews:
They said they wanted anyone to be able to pick up this as their first Hollow Knight game and just start playing… Sorry, but, bullshit. the difficulty ramp is too quick, double damage comes out to early and the boss fights get more challenging quickly. See the weaver for instance, a fight I’d place around the difficulty of Grimm, but there’s double damage and you probably only have 5 health.
Also they mentioned part of the game’s difficulty was due to Hornet’s competence and utility… Ghost is canonically a better fighter than Hornet, so by that logic they should have made the game easier (yes I’m being silly about this part).
I think its fine for a player new to the series but you’ve got to the type of person that is willing to learn and willing to die over and over. For people who play these kinds of games its not insane to expect them to pick it up.
Didn’t personally watch the interview in question (or forgot by now) so I don’t know what they meant, but it definitely feels like lore wise Silksong can stand as an independent game with what I’ve discovered so far.
Regarding difficulty, Hollow Knight isn’t the only game that could have prepared you for Silksong I think.
I think what it helps a lot with is familiarity and mindset. The overall game loop is very similar.
That said, I think it’s wise to give HK a try before buying Silksong. It’s a cheaper game, worth playing through if you’re into these kinds of experiences and if you don’t enjoy it, chances are Silksong will not be much fun for you either.
_stranger_@lemmy.world
on 08 Sep 22:46
nextcollapse
Baguette@lemmy.blahaj.zone
on 08 Sep 22:52
nextcollapse
I mean personally I don’t have any issues with an easy mode in games, casual play is nice when you come back home from work half dead. Silksong is advertised as a soulslike though. Feels a little counterintuitive to take away the aspects that define a soulslike, even if it makes the game accessible to a wider audience.
And all music should be under three minutes long. Every book should have page numbers. Photographers should have familiar subjects. Paintings should have a full explanation by the artist telling you exactly what they meant to communicate. /s
If the game isn’t for you, just move along. There are tons of games out there.
are you aware of the meaning of the word “setting” in this context?
Just in case I can explain:
It means you can switch something from one behaviour or effect to another, basically giving you a choice of how something should work.
So, adding a difficulty setting changes nothing about your experience of the game.
do you need more words to explain this simple thing?
I can try to use simple language and shorter sentences if you require it?
Don’t coddle whiners, make them git gud or get out.
EarlGrey@discuss.tchncs.de
on 09 Sep 01:51
nextcollapse
Runbacks are a lame attempt at artificially increasing difficulty. I’ll happily die on that hill. I love difficult games, but there is a fine line between frustration and difficult.
Elden Ring (at least all the bits I played through) and Sekiro absolutely nailed it. None of the run backs were particularly egregious, and it let me really focus on experimenting and learning to feel out the difficult fights. Celeste is another good example. I have dropped hours on some of the later levels trying to master them, but never once got frustrated.
Hollow Knight I never finished because I got stuck on a boss and the runback was just way too long and annoying. I loved everything else about the game and want to finish it eventually.
Edit: I think they have their place as “mods” that you could enable to increase difficulty, and i’d actually probably enjoy it that way. Just designing the game around them is where i draw the line.
Cybersteel@lemmy.world
on 09 Sep 04:18
nextcollapse
To be fair, From has like many games to learn from that while Cherry only has HK. I’ll never forget the sheer pain of the Frigid Outskirts from Dark Souls 2.
Kinokoloko@lemmy.dbzer0.com
on 09 Sep 04:45
collapse
At least that’s an optional area. Now, the run back from pre-SotFS No Man’s Wharf? That was a pain.
Underwaterbob@sh.itjust.works
on 09 Sep 08:29
collapse
The run to Blue Smelter nearly gave me a coronary.
ZombiFrancis@sh.itjust.works
on 09 Sep 20:55
collapse
Although DS2 gave us a reprieve with despawning enemies eventually, making runbacks feel rather poignant when you’re walking an empty world.
NigelFrobisher@aussie.zone
on 09 Sep 22:50
nextcollapse
I hate that I only completed Frigid Outskirts because all the horses respawned. The bosses were absolute rock there too.
Underwaterbob@sh.itjust.works
on 11 Sep 00:42
collapse
Yeah, I remember a few sad runbacks with populations looking pretty sparse…
To me it feels like “if you don’t survive the journey, you’re too weak for the boss itself” it brings me down and makes me calmer until I reach the boss.
I like them because it forces you to try to salvage a fight instead of just conceding after a bad start. The time spent getting to the boss is investment you don’t want to waste.
I think this is really just an issue of the tools and abilities not being inherently linked to the related bosses.
FYI quickhop attacking is faster than ground combos and you can weave in the trio dagger throws when you are dodging away from close attacks. Also your attack will negate enemy attacks weapon hitbox(but you still have to dodge bodily contact). The poison tool upgrade is overbalanced and makes a lot of fights a joke.
I’ve also found myself messing up the run back but committing to the fight anyway with a few masks down. You can either heal back up by breaking the cocoon, or practice starting the fight low and keep the silk for later (one of the best changes from the first game IMO is making the cocoon an asset in contrast to the ghost that would harass you).
Another aspect is the run back itself. When you struggle a lot with a boss (as I often do), you will have to do the run back so many times that you passively start getting better at traversing the map. And even if the specific combos you used on the boss itself don’t necessarily translate to other bosses, the movement skills likely will keep being useful.
pressanykeynow@lemmy.world
on 09 Sep 23:07
collapse
I like them because I will think what I did wrong, not just going to do that wrong thing again until I get lucky with my wrong strategy.
dockedatthewrongworf@aussie.zone
on 09 Sep 02:15
nextcollapse
I think this discussion has more merit when framing this from an ableism viewpoint. Games having accessibility sliders to either slow down puzzles or enemies helps players who have a disability.
A game that comes to mind is Crosscode! You had options that could change the speed and damage for various things in the game. Was nice because sometimes I’d change the settings when I had been stuck and frustrated on a puzzle which made the game far more enjoyable.
dockedatthewrongworf@aussie.zone
on 09 Sep 03:37
nextcollapse
For myself? Definitely! But someone shouldn’t be prevented from playing a game because of a disability. Just like how Frostbite engine games have great accessibility options for colour blindness.
loudwhisper@infosec.pub
on 09 Sep 06:36
nextcollapse
Tbh it’s a reflex and dexterity game, among other things, so it is not for everyone. In the same way a game that requires memorising melodies is not for me, since I suck hard at it.
I suppose there could be a mod that simply doesn’t let you die and you can explore the whole world.
There is no other way to make a platforming section easier, unless you add more anchor points etc., which requires actually changing the world (essentially, you remove the platforming section), so those could still be a problem.
Celeste is a game about reflexes and dexterity. They implemented tons of accessibility features, including ways to make platforming easier.
Holytimes@sh.itjust.works
on 09 Sep 14:15
nextcollapse
And the game is fundamentally not the same with some of those accessibility features enabled. Good on the devs for targeting a wider audience but fundamentally they have different game play experiences.
Not every designer wants to have multiple experiences in their game. That should be entirely up to the designer and demanding them add entirely new experiences is unreasonable.
Color blindness support, rebindable controls, subtitles, on screen audio visual cues. There’s plenty of things that can help the disabled that don’t change fundamental aspects of the game. If a developer adds these but doesn’t want to compromise the intended gameplay as they see it then they shouldn’t have to.
End of the day. It’s art that is being sold to be consumed. If you don’t like the art, then it’s not for you.
I can see they have lots of options!
However the platforming seems to be slightly different? In case of HK I suppose that invincibility-like mode is what I suggested brought to the extreme (I.e. you can just walk over spikes etc). Maybe the other thing that could work is slowing the game down so that timing is easier to get.
I think it’s an interesting discussion accessibility from this point of view. I think everyone draws the line at some point, between accessibility and simply making a game with some principles that represent the soul of the game.
DupaCycki@lemmy.world
on 09 Sep 08:32
nextcollapse
Colorblind accessibility is easy to implement and pretty much everybody can do it after reading a wikipedia article on colorblindness.
On the other hand, balancing a game for several difficulties is not easy and takes a lot of time. Plus, it doesn’t always make sense. Part of the game is the struggle. If you’re skipping the struggle, then you’re missing a part of the game.
Holytimes@sh.itjust.works
on 09 Sep 14:11
collapse
Disability, accessibility and gameplay accessibility are two different things and should be treated as such. There is also a very hard line between what is possible to help someone with a disability. Enjoy a medium that requires certain minimal physical traits.
The color blindness deafness rebindable controls as many things that can help the disabled and these should be expected whenever possible. Hell a lot of these are built directly into your operating system and don’t require any effort from a game developer. They just need to make sure not to get in the way of already existing tools.
But gameplay accessibility is an entirely different beast and even very minimal. Gameplay accessibility can create an entirely new gameplay experience to the point where it’s not the same game. If the developer wants to add those, it should be up to the developer and what they’re targeting, both as an audience and as an artist.
We should always demand disability accessibility. We should never demand gameplay accessibility.
The main goal of a game is to be fun, not to be a bragging right; even more in a single player game.
If someone, for any reason, prefers a more casual experience, let them have it. On the other hand, if you prefer to brag, go for it and cramp up the difficulty.
There us no point of gating a single player game. Single player games should be accessible for all.
DupaCycki@lemmy.world
on 09 Sep 08:20
nextcollapse
The main goal of a game is to be whatever the creators and/or you want it to be. Frustrating difficulty can still be fun, just like feeling scared in a horror game is fun. It simply has to be done right.
Keep in mind it’s already very hard to make a good, balanced game. Adding difficulty sliders increases that exponentially. Even if you add a few presets - that’s still a lot more work, which indie studios may not have resources for.
Katana314@lemmy.world
on 09 Sep 11:29
nextcollapse
Many FromSoft games don’t strike that balance right. The ones I’ve tried, even the ones I successfully beat, gave me a groan of “Fucking FINALLY, now what mediocre reward and fresh hell do I get for that!? In fact, why am I playing this…?”
Another example, Stellar Blade. I enjoyed the difficulty, and got pretty good at the parries against bosses; but usually only hit about 60% of them. That wasn’t good enough for the very final boss, which takes off about half your health for each one you miss. Only for that fight, I ended up turning down the difficulty - and it was still tough! And, I still felt rewarded at the end.
One final example, Another Crab’s Treasure. It has some hard fights, and many difficulty options. I’m glad those were there…but I also just never used them. Also, it now has a NG+ that gets even harder.
There doesn’t need to be sliders or options menu settings. Elden Ring handles difficulty settings beautifully: upgrading your flask is optional and increases both the frequency and amount of healing that can be received. Using summons is optional and can make some fights an absolute cakewalk. Same with all the different crafting items. If you want, almost every dungeon in the game can be skipped or revisited if it’s too hard.
All Team Cherry had to do was change the timing or location for access to certain tools in the game.
pressanykeynow@lemmy.world
on 09 Sep 23:21
collapse
To be fair while Elden Ring is the most popular From game it’s also by many accounts a downgrade from their previous titles. It’s fun but not nearly Bloodborne, not Dark Souls with it’s ups and downs but establishing the genre, not even Sekiro which is weird for the series but still doesn’t have any game to compare where it shines. Personally if I had to choose between three Elden like games and one Bloodborne, I wouldn’t even think.
I used Elden Ring as an example, but all of Fromsoft’s Souls games have had similar ways of adjusting difficulty. Bloodborne still had summons, still had tons of optional areas and alternate paths, and even had the cum dungeon if you want to cheese it on levels and skip the grind.
And it’s not like From is the only company doing difficulty this way. Most Mario games are pretty straightforward for casual players, but advanced players who master the controls can often find secret levels or alternate collectibles. It’s an added, optional challenge a player self-imposes to make the game harder. Or Celeste and the optional strawberries and post-game levels.
Holytimes@sh.itjust.works
on 09 Sep 14:07
nextcollapse
A single player game shouldn’t be accessible to all. It should be accessible to everyone the creator intends it to be accessible to.
Devaluing and demanding an artist or team of artists compromise their vision and intent is flat out a shit take. You have to be a massive self centered asshole to think it’s even remotely acceptable.
Nintendo expects Mario games to be played by everyone, thus it’s reasonable to expect accessibility features and difficulty controls. To allow for the widest range of players.
A Mario game with out either implicit or explicit difficulty controls would be a fair thing to criticize when Nintendo’s clearly stated goal is to reach the boardest audiences and be a game for the whole family.
But a game made by say kojima IS NOT trying to reach the boardest audience. Thus, expecting any amount of control over the experience is just being an asshole on the part of the player. The game is designed for himself first and foremost. He’s making something he wants to make. Tell a story he wants to tell. If the player enjoys it then all the better.
Games are after all first and foremost art. Art can be a product or can be a passion. A product even if art is reasonable to expect it to be made for the consumer first and cater to them But never should any reasonable person. Assume a passion should bend the knee.
A high difficulty is not inherently good game design. Making a game more approachable through lower difficulty settings with additional checkpoints doesn’t make it worse for people who like a challenge. It just makes it enjoyable to more people.
Claiming it’s down to “artistic vision” just feels dishonest. You could claim Studio Ghibli movies should never be dubbed or subbed. You just have to learn Japanese to enjoy them, just don’t watch them if that’s not for you… but why? How is it a bad thing if more people can enjoy something?
Cup Head is a great example. It’s a fantastic game with an art style that younger kids love. But it’s too difficult for most kids, which doesn’t make the game better, it just locks them out from a game they’d otherwise love.
Studio Ghibli movies should never be dubbed or subbed. You just have to learn Japanese to enjoy them, just don’t watch them if that’s not for you…
I feel this is a false equivalence.
If you wanted to make a movie analogy, I’d say it’s more like a movie having subtle subtext or context which would make it’s message or intent more difficult to comprehend.
Imagine if someone watched The Cabin in the Woods (satire movie about horror movies) and said it was a bad movie because it wasn’t scary.
I think its fair to say that person would have low film literacy at least.
How do we compensate for that? Should movies start offering accessibility features so every viewer can have the ability to know foreshadowing, film cliches, or meta-narrative devices?
I feel like giving viewers an option before a movie to say “i have low media literacy”, which would result in popups during the movie to say “hey, this is a callback to the Hellraiser franchise” would be insulting to the creators.
The film wasn’t made for casual movie viewers, it was made for a specific audience. The creators aren’t obliged to make it more easily digestible.
Edit:
Satire falls apart when it’s spoon fed.
If difficulty is part of the games design, then reducing it is functionally similar to explicitly stating irony to a viewer.
Magnum@lemmy.dbzer0.com
on 09 Sep 09:27
nextcollapse
Cabin in the woods was a satire movie??? I like the movie…
I’ll write my response as if you’re being sincere;
Cabin in the Woods is one of my all time favourite movies, but the entire premise is built around horror movie tropes.
The “gods” mentioned at the end of the movie are the movie viewers themselves. They “demand blood” (watching a splatter movie for the sake of watching people get killed).
It’s a requirement that “the virgin” be the last one killed, but the death is optional (this is a staple of horror movies; the ‘Final Girl’)
One of the literary devices the movie toys with is the idea that ALL the horror movies we’ve seen are part of the same universe, and the guys in the offices are the ones pulling the strings to entertain us.
The entire movie is one giant nudge-nudge, wink-wink for people who love to get meta with horror movies.
If you enjoyed it regardless, that’s fine, but my point was that it would be a bad product if it tried to accommodate for viewers such as yourself.
No I really did like the movie and yes it was full of stereo types like the chad, the stoner, the girl etc but I never came to think of it as satire or that we are the gods demanding the blood. But it was a good movie, I liked it.
Small aside: the characters aren’t stereotypes, they’re archetypes. This is another example of the satire, as well as the gas station attendant from the start (I think he was called the Harbinger?)
But The Cabin In The Woods is exactly what I’m talking about. A product with mass appeal that still caters to a small group of people. Much like Paul Verhovens old movies. You can watch them as dumb action or social criticism.
And movies have several accessibility features. Things like subtitles, which often translate cultural references or jokes that don’t directly translate to viewers from foreign countries. Descriptive audio tracks for visually impaired, directors commentary to learn things behind the scenes. Many services and devices also allow you to even out dynamics and enhance speech.
The problem with games that have a too high difficulty threshold isn’t that you’re missing out on some hidden subtext. It’s that you will never get to see 70% of the game, for absolutely no good reason.
Cuphead is such a good example of this, according to xbox achievement stats 31% never made it past the first part of the game, 72% never got to the end of the game.
Accessibility in film delivers the same work to more people. Accessibility in games can cross the line into creating a different work entirely, because the interaction itself is the art, not just the visuals or sound.
Saying “most players never saw the end of Cuphead” isn’t proof of failure; it’s proof of selectivity. Just like not everyone finishes Infinite Jest, but it doesn’t mean Wallace failed as a writer.
Cuphead was made to invoke arcade game feelings. The gameplay is brutal by design. That’s the point.
It’s like watching Terrifier and throwing up half way through, storming out of the cinema and saying “the acting was good but it was too violent, I wish I could watch a version of the movie without the gore”
But it doesn’t, accessibility in film does not deliver the same work to more people. Films are translated, dubbed and subbed to be approachable. Adding voice acting from talent that were never involved in the original film. It’s all about adapting the film to fit a wider audience.
The fact that gamers think games are somehow different and the “git gud” approach is just pointless elitism. How would Cuphead, Super Meatboy or Silk Song be a worse game if they had an easy game mode where you had more life and/or checkpoints? How does that setting change the experience of someone playing in normal, veteran or hardcore mode?
Subtitles/dubs are translations. They adapt language, not pacing, cinematography, editing, or structure. That’s fundamentally different from altering a game’s difficulty, which changes the mechanics, the thing the art is built from and differentiates it from other mediums.
A better analogy:
Subtitles are like adding glasses so more people can see the same painting.
Easy mode is like repainting sections of the canvas so it’s “clearer.” You can call both “accessibility,” but one preserves the work, the other mutates it.
Furthermore, language isn’t a good metric by which to compare analogies because games are also translated.
“How would the game be worse if it had an easy mode?”
Adding an easy mode changes the experience even for hardcore players because:
Design intent shifts. Once multiple difficulties exist, developers design around them. Balancing, encounter pacing, even story beats get shaped by the lowest common denominator.
Cultural meaning shifts. If a work is known as “brutal but fair,” its identity collapses when an easy bypass exists. (Dark Souls without consequence isn’t Dark Souls; Cuphead without punishment isn’t Cuphead.)
Easy mode doesn’t just let more people in; it makes it a different game. Saying “just don’t play easy” is like saying “why not release a PG-rated Terrifier with no gore? Horror fans can still watch the R version, so what’s the harm?”
Terrifier is available in several cut versions for specific regions / services. Which is incredibly common for movies in general and have been since the 70s. Which you do to reach a wider audience.
Both Silk Song and Cuphead already have additional difficulties. They’re already balancing difficulties, they’ve just decided to gate keep gamers who are not able to play difficult games.
If Gears Of War and Call Of Duty had hardcore and veteran as the only difficulty setting, it wouldn’t make them more interesting games or make a statement about the horrors of war and the fragility of man. It would just make less people enjoy them, for no good reason.
A high difficulty threshold is bad game design. And it’s exclusive to people who have physical disabilities or limitations, or other reasons to why they can’t play overly difficult games.
And I say that as someone who loves to beat games in the higher difficulty tiers. But as someone who also wants more people to be able to enjoy the games I enjoy and who’s happy game design has improved since the 80s.
“But as someone who also wants more people to be able to enjoy the games I enjoy”
Its really not about you is it? I get where you are coming from but in the end its people who make the games who decite what kind of experience they want to make. Sometimes their visio does not click with everyone and that is allright.
No, that’s exactly my point, it’s not about me. And of course game developers and publishers are free to do what they want. But their decisions can and should be criticized if you don’t agree with them.
Many years back a friend working with a group of disabled teens and young adults called me asking about Guitar Hero. He wanted to know if there was some practice or easy mode where the song didn’t abruptly stop if you didn’t play well enough. At that time, unfortunately there wasn’t.
I can’t remember if Guitar Hero ever got a no fail mode, but Rockband did, which opens the game up to a new crowd of gamers.
I feel like you are pushing the goal post with bringing up disabilites in to talk about difficulty. It rough but not everything is made for everyone.
Difficulty is part of the games identify and its design choice.
Of course people can share their opinions and critisize anything they want. I just find it a bit arrogant when people say things like that. I mean do you really think you know more about game design than Ari Gibson and William Pellen?
Or Miyazaki? Fromsoftware basically started a completely new genre and it showed people want hard games that dont hold their hands.
I still remember how fresh demon souls felt when it came and kicked my ass. If there would have been a difficulty slider in it i would have made it easier for my self, but i would have lost a huge experience.
What you and I experience as challenging or punishing is unplayable for someone that’s younger, has a lower skill level or certain types of disabilities.
For them, a lower difficulty level just means they’re playing the same level of challenge that I am.
I’ve never claimed that I know more about game design than Miyazaki. I’ve just said that I think a high difficulty threshold is bad game design cause it’s exclusive. I think games should strive to be inclusive. One of the most downloaded mods for Elden Ring is an easy mode.
And im saying exclusivity is not inherently bad thing. There is plenty of games to play.
Your elden ring easymode for example. In nexus it has 180 000 downloads while the game had over 30 000 000 sales in pc alone. 0,6% of players have felt it neccessary to make it easier for them self. And i think its neat they have option to make it so. But 99,4% have played the game in the way developers intended and how they build the experience. If there were build in easymode im sure many players who strugled to beat the game would have changed the dificulty to easier and they would have watered down the experience the game was build upon.
MrFinnbean@lemmy.world
on 09 Sep 16:24
nextcollapse
Why everything should be for everybody? And why artists should care about your opikion when they are creating what they want to create.
Cup head is great example. Everything in the game is meticiusly hand crafted. The big part why its so popular is the difficulty that forces you to focus on the aninations and sprites. The difficulty also is economical in game as labor intensive as cup head. Because every sprite was hand drawn devs could not just churn unlimited levels and the games lenght came from the difficulty. Making the game easy would ruin the pacing of the game.
Games are art form like any other. There are mainstream movies, plays, songs, paintings and games etc etc etc. that try to reach as large audience as they can. But there is also obscure art pieces that only small group of people can enjoy. And both ways are fine
I find it obnoxious when people bitch about desing choices that devs have consciously made. Its not like they have any obligations to make a game in one way or another.
Is it not fair for the game developers’ artistic vision to not be accessible to all? Accessibility is nice, expands the potential audience, but if it compromises my artistic vision and I’m ok with giving up reach and money to preserve it, that doesn’t make my game bad or my vision invalid.
It would be ridiculous to call up the bar or the ama and complain to them that becoming a lawyer or a doctor is not accessible to all.
One last addition, adding control remapping, color options, and text to speech are true accessibility. Easy mode is fake accessibility
Easy mode is not fake accessibility. Celeste has the correct idea in allowing players adjust the difficulty for accessibility purposes.
Not everyone has the same reaction speed, same cognitive abilities, same eyesight. There are people who can only use one hand and that automatically makes reacting to attacks many times harder, should they be excluded from being able to enjoy the game because they are not physically capable enough for the boss fights?
And boss fights are probably 5% of the game anyway!
I agree with making accessible controllers with special layouts and allowing custom control bindings to accommodate those who are differently abled.
Those can be accommodated without meaningfully altering the game. Changing the gameplay is different however. Not that adding more difficulty options is a bad thing, I don’t mean to disparage anyone by calling it fake accessibility, just that I don’t think it’s the same as other options because it fundamentally changes the experience compared to other options that I considered “real”
pressanykeynow@lemmy.world
on 09 Sep 23:38
collapse
That’s an interesting take. You think game developers should not make games that require hands, vision, hearing, etc to enjoy them?
No, I think if something can be done to allow more people to enjoy the game, then it should not be considered a bad thing to do it. You can not make it accessible to everyone in the world, but if there are time and resources to add accessibility, it should not be neglected.
And I don’t agree with the use of artistic intent as an excuse to not include specific accessibility options: take closed captions for example, they are made to allow deaf and hard of hearing people enjoy the content even when they can’t hear the sound. A lot of media is built on sound being a cornerstone of the experience, and people who will use closed captions will have no notion of it, but does it mean that they should be excluded completely?
Just because people who use the accessibility options will not experience everything in a way the author intended does not mean they should not be experience it at all, and in this day no one really complains about game including captions or colourblind options, but anything that might affect difficulty is, for some reason, out of the question and is only subject to the artist’s vision of it.
pressanykeynow@lemmy.world
on 10 Sep 12:09
collapse
Following up on this, I think the studio ghibli is a good example of where community adding accessibility in the form of mods or cheats (or fan subs or dubs in the case of ghibli)
Yes, community mods that add accessibility options are great. But unfortunately they’re generally limited to certain platforms.
HollowNaught@lemmy.world
on 09 Sep 08:58
nextcollapse
I’m about 10 hours into silksong and it’s amazing, don’t get me wrong. But the majority of the boss fights seem… cheap?
Like, their difficulty doesn’t come from their various attacks, or their environment. Instead, it usually comes from the fact that they do double damage, or the fact that they spam the same two attacks over and over way too quickly, or the fact that they can do the same add summon three times in a row and make what was a controllable situation practically impossible
Now, I’ve 112% the OG hollow knight and beaten true radiance, so I’m not against difficult boss fights. In fact I relish the feeling of learning their moves and patterns after every single death
But when the moves are “ram into wall. Then ram into wall again” it becomes incredibly annoying
Some of the boss fights felt amazing once you start learning their attack patterns, but then others were just… lacking. The savage fly one comes to mind. It wasn’t particularly a difficult boss itself. But when it summoned ads, it became a fight around rng. It wasn’t a fun fight at all. Felt like the devs realised it was too easy and chucked in ads then left it there.
Separately, why on earth the boss doesn’t receive damage for slamming down on the spiky enemy when its spikes are deployed… Missed opportunity!
The Beastfly in the Chapel isn’t too bad, since you can leverage its slam to take out any ads, however there is another arena where you fight it again and it spawns flying ads who shoot projectiles which deal double damage AND the boss breaks the platforms you’re standing on.
Feels like bullshit fighting against it.
pressanykeynow@lemmy.world
on 09 Sep 23:01
collapse
I disagree about the fly that they just wanted to make you die more.
The boss itself is super easy, it has two attacks which are not only easily dodged but also leave a lot of opportunities to attack and move around.
So in essence the boss is a bag with silk to heal or use magic attacks while the real problem you face is using those resources to control the minions it summons.
So yeah if you go with the strategy to kill the boss fast you will suffer but if you act as a hunter to control the fight you will win.
Just my take on this boss after 100+ tries, and do consider it a good and interesting boss fight.
Or you can just rely on luck and brute force.
SlippiHUD@lemmy.world
on 09 Sep 10:41
nextcollapse
My biggest complaint is the sheer lack of rewards when I finish a fight. Give me any currency.
I have spent so much of this game broke, unable to buy the things I need to advance any side plots.
I’m currently stuck on the fight for the Music in the top left of the citadel. The double boss at the end is brutal. But because no enemy in that fight drops monster parts, I have to quit to grinding it to go grind more materials to build equipment, despite having slain 20+ enemies each run.
MrFinnbean@lemmy.world
on 09 Sep 11:33
nextcollapse
The game screams passion and devs spend seven years making it the way they like it. It is also a dirt cheap.
Critisism is fair and everybody has right for opininion. My opinion is that people who are bitching about the boss runs can shove it up to theirs.
Don’t like it, don’t buy it. I’m happy for team cherry and their success. It’s not for me but I don’t resent them that it isn’t. This nothing burger discussion is yet another herring designed to drive clicks and traffic off of the work of people who ACTUALLY create something of worth. Modern parasitism at its best.
traceur301@lemmy.blahaj.zone
on 10 Sep 06:16
collapse
Very well said
Highlandcow@feddit.uk
on 09 Sep 15:52
nextcollapse
Sigh this shit again, if it’s the creators decision to have a game with finely tuned hard difficulty, so be it, that’s the creators creative decision and it should be respected
BilliamBoberts@lemmy.world
on 09 Sep 20:18
nextcollapse
“death of the author” suggests some of the author’s intent is lost when a work is consumed by the audience.
kilgore_trout@feddit.it
on 10 Sep 05:50
nextcollapse
Then it’s not the developer’s fault anymore that the game is hard.
It exists by itself.
Go a degree I guess as the audiences own experiences will determine there own interpretation of the work, but in this situation I don’t think someone’s own experiences is going to impact too much the fact that silksong is hard as nails at points
EnsignWashout@startrek.website
on 09 Sep 20:18
collapse
I can accept stupid decisions. I don’t have to respect them.
chonglibloodsport@lemmy.world
on 09 Sep 20:26
nextcollapse
Respect is a weird word. It seems to have 2 nearly opposite meanings (kind of like literally):
Deep admiration for someone or something for their abilities, qualities, or achievements
Due regard for the feelings, wishes, or rights of others
So the first one implies that respect must be earned. The second implies that everyone must be respected by default (their due regard), thus respect is unearned.
No you don’t, so you can either mod the game or not play the game right?
DupaCycki@lemmy.world
on 09 Sep 16:11
nextcollapse
In my opinion, the game is not particularly difficult. That is, if you’ve played through the original Hollow Knight. Which most people haven’t. In fact, it looks to me like a lot of people jumping on the hype don’t have too much experience with metroidvanias and soulslikes.
It’s a sequel, so intended to be played after the original. Why do we care what people who haven’t played the first game think?
pressanykeynow@lemmy.world
on 09 Sep 22:38
collapse
It’s difficult for me and I like it. I played Hollow Knight but didn’t finish it because it was too frustrating late game. Silksong to me is not frustrating because difficulty is mainly in figuring out how to pass the challenge, not doing reflexes which I don’t have. Most of the things I heard people complain about are solved by not rushing around with failing strategy but by thinking what the game recently suggested you to do for this particular encounter.
I actually think bringing in Hollow Knight experience aka “I already know everything” might be the reason why some people are frustrated. Like I heard a person who claimed to get all the achievements in HK complain that the second phase of one boss is terrible because they spent a hundred tries to dodge all the projectiles while you can just stand at the corner of the arena where non of them will hit you and use the tools this game gives you to win the fight.
maxwells_daemon@lemmy.world
on 09 Sep 19:15
nextcollapse
I personally think Outer Wilds should give you the whole lore as an audiobook, not everyone wants to go hunting for clues and reading a bunch of old conversations between dead people in order to figure out what’s going on…
JackbyDev@programming.dev
on 09 Sep 21:02
nextcollapse
I mean, an audio book of Outer Wilds would be dope.
If you’re not able to commit to learning new strategies and using game mechanics to adapt to a game’s difficulty, and experience it as the developers intended, maybe it’s not for you. You can always watch a lore video or let’s play by other gamers to get the story if that’s the goal. This is Dark Souls 2 all over again, and I will personally say as someone who initially hated it, then gave it another chance; When you persist and triumph through grit, the game leaves a lasting impression and sense of accomplishment that you cheat yourself out of with a difficulty slider. That’s my favorite game in the series now, which is a deeply unpopular opinion, unsurprisingly.
This debate pops up every now and then and my opinion remains the same, there are plenty of games that aren’t meant to be a challenge to choose from. Part of games that are built to be a challenge is being able to reflect on how far you grew in the process, and people hate to hear it but ‘git gud’ is a real thing for those who believe things worth doing are hard.
itsprobablyfine@sh.itjust.works
on 09 Sep 23:31
collapse
Yeah I think as long as the devs are forward about it no problem. I have plenty of ‘hard things’ in my day to day life and I’m not looking for more of that in a videogame. Give me a Stardew or Factorio everytime - I want to relax and design things. Different games are for different people and that’s a good thing. Any game made to satisfy everyone will almost certainly satisfy no one.
Absolutely, it’s important to know what you like and want. Hell, lots of people work off vibes and go through phases where certain game types stimulate them, then fall off of those. Like MMOs and online FPS used to be my main thing, now I stick to single player story driven games. I’m not about to go loudly pout about how Stellaris doesn’t work for me and should be changed to appeal specifically to my wants, too busy with other games (and life).
Avoid2575@discuss.tchncs.de
on 10 Sep 07:14
nextcollapse
In this thread: people complaining who are apparently bad at game mechanics and can’t or won’t learn to improve.
Just beat Widow second attempt.
The run back has you start on one screen, traverse two screens, and done. I got as high as 12 Mississippi counting during it.
There are mods and cheats for this game already—and they even run on Linux. I turn 50 next month: though I’m still playing, I don’t have as much time for gaming as I used to and my reflexes aren’t what they were. I haven’t entirely removed the challenge with mods, but I feel no shame in tweaking this game to go easier on me and chew up less of my time as punishment for failure. I wish they had these as accessibility options built-in, but I’m fine with hacking it.
Anybody telling me I should “git gud” can pound sand: I’m already good at a bunch of things that get me a paycheck. I play games so I can relax and be terrible at something for fun. I’m certainly not playing for bragging rights.
I think this game is not for you then.Harfd games are hard so that you can feelproufd of yourself after completing something hardet than you though you could. You may not complete the story but if you “git gud” you may actually enjoy it more.
Some games are not meant to be relaxing. Why would you even play a hard game if you want something easy?
threaded - newest
I'm in act 2 and while Im in love with the game, I can agree. The game could be impossible for people who aren't already very good at platformers. Benches are very sparse and money is always an issue. I hope Team Cherry make the game more reasonable through updates.
I have no idea what people were expecting to be honest. Hollow Knight was already known for being an extremely difficult game with punishing anti-fun elements like runbacks and corpse runs. Which game had everyone played that got them so hyped for Silksong?
There’s a reason I stayed away from HK, and I will be staying away from Silksong too. Game looks great but I won’t be able to beat it and I won’t have any fun failing to do so.
I think the big difference is that HK had a smooth difficulty curve as you slowly unlock new abilities. Silksong by comparison picks up where HK left off and is immediately hard which makes it hard to approach for new players. Early game areas feel as hard as late game areas from the first game. That's throwing everybody off who is either new to the franchise or hasn't played Hollow Knight since it came out checks notes 8 years ago
Are you sure about that? It's been a while since I played Hollow Knight, but other than Hunter's Marsh I think Sillksong has been comparable to or slightly harder than equivalent parts of the Hollow Knight. The enemies are tougher, but you also get more tools to deal with them so it evens out. Mostly thinking of the projectiles here, but the mobility difference also can't be understated; you can abuse dash attacks in Silksong in a way you never could in Hollow Knight. Also I haven't quite (or at all really) gotten the hang of it but the game might've been designed with parrying in mind, which would allow you to avoid a lot of damage because many of the harder enemies are warrior types.
Ya, Hollow Knight's first areas like forgotten crossroads and greenpath were a lot easier. There werent any mechanics you have to worry about other than jumping and attacking, and most enemies you faced just walk slowly towards you. Bosses were also fairly straightforward.
By comparison Silksong has you fighting tougher enemies that could deal 2x damage, and quick bosses right off the bat like Bell Beast which kills you in 3 hits. Healing taking your entire bar also makes platforming more difficult because newbies will often be low HP and not have enough silk to heal.
Yes, Hornet is way faster and stronger than the knight but that kinda assumes you're good at dashing and pogo jumping, which many people fail at in the start.
Compared to what areas in Silksong? Because Moss grotto and Marrow seem to have roughly the same range (and difficulty) of enemies as forgotten crossroads and greenpath. I think you also have somewhat rose tinted glasses regarding the starting areas of Hollow Knight because most enemies weren't walking slowly towards you. I'd say it was more of a 50/50 split between walking enemies and flying enemies with some flying enemies shooting projectiles and flying projectile shooters are much harder than the one projectile spitting regular enemy in the first 2 areas of Silksong.
I think the comparison here isn't as one to one with Hollow Knight. Silksong is much faster paced. Hornet is more mobile and heals faster (and heals more at once), so bosses killing in 3 hits might not be that much harder because it's easier evade attacks and healing is faster. Bosses killing in 5 hits in Hollow Knight might end up being harder than Silksong because healing is a much slower and deliberate action and you might not get a time to heal with an unfamiliar boss.
From my experience grotto and marrow have been comparable to crossroad and greepath. It gets harder after marrow but Hollow Knight also got harder when you got into fungal wastes. Maybe the pace change makes you feel like it's harder than Hollow knight but so far I haven't felt like it was noticeably harder than my first Hollow knight playthrough.
I mean...it's kinda silly to go into Silksong without playing Hollow Knight yeah? Unless Silksong has something at the beginning that sort of catches you up to speed OR is like a Souls or Final Fantasy where it has nothing to do with the previous game entry.
But If I were a fan of the series I would hope the game ramped up difficulty and didn't hold my hand for the sequel. That, in my opinion, would be a worthy purchase. I had playing sequels that kind of "reset".
It’s the latter of the two. The focus is on a side character from the original game, but takes place in an entirely different map/kingdom. You don’t need to have played Hollow Knight, but there are little lore pieces that tickle the brain if you have (and didn’t just skip over all the dialogue). I’ve been really enjoying the game so far, and there’s only one runback that’s felt REALLY tedious, but it’s on what I’m assuming is an optional boss based on what I’ve played so far.
Every time a hard game gets made, we have to have this debate? Maybe the real easy mode is just not trying to please everyone.
I have to agree. Although I would have said “the real easy difficulty is realizing that not every game is for you”. And sometimes that includes really popular games, ones that everyone else seems to be enjoying. And that’s ok.
That’s fair, but I also don’t see a problem in voicing criticism about aspects of the game I don’t like. Especially if I do like the game as a whole. People should not see that as an attack on their personal enjoyment of the game.
Sure, and as a consumer of a product, you are within your rights to do so. But I think that a lot of times there’s an underlying thread of entitlement that comes with a lot of the criticisms. The tone suggests more ,“how dare you make something I can’t play” and less “I’m not suited for this challenge”. There’s surprisingly little in the way of complaints about the game design that read as things that fit the theme and game vision. There are a few, but most aren’t.
And full disclosure I’m speaking from the standpoint of someone who while interested in a lot of the “git gud” genre games, can’t cut it 90% of the time. It took me realizing that I just wasn’t who those games were for before I was able to look at some of my options and realize they were just me and my sour grapes.
if i purchase a game, you bet your ass i feel entitled to play the whole thing.
.
Yea. I wont dismiss this criticism as hate, but I will dismiss it as dumb. The game was designed to be a challenge. Not everyone is up to that challenge, that’s fine. The game isn’t meant for you, then.
My friend can’t play the Dark Souls games. He’s really interested in the setting and has given a few multiple attempts, but the difficulty curve just isn’t for him, so he just doesn’t play them.
Not everything that makes the game harder or more challenging to play is good game design though, and a game shouldn’t get a free pass just because its developers stated “well the game being hard is part of our artistic vision”. It’s fine to criticise things, even - or actually maybe especially - things we like. We don’t have to be binary about things, we can like something while still recognising its flaws.
Excessive runbacks for example is something that is primarily concerned with disrespecting your time as a player and even FromSoft seem to have realised that they’re not a good addition or a fun way of increasing difficulty seeing as they introduced Stakes of Marika in Elden Ring. Hell, even Ninja Gaiden went away from boss runbacks starting from the second game, and that came out in 2008!
I can’t say I’ve gotten to some of the examples people have mentioned as “annoying; bad design”, so I’ll leave judgement until I get there. But there’s nothing inherently wrong with runbacks if it’s part of the design and the boss is the culmination of that.
Stakes of Marika are definitely there to appeal to a wider audience. I personally don’t care for them, as for most areas in DS I enjoyed trying to claw my way back to the boss unharmed. It was like a puzzle.
It’s fine to criticise things, but I personally think “make checkpoint outside of the boss” the criticism is not a good one. At the end of the day, that’s all personal opinion.
A lot of DS1 runbacks were true runbacks where you could just run past everything. Once you’d worked out the running, they weren’t too irritating, but some were a bit long. In DS3 a number of runbacks had unavoidable enemies on the way where you could mess up and eat a hit and then be down an Estus charge.
The main two problems are:
You’re getting voted up for your opinion, and I’m getting down for mine. Strange. Things you say are unfun for you are fine for me, like I said in my post, I do believe it’s personal opinion.
I’m not denying that there has to be design intent in here, but I take great issue with people stating “runbacks are unfun” as a matter of fact. Again, if it’s taken into consideration with time and how the boss mechanic works, that’s simply how the game is designed. I respect everyone’s opinion and their thoughts being the opposite, but I don’t think it’s a universal truth that must be upheld with every game.
Again, maybe I’ll feel differently regarding Silksong specifically as I get further. So far I don’t take umbrage with it’s runback design.
I think he’s being upvoted and you’re being downvoted because boss runbacks have been around for a long time and both the industry and community have since come to a consensus that they’re just objectively bad game design. They don’t add anything of value to a game and their existence is a detriment to the experience. I don’t think you’ll find a single person who holds the opinion that they’re fun. People like yourself may tolerate them, but a tolerable inconvenience is not the same thing as fun. You’ve actually gone exceptionally out of your way to avoid calling them fun.
Like with anything, not all personal opinions are going to be held in equal regard. And your take here is going to be an outlier so I wouldn’t be surprised if you continue to get this reception.
I haven’t gone out of my way. While I haven’t used the word “fun”, I did say I enjoyed most runbacks in Dark Souls as a sort of puzzle. Being downvoted for a subjective opinion is absurd, especially when the person I’m responding to also has a subjective opinion. But nice to know my opinion has less value.
Anyway, I don’t really want to go in circles with this since I feel like both sides here have said what they want to say.
I’ll just leave with an example of a mechanic I find unfun and wish would go away, as a sort of olive branch of understanding that opinions are opinions. In Breath of the Wild and similar games, I hate the weapon/item degradation mechanic. I understand their design goals with it, and I understand how removing it from those games would change quite a bit of how they want the game to run, but I’d be much happier if it were to disappear completely.
I think we all know that the up/down votes are people agreeing or disagreeing with you. So having more downvotes than upvotes means that more people disagree with you than agree with you.
Also, if you complain about downvotes, that usually deserves a downvote from me.
It’s only subjective in that it’s not entirely impossible for at least one person out there to enjoy the mechanic. However at the same time there has been a general consensus made that it’s not a good mechanic. Your opinion may be the equal of any one other persons opinion, but what I think you’re not understanding is that is that it’s not the equal of the many opinions of the majority of people. If you expect your one opinion to hold the same value as the collective opinions of everyone else, you’re setting yourself up for disappointment.
That’s not a great example to your point because the weapon degradation mechanic of BOTW is also widely regarded as a bad mechanic. It’s the most disliked mechanic in that game.
I think I approached the discussion wrong and perhaps wasn’t voicing what I was thinking properly. Regardless, I’m clearly not in the majority of opinion, so I’d like to just bow out of this discussion and wish everyone has the fun that they want to have.
Lemmy is really weird about these kinds of things. The hive has decided your personal feelings towards game design must be punished I guess.
“Punished” lmfao
Also, “hive”.
I’ve spoken to others about this subject due to this and none of them have reflected the comments here. I don’t even know most of the people I posed the question to. I suppose this forum (and the forums or social media these posters frequent) hold their opinion as more of a fact than I was led to believe.
Regardless, everyone can feel how they want about this. I’ll just play Silksong and have fun on my end of the table.
Well, some opinions are more valid than others, even when there is subjectivity… of course, I would say that.
“Design intent” is not an excuse for unfun mechanics. Design intent matters - for example if you’re complaining that it took you 50 attempts to do a boss and you’re frustrated, but other people are completing the same bosses in fewer attempts and enjoying it, the intent of the designers and the spectrum of opinions is absolutely critical. But this isn’t that.
Someone else in the thread made a great example: would you be so “design intent is all important” if the designers put a 1-minute unskippable cutscene before the boss? To me, and I think to almost everybody, that would be fuckin awful. Everyone hates unskippable cutscenes you have to sit through repeatedly. How does that differ, really, from a typical 1-minute runback?
It’s undeniable that the challenge is part of the mystique for some games. I note with great respect the fact that Celeste offers accessible difficulty tweaks. I beat that game and it was a great experience.
Both choices can be good, when made with intention and care, and when motivated by specific goals as a creator.
With dark souls, at least the ones I’ve played, the difficulty can be tweaked by engaging with the world, learning the progression system and the character options that suit you. For example I didn’t beat DSI until I tried playing a magic user, because I’m slightly bad at those games. DSIII was easy enough by comparison to beat as a straight up STR build, but that’s beside the point. Difficulty is a design choice, and the conversation around it is tiresome when it ignores the aims of the creators.
well if you buy the game and it’s difficult enough to keep you from playing it all the way through that’s kinda shitty.
Let me start by saying I have a few thousand hours in Hollow Knight and I do for the most part enjoy the Git Gud type of games.
There are entire genres of games that I can’t enjoy because they’re too open/chill and if they had a hard mode I would probably really like them. This is the same problem the other way.
Maybe wait and some modders might make the QoL parts you want available, maybe never play it, maybe watch a streamer do it. But not every game has to be fun for everyone.
There might also be a generational divide taking shape. People my age grew up with “Nintendo hard” and the industry was all about making games seem longer by making them extremely difficult to beat. Our options were to get better, cheat, or give up.
These days the industry is all about mass appeal, and all the problems that we see with games having massive budgets and having to make sure as many people can like them as possible. Indie games have different incentives, and so when a game comes along that was made with priorities that aren’t in step with what we’re used to, it tends to ruffle feathers.
I know my kid doesn’t have any sense that games should be difficult, or that a challenging game can be satisfying. Even FromSoft games are trending towards less difficulty, despite having the fans who famously chant “git gud”. Bigger studios might know something my generation doesn’t get about younger gamers - maybe games like Silksong are having their swansong, so to speak. I hope not, but it’s hard not to notice once it’s been pointed out.
“Nintendo hard” isn’t about difficulty it is about entire games being based around knowledge checks, like having to remember to pre-swing when you jump particular gaps or get knocked into the gap in og ninja gaiden for instance.
When you’re a kid with no understanding of game design, no internet, and no subscription to magazines that explain it, all those dirty tricks that we now rightly put to much rubbish did have the power to make you think “I suck at this”. They didn’t have to be clever back then to give us this insane need to be punished by game designers just the right amount so that we can finally just try really hard, get really annoyed, stick with it way too long, and eventually get to say “yes, fuck you, I win!” For a certain kind of kid from that generation, that’s almost a healing fantasy.
The thing is, there is no reason not to add accessibility settings.
Hollow Knight and Silksong are beautiful games with an intriguing world, great characters and lots of areas to explore. There’s no reason to gatekeep games like these from people that just can’t beat them because they are too hard.
Just add a simple accessibility menu where you can scale health, damage and loot drops. It’s almost no work to implement, players can still try the regular difficulty and turn it down when it’s too much and speedrunners can make their lifes more difficult. Everyone wins.
The accesibility is called getting a controller that works for your disability, then training to beat it.
Not every disability is magically cured by a controller.
The thing is, I can’t personally think of an accessibility setting that would serve the intended function without removing the sense of having finally met the challenge. I struggle with difficult games too, and I don’t always complete them. That struggle and uncertainty is part of the journey though to me and if there was a difficulty tweak available as soon as I got frustrated the first time, it would erase those stakes (for me).
I mentioned Celeste as a positive example. I did feel a satisfaction with completing that game, but if not for the highly emotional personal journey of the narrative potion of that game I don’t think it would have been as satisfying. At every point I knew there was an easy way out, and staying frustrated and gradually getting better was a conscious choice without any real stakes attached to it other than my own self-satisfaction. The was never any worry that I’d fail to complete the game. Those stakes do make eventually winning feel real.
So I just can’t think of any suggestions for this. It’s elitist or ableist I realise, and I’m not happy with that. The creator certainly was aware of games like Celeste, and they had plenty of time to consider those options. Before casting any judgment or making suggestions on their behalf, I’d be really interested to hear what they have to say about the choice. Do they think the struggle has to be as firmly set as it is for the triumph to feel as elating? I can’t read their minds, so if there’s an interview where they address that I’d be all ears.
To each their own, I always think of difficulty and challenge as proportional and relative to the individual. You can just as easily turn the question around the other way: how can you feel any satisfaction beating a Souls game using magic and summons and level ups and items when there are people who have beat it at Level 1 hitless and using a dance pad instead of controller? What’s “appropriately challenging” is way too individual for the bluntness of a single difficulty setting.
And coming up with solutions isn’t even that hard. Add some sliders to adjust the length of parry windows and i-frames on dodge rolls and whatnot and you’re probably a good part of the way there. Gameplay intact, people still go through the same motions they just have a chance now even if they don’t have the reflexes or timing for frame-perfect inputs.
I hate to answer a rhetorical question directly, so please forgive that; my satisfaction would have been much greater, if I was able to achieve those things. I have a realistic sense of what I was able to do given the challenge that I faced and the skill I was able to muster, and although more success would have been sweeter, I am able to be content because I have a shared context with other people who faced the exact same challenge.
I know many have been unhappy with what they are able to accomplish in games with no difficulty settings, and I see it as a choice by the creator to set people apart. It’s a harsh choice that seems most appropriate in grim and harsh stories.
Those who say it is passé argue so very convincingly, but I can’t hide that it appeals to me. It speaks to something primitive, perhaps anhedonic. I was wondering if it’s a generational preference more prevalent among people who grew up during the era of “Nintendo hard”, and if single-difficulty games will fade away in time completely. Maybe this game should have been called Swansong, if so.
In a game like Hollow Knight (and Silksong), I can't help but feel such a crude setting would end up doing more harm than good. I mean, let's take health for example. Increasing your health wouldn't help much if you can't handle what the game is throwing at you; the few extra masks the game gives you only really help if you can handle the difficulty but need mistake tolerance, otherwise enemies will still hit you and you'll still fail at platforming and fall into spikes. Fundamentally the difficulty of a game like Hollow Knight comes from a lot more than just damage numbers, so a naive difficulty scale would only give an illusion of accessibility that would fade away at the first difficult part, and in that case it's better for everyone involved if the inaccessibility of the game is easily apparent.
Increasing mistake tolerance already increases accessibility, even if you still have to manage a tough platformer part.
Of course the options given are just examples to get it done quickly. Accessibility options can be a a lot more nuanced, even going as far as altering level structures to provide pathways for players that can’t platform.
The point of my post was that for all I care the difficulty options can go all the way to invincibility, one hitting every boss and skipping every platformer segment. It does not reduce my enjoyment of these games if other people can play the game in a way they want to.
Sure, but then we're way past "there's no reason not to add X."
I’m reminded of when Elden Ring first came out and we had a little panic attack about how much harder it was than other souls games.
Then like a year later it was widely considered to be the easiest Fromsoft game (if you’re just doing the required content).
Time will tell. These games all have so much talk about how certain builds are “cheese” or how the ashes make the game too easy or whatever - that’s all just dumb. The game itself is the difficulty settings, sometimes.
It seems too early to say how Silksong will be remembered, and Team Cherry still only had two games under its belt so it’s arguably too early to judge them. Will their next game be totally different and a massive risk, or do we have a Vivaldi on our hands, doing masterful variations on a theme?
I like the game, but I definitely think it deserves some criticism. I really don’t get the thinking behind not placing a bench directly in front of every boss arena. The run-backs don’t make the game harder, just more frustrating. It’s also something I disliked in older Souls games, but thankfully they realized the problem and fixed it in Elden Ring. And some mechanics are just baffling, like benches that are locked behind a paywall, which you have to pay every time you want to access the bench. Why on earth would they do this, with currency already being as sparse as it is?
No way ? I haven’t seen this so far. Paywalled benches ??
I found one so far, pilgrims rest costs 30 rosarios everytime you want to enter, there is also a merchant inside
There is a way to make Pilgrims Rest free :)
Good to know :)
Not actual cash, but they require in game currency.
yes, that’s what I heard. phew, actual cash would shatter the internet lol. “Beloved indie team falls to predatory microtransactions”
The paid one time bench thing etc is for a narrative reason, the main point of the story as far as I played is about the church scamming people on every occasion. Money won’t be an issue once you reach act 2, I always have more money then I can spend even after buying out all merchants I’ve seen.
As for no benches in front of bosses it’s to discourage throwing yourself at the boss without reflecting on where to improve. The long runs I saw people complain about also were mostly like 2 screens. Worst bossrun so far was probably the judge which was only like 2 screens when you think about it.
I really enjoy the game so far, I’m about half way through act 2 I’d say so maybe it gets super hard later, but right now I think it’s very balanced between a bit challenging but not frustrating. I do feel that the game was created with players like me in mind, someone who did all pantheon, steal soul mode as well as all achievements in hk but is a little bit rusty from the long wait.
I think you can theoretically get the fleas to move in right before the boss room, but I don’t know how many of them you need to find for that to happen. Maybe killing the boss is also a trigger, so in that case this won’t work.
I feared they might do something like this, but don’t think they did. I finished Hollow Knight twice, last time was almost six years ago, never did any Pantheon or challenge stuff, same with other Metroidvanias. The game is difficult, but don’t think it’s unreasonable (I’m also in Act 2, maybe the beginning).
Oh wow I didn’t know the fleas moved there. Mine are still in greymore, maybe I should talk to them again sometime. I did get an achievement that I have half the fleas so I’m still missing a lot.
Ye I also don’t think it’s unreasonable, like I said I’m super rusty from not playing hk for quite a while. I do feel like a lot of people just forgot how hk played. I’m having a blast with the game so far, it’s lovely.
I found that run back to be infuriating at first, but it quickly stopped mattering once I realized that you don’t need to kill everything on the path over and are for the most part better off just running past the enemies.
I like self reflection, especially when I died 10th time from the same boss… Self reflection like why I am torturing myself with this shit?
I found this in one small area, which was probably done for the flavor, since it makes thematic sense there, but otherwise it’s always been permanent unlocks.
Even there it can be made permanent if you pay attention, (and don’t mind doing a little light property damage)
So looks like I forgot about at least one bench.
:::spoiler spoiler First is in a house, that you need to pay to enter, with a bench and vendor inside.
The ones I originally meant are below the Citadel, there are a few rooms, with two or three benches each, but you have to pay 15 every time to use the bench for a short time. :::
Dunno which one of those you mean, that can be made permanently free, or if there’s even others I forgot or haven’t found myself.
Ah, I haven’t gotten into the citadel yet; I’ve just beat the Weaver
I have been running around the citadel, and with more fast travel options there I’ve gotten in the habit of constantly going back to belhart and making rosary necklaces. Sekiro had a similar mechanic with gold pouches. Also in this stage of game I’m finding a lot of silkeaters, so if I take a wrong turn at alburquerque and don’t want to get locked into a fight or weird platforming area I can just recover my beads. It gets better kids. Keep playing.
I think we don’t have enough language to talk about difficulty in a productive way.
You could keep all the boss mechanics the same in a game but add a 1 minute unstoppable cut scene at the start and the game is “more difficult” because it takes you longer to learn boss patterns and experiment with different strategies. But that feels very different to narrowing the windows to react or expanding the move set of a boss which feels different again to changing the values so you need to grind more/fewer levels or resources to pass it.
“Runback too long” and “git gud” sound a lot like people talking past eachother, but maybe thats just an artifact of the journalist reporting rather than the discussion itself
I think we have the language and you just proved it, but often people are just not reading or thinking enough about other perspectives before talking, and so do talk past each other like this.
I like your comparison to an unskippable cutscene; these are, I think, universally reviled at the start of boss fights. For some reason I don’t think long runbacks are reviled in nearly the same way, yet repeatedly running through the same area with no challenges (jumping off the staircase for the shortcut to Ornstein & Smough in DS1 does not count ffs!) is not really any less boring.
The ideal runback to me has a few enemies that you can soon work out how to run around. You actually get a feeling of having accomplished something, but don’t have to get perfect at defeating those enemies, nor waste time doing so (running will always be faster than fighting, pretty much).
I think “git gud” is just a knee-jerk meme though - there is no reason to believe that someone saying it has engaged in the slightest with what has been said to that point; they’re just trolling.
they are related and compound each other. it’s harder to “git gud” if you have to do a bunch of runbacks too.
Add an easy mode just half the boss health and damage. Easy fixed
yea, that’s entirely valid. I love these games (Metroidvanias) because of the exploration and worldbuilding. The combat is a way to advance further into that world, but it’s just a means to an end to me. Make it too tough, and you’re preventing me from enjoying the parts I like.
I played a good 4 or 5 hours of Silksong so far and loving it. It’s a little tough though, and I think it could use a nerf.
I think the game is difficult, probably a bit more difficult than the first game (which I haven’t played in over 5 years, so I might be wildly off), but I don’t find it unreasonable.
I know a lot of the time it’s my fault that I died, because I’m someone who likes to trade damage with enemies, which just isn’t really possible in this game, but I can’t stop doing it.
As for runbacks, I think there are a few weird ones, that can be terrible, depending on if you found/unlocked the nearest bench, but otherwise I don’t remember anything truly awful.
spoiler
For example the Chapel of the Beast in Hunter’s March I think, if you didn’t unlock the trapped bench, that’s pretty close (even then it’s still kinda long, although you’re basically just running). The fight against the gatekeeper, at the entrance of the Citadel, can have a long runback from the worm area. But the fleas, along with a bench, also move directly in front of the boss room, theoretically you might be able to do that before you fight the boss.
I don’t mind difficult games. I recognise that they exist as a kind of pushback against mobile games and casual games that have risen in popularity. I don’t mind that they exist. Likewise, I strongly believe that gaming is for everybody, but not every game has to be for everybody.
I think it’s perfectly fine, though, to ask the question: if the game — any hard game, to include the Dark Souls game and its spinoffs (e.g. Elden Ring) and knockoffs (e.g. Breath of the Wild) — had an easy mode, where virtually anyone could win it eventually, would that truly make the game less fun for people who like hard games? What if the game were hard by default, and easy mode cost $5 extra? That way, you would never be presented with the option, but those who want it can get it for a slight upcharge. (Maybe less on a $20 game, I’m thinking the $5 would be for a $70 game.) Case in point: Final Fantasy XV was never hard. But for 49¢, you could buy a “DLC”/“mod” that made gas cost half — 5 gil instead of 10 for any fill-up — and also made hotels (which give a big XP buff) half price. So one early-game strategy was equipping a ring that would not pay out experience when you camp, and saving your XP (which is normally paid out every time you sleep) until you could afford a room at the XP-doubling Galden Quay resort hotel, gaining you several levels by then. With the DLC/mod, you could afford it much sooner, and you could actually do it a few times, setting you up for later parts of the game. It wasn’t an easy mode, but it did soften the grind a bit, and it wasn’t presented as an option in the game. You kinda had to know about it and go look for it.
I actually think there’s something to that. Making a game and selling parts of it never really goes down well with players. But most players can’t beat hard games. So what if instead of new games being $70 or $80, they were $50 or $60 still, but people who want help can buy things that will make the game easier. Let those players subsidize the ones who are good enough to beat it without them, incentivising them to get better. Ideally, to get better at that game so they uninstall the helpers, beat it without them, then when the next one comes out, they’re ready.
I don’t hate hard games. But I’m not going to pay for them. If they make their money off people who have that much time on their hands, that’s fine. It’s a sound business decision. But I also think a game can’t say “we wish we made more money” while intentionally excluding players who maybe have full-time jobs, families, or other valid reasons to not learn the perfect button combinations and ultra-precise timing some of these games require. I think if they could find a way to include those players while not putting off their base, they’d have a winning solution on their hands. And no, we’re not gonna quit our jobs or neglect our families to “git gud” like we live with our parents and are half our age.
I agree with most of it, except I think it’s fine for developers to make a hard (or very hard game) if that’s their vision. Not every games is for everyone. And if developers are fine with targeting just a niche, there is no issue with it.
That being said, I do have issue with players / gamers saying there should be no easy mode. Adding an easy mode doesn’t take away anything for anyone who isn’t playing easy mode. All it takes away is their ability to brag that they finished a game half the people can’t finish. There are ways for developers to handle even that. Give some special achievement or something for those who finish on non-easy mode, but that’s again up to developers, and I am fine if there isn’t one.
Rockband was a good example of achievement-gating the higher difficulties. You got an achievement for beating the game on Medium, Hard, or Expert. And doing it on one of the two higher ones would unlock the ones below if you didn’t already do it on those difficulties. So if you were good enough to beat it on Expert, you got three or four achievements. Now I know you’re probably thinking “wait how do you beat Rockband”? By completing the Endless Setlist, which is unlocked when you beat the story mode. The story mode just unlocked the higher tiers of difficulty. The Endless Setlist was all the songs. Six hours and 20 minutes minimum. Oh, and when I said “three or four achievements”? The fourth one is if you do it without pausing or failing (at any difficulty Medium or higher). That one was called the “Bladder of Steel Award.” Yes, I own it. You food prep in advance, you do it on vocals, and you time your bathroom breaks very carefully (and drop a deuce in advance as well). But those three achievements for beating it at difficulty? Those are per instrument. I only have the gold (expert) vocals award. I may have the bronze (medium) bass award, but I never got any for guitar or drums.
That’s just one example of difficulty and incentives. I like how Deus Ex 1 did it, too. On Easy, you did more damage and took less. On Hard, you did less and took more. On Medium, it was balanced. On Realistic… everyone takes more. That was how I played. I wasn’t getting hit. I played a sniper. Even on Easy it was hard to one-shot enemies with a good gun and a headshot. For some reason that didn’t kill them. On Realistic, a shot to center mass with my .30-06 will drop any human enemy. A shot to the head will drop the augmented ones. So that’s how I play… played. It’s not on Xbox and it’s not on the Mac. My Mac can run it through Whisky, but I haven’t played much more than parts of the first level, so I’m not sure what the compatibility looks like later.
Wow, that’s some dedication. Salute to you for actually getting those achievements.
That’s an interesting way to play Deux Ex, never tried the sniper walkthrough, will give a try if I went back to it.
Well, you know the 30.06 ammo is kinda hard to come by, so I didn’t use it all the time. I’d avoid combat on Liberty Island and just hoard ammo. I modded a mod for it and made a few changes — like after UNATCO “cuts through” the NSF “like a hot knife through butter,” with my mod, they don’t loot the bodies. So I do. Bit of a reward for getting through without being detected. So then I trade the pistol for the silenced version. The mod that I modded, Shifter, makes unique versions of each guns with a stat or two buffed. I could tell you where the pistol is (Lebedev’s bed on the plane) but I forget where the silenced pistol was. May have been in the canals in Hong Kong — so, not worth waiting for. I mean as opposed to slapping the weapon mods on the regular one. So for most guys I’d shoot with the silenced 10mm. Sniper’s really only good at range. But, that one mission, where they drop you on top of the 'ton (the hotel in NYC, supposed to be Hilton, but… copyrights) I take everybody out with the sniper rifle (it’s like 8 guys tops) before dropping down to street level. I can’t remember if it’s when you go to Dowd to get the plans to scuttle the freighter, or when you go back to NYC to send the singal from NSF HQ. Been way too long since I played, but really only a year or two. I wish they’d put it on Xbox.
Ah interesting.
You got that backwards: difficult games are as old as arcades. If anything, casual games exist as pushback against difficult games, not the other way around.
Yes indeed, when arcade games were the norm devs specifically designed for absurd difficulty ramp ups and cheap deaths to finagle another quarter out of you.
I grew up with Atari and the NES. I think it’s actually both ways. I don’t think casual games were ever really a pushback against difficult games though, I think they were just trying to reach a wider audience. Take Subway Surfers for example, it’s probably the best example of the casual (phone) game. Anyone can pick up and play it, and if you fail, you just start over. IIRC you had to watch an ad first though? I dunno, I got hooked on it and I bought the coin doubler for $5 which also removed the mandatory ads (not the ones you can opt to watch to double some prizes or open ad-gated prize boxes though). That’s all I ever paid for it — far less than any paid game. Of course you can’t “win” at it either, it just goes on forever. On consoles, you also have Animal Crossing and the like. Games that never end but you can’t lose, either. Like you can get stung by wasps or scorpions or bit by tarantulas (though the latter two encounters are rare), but you just pass out and wake up in front of your house with nothing lost. But no, I don’t think casual (e.g. Animal Crossing) or accessible (e.g. Subway Surfers) was an active “push back” against the “NES Hard” trend of hard gaming.
Of course, arcade games weren’t just hard to be hard — like Subway Surfers and other phone games, they exist to get you to spend money. An arcade game that isn’t generating revenue isn’t desirable to people who operate arcades.
I haven’t played this yet, so I don’t know anything about what difficulty settings it may or may not have But in general, I see difficulty settings as an accessibility feature.
I liked the way that Ender Magnolia did it, where, at a save point, you could adjust several settings to customize the difficulty. I was able to temporarily make it slightly easier just for a few bosses that I lost my patience for.
Mandragora had the exact same difficulty system, you could adjust enemy HP, Damage and even Stamina cost at every bonfire. Great accessibility feature.
Difficulty is subjective. Creating multiple levels of difficulty either takes tremendous effort to do well or, as is the case with most games, an adjustment to some numbers that is less an increase/decrease in difficulty and more an increase/decrease to the tediousness of combat.
Puzzle games with difficulty settings alter the complexity of the puzzles. Action games can alter the encounters themselves (how many, of what kind of enemies and their placement in the arena), or even changing the enemy behavior to be more/less complex. Yet this kind of difficulty adjustment isn’t common at all anymore.
People have nothing better to do than complain, I suppose. Don’t like the game? Don’t play it. The game is good, imo.
What about people who like the game but have criticisms? This is the time to discuss it.
That’s alright too but every time there’s a hard game, it’s always the same old complaining. It’s tiresome.
Hollow Knight, the first game was hard too with some bosses.
I think it’s fine to litigate that again if the same criticisms go unaddressed in a sequel. It took how many souls games before From ended up putting checkpoints right before bosses? When they finally did it, they had their most successful game to date.
Every single game that’s hard, gets the same “it’s so hard” complaint. Well of course it is, isn’t that one of the appeals of the game? Reminds me Sekiro when it got out.
Anyway, we both got our own opinions and that’s that. Lets agree to disagree, I suppose.
.
The game was designed for people to have played the first one first. I think the difficulty curve works best if you consider Silksong as a direct continuation of the first game, picking off where the main story left off rather than the extra challenges they added through updates like godhome.
Regarding difficulty: I’ve lived through the 80’s, where difficulty was ramped up to make the game last longer, as you only had precious few kilobytes to fill with content. I’ve grown to hate difficult games.
It is your right as creator to go that way if you wish, but it is my right as player to hate your guts if I buy your game and it kills me over and over again in the first minutes.
If you dislike impressionist art, would you still go to a museum exhibition on that topic and then get angry at the curators?
If it is clear that the topic is Impressionist art, I would not go. If I buy the ticket to see Expressionism and get Impressionism instead, I would fell upset.
(Actually, I’d go either way, I love art)
Another 80s child here. The difficulty of ganes of that era was to extend tge game duration and made them seem longer. They were designed that way to eat quarters at the arcade, the original “games as a service”. What happened with home computer and console games at the time was that developers used the same paradigms for “buy to own” games that they used for arcade, thus the idea of limited lives, game over screens, high dificulty, etc.
Honestly, Hollow Knight 1, and what I’ve played so far of Silk Song have frustrating runback only if you feel that exploration should carry no risk. And also if you feel the consequences–dropping your resources and needing to abandon them–are game ending.
The devs make no attempt to hide the fact that the father afield you get, the more dangerous it gets, but that you can get stronger if you make the most of what you’ve already explored.
Resources are unlimited in the world, so you can always get back to where you were even if you abandon your cocoon/shade. You can also go back and spend the resources before you lose them.
Once I realized that venturing too far off carries a growing risk, I started looking out for the telltale signs that I’m entering a boss room. When this happens or even when I just feel like I’m going to lose all health, I just venture back and spend at the nearest shop or just prioritize finding a bench. Where I don’t heed the warning and go in anyway, I take it as my fault I can’t recover my shade/silk before I once again prioritize finding a bench.
All that said, at least so far I’ve found that whereas in Hollow Knight, if you die in a boss fight you’re not equipped for, you MUST abandon it or try again. In Silk Song, the silk cocoon actually helps with the fight: instead of also trying to kill you, it’s extra health that you can save until mid-way through the fight. Also, some boss rooms don’t lock the entrance (at all or as quickly) so you can die closer to the entrance and safely recover your stuff.
After starting Silk Song, I went back and started replaying the original and some changes like this are actually actually a quality of life improvement over the first 😂😂😂.
(I’m just irrationally mad that they removed the cheeseable pogoing. It was so cheeseable but I get why they tweaked the mechanic to become harder to use in exactly the same way. I’m actually using the other offensive abilities more.)
Minor spoilers regarding crests
There's actually one crest that straight up brings back pogoing and another that give you something similar, but honestly Hornet's default dive is very underappreciated I'd say. It allows you to do maneuvers that you can't with normal pogoing, and even platforming isn't that hard when you get used to it.
A lot of comments tying runbacks to difficulty, when they have nothing to do with each other. I haven’t playing silksong but I played about half of the original and uninstalled it, despite the fact it is so many people’s favorite metroidvania and metroidvania is one of my favorite genres.
Not putting checkpoints close to boss fights is not difficulty. It is disrespectful of the player’s time, which is a problem hollow Knight was full of.
I liked Hollow Knight, but yes, it kind of was. Frequent destinations were far away from fast travel, and there was a low level area that they transformed into a high level area later in the game specifically so that crossing the map wouldn’t be a cake walk. I’d argue that earning the power to make an area like that into a cake walk is a core part of the fun.
Hollow knight had a custom fast travel option in late game. You could place a dreamgate almost anywhere and just zwoop to it.
It’s been a few years, but mostly I just remember needing to go to the shop over and over again from various points in the map and it being a long trek. I don’t remember a custom fast travel point, so either I never got it, or it came so late that I didn’t remember its utility.
Agreed, the highly specific gate locations were what ultimately made me abandon the game, in combination with various other factors (sheer difficulty, etc.).
You're pointing a finger at the Soulslike genre here, not only HK. Some games may abandon it, but this is common enough to be called a genre stable.
Just like the "hit hit, dodge/parry, hit hit" combat pattern, losing/recovering currency, enemies respawning on bonfire use… etc.
I think this whole genre is wack, TBH. I don't even find it difficult, I just think what they test is perseverance in the face of misery and tediousness, which's a bizarre thing to test in a video game. It's almost as if it's straight up telling you: this is a serious video game, no room for fun here.
Meanwhile, Ninja Gaiden proved you can simultaneously have extreme difficulty AND fun like one million years ago.
To be fair Ninja Gaiden Black did also have boss runbacks. It’s one of a handful of small complaints I have about what is otherwise a very close to perfect game (Chapter 9 in the military base being one of the others).
But NG2 did have boss checkpoints, yes, and was much better for it. Even the notoriously player-challenging Itagaki realised after one game that boss runbacks sucked, and this was in 2008 - Demon Souls wasn’t even out.
I was mostly thinking of NG2, yes. I enjoyed NGB, but NG2 is the only one I replay, and it's mostly what I'm thinking of when I bring up Ninja Gaiden.
We can even go back further and bring up Bayonetta (2007), God Hand (2006), or even DMC 3 (2005) All are tough as nails, but super fun.
It’s true that I’d prefer it in no games, but it’s also less frustrating in straight soulslikes. The problem with HK is that it is a synthesis of metroidvania and soulslikes in the most time-disrespecting ways possible. Really most of my frustrations are with map design, and then they add not getting maps until you find the map guy (in samey environments I can’t remember well enough without a map).
What made me put it down was playing for an hour going through multiple zones without finding either a map guy or a bench somehow then dying. I’m pretty sure just being able to see the map would have been enough to keep me playing.
For this new fangled soulsvania genre there are numerous better entries that I thoroughly enjoyed. Ender Lilies and Blasphemus are the first 2 that come to mind.
Personally I think we’d all be better off not even calling them Soulslikes, for this very reason. Full-blown Soulslikes have so many more nuances and systems that add to the experience.
Yeah, huh, apparently HK is tagged on Steam as a Souls-like, but I disagree… just brutal difficulty in a melee-heavy game isn’t enough to merit that badge, but oh, well.
Agreed. I’m not sure why I would waste my time with shit like this when it’s just objectively not fun for me to play.
Different strokes for different folks, so if you like it more power to you, but I’d rather play games that are fun to play for me.
I only have a certain amount of time to play video games, and if I can’t make any progress at all in an hour or two, why would I bother continuing when an hour or two is usually all I have in a day to play your game?
I’ve decided not to bother picking up silksong because I found HK tedious, frustrating, and unrewarding.
People who enjoy such games are clearly masochist who don’t know what a good game is if it hit them in the face. Idk why these sorts of “gamers” even exist. I long for the halcyon era where good stuff like Mario, Zelda and Sonic were the staples of hardcore gamers.
I played some Elden Ring and as I recall there were check points next to the bosses.
Ender’s Lilies is a metroidvania listed as a soulslike and always has a check point next to the boss room (highly recommend it btw).
You should try Salt and Sanctuary, Sekiro, Bloodborne, The Surge, Lords of the Fallen, or Lies of P—all had boss runbacks, and that's ignoring HK, Silksong, and the original Souls games.
Apparently I shouldn’t. But if there’s a list of soulslike games that do it, and a list of soulslike games that don’t, then it is not in fact true for the genre and is instead true for specific games.
My partner loved that aspect of the game. Each to their own, that’s why it’s good games have differences.
disagree. they are related and absolutely add to the difficulty of learning how to beat a new boss. it’s way easier to develop a strategy and muscle memory if you can retry the boss fight as soon as possible without having to redo other sections of the game first.
I disagree. Having a slight forced intermission between attempts both gives me pause to reflect on what I needed to do better, and presents a risk of not making it back to my death point, which keeps me mindful.
I like Silksong's runbacks a lot more than I've liked the ones in 3d soulslikes though. In Dark Souls for example the risk of losing your corpse felt really high, whereas in Silksong you very often have either a gate that unlocks a quicker route back, or a clever acrobatic solution that reliably avoids all the enemies.
You can make the case that it’s not a fun use of our time but how is it not tied to difficulty? Being able to get to the boss with enough health or consummables is certainly part of the intended challenge.
I’ll admit I don’t even remember doing runbacks in hollow Knight (or even having to fight any boss in the part of the game I played more than one or twice), but in other games where you have to run to the boss you normally just run past everything without fighting it and go into the boss with full resources. No challenge - just running past everything, which not only wastes time but also totally breaks immersion for me.
In any case, my overall discontent is with all the time wasting added together than any specific thing.
I will say the run backs in Silksong/HK are better than, for example, DS1 for the reason you give. In DS you just run past enemies and it’s trivial. In the HK games running past enemies becomes a platforming challenge. Yeah, you can still do it, but you still have to engage with the enemy even if that’s just jumping over them. DS you just run past them and they almost always too slow to engage with you if you’re sprinting.
I haven’t played silksong, but most games like Dark Souls and the like, getting back to the boss without taking damage is pretty easy. It’s not difficulty, it’s just time.
Also in Fromsoft games runbacks are a deliberate design choice that forces the player to take a quick break after dying to a boss.
I never actually liked FromSoft’s themselves, but several Soulslikes I really enjoyed did away with runbacks, or always had checkpoints right before bosses.
I really just want people to start evaluating each design decision Dark Souls made on its own - stop worshipping the whole as being perfect, because it most definitely is not. So many of the knowledge checks (poise, anyone?) are just there for experienced players to lord over confused shrubs.
I’m not really used to metroidvanias having runbacks honestly. Most I’ve played either have save points close to the bosses or just drop you outside the boss room if you die.
Have you considered that the run back is trying to tell you something? The game doesn’t want you to bash your face against the same enemy the same way. It may not even want you to fight that boss yet at all.
The run back is meant to be an incentive to think about your options. Do I have other areas to explore? What do I keep dying to? Am I overlooking an obvious weakness during a particular boss mechanic, or am I not using an ability as effectively as I could be to stay alive?
If you let the player immediately run back into a boss, they will veg out and do just that until they eventually get lucky and barely down a boss by the skin of their teeth. But that’s not how you should be approaching these fights.
Sometimes the most productive run back even involves a good night’s rest.
The other day, I fought the boss of the abyss in the dark souls 1 dlc. It took me 5ish attempts, and I changed my gear to have more magic resist after I got further in the fight and got merked by magic attacks. All spending 2 minutes between each attempt running back to the fog gate did was make me zone out and wish I could just get right back to it.
Btw, the original runback was mega man, where you get to try the boss until you run out of lives then you have to do the entire level again. Still way more interesting than running past everything in souls games.
Do you believe DS and Megaman could have been even more iconic if they had listened to players and made their runs back shorter?
My point is, it’s not like the designers didn’t know what they were doing, this is a very obvious aspect of their gameplay. And regardless of how minor inconveniences like this make us feel as players, we don’t know that it’s not precisely those lows that contrast with the highs to create the intended experiences which made those games cult hits to begin with. You wouldn’t look at a Rembrandt and say, “look how much of the painting is just black! You’re wasting all this space! You could add so much detail and context in there!”
I’m a firm believer that “given the opportunity, players will optimize the fun out of a game”. If players weren’t complaining about the run back, then they would be complaining about the empty flask drinking animation. Inconvenience is not a convincing argument to me. Just like any art, games are free to evoke any and all emotions. It only becomes a problem if the emotion they keep evoking is boredom lol. But even then, boredom is a valid tool on the artist’s palette; sometimes the only ones who are getting bored are the boring people.
I actually said I like the mega man version. I think the dark souls version is boring and doesn’t do anything of what you’re saying. I don’t even remember run backs from when I played half of hollow Knight because I didn’t even think the game was hard. It just wasted time in so many ways that I decided I’d rather play a different game that didn’t, but if people had to deal with the time wasting design that I remember and also do dark souls boss run backs then I’m not surprised they’re irritated.
Edit: and no I don’t think DS would be less iconic if you didn’t have to do boring runs between boss attempts…
I loved Ender’s Lilies and it had save points outside the boss rooms. I do not believe the game would have been more iconic if I had to run through several rooms of enemies before fighting a boss again.
The joy of victory came from overcoming a difficult fight, not from avoiding a tedious repeat.
I agree with this argument in Dark Souls. It isn’t quite the same in Silksong though. Upgrades are very limited. You can’t just swap weapons and go farm upgrades for it. You have one weapon and can’t upgrade until a few hours into the game, and after the one you can’t upgrade again until some future point. Health and silk upgrades are also incredibly limited, and you ability upgrade slots are equally limited.
In DS/Elden Ring, you’re supposed to go explore and spend your souls on upgrades. I’m Silksong there are very few real combat upgrades to be purchased. You can’t just level up or upgrade weapons to get more powerful.
I will need to play more of silksong to be able to comment fully, but I felt that, even though you could understandably say all the same stuff about Hollow Knight, I still do think that the only times I struggled in HK (on required content) I later found out about an upgrade that was available if i had looked that would have made the fight much easier (nail upgrade, ability, charm, more hp, etc).
No, not to the same degree as Elden Ring, i agree, but I do think HK’s exploration played a very similar role as it did in Elden Ring. In both games i would tell people to only bash your head against a boss if you want to hurt yourself, otherwise go explore.
Yeah, I just recently unlocked wall clinging. It feels like now there are several directions to go, but before there was largely just one. Also, because of the way charms are limited (only having two slots for each of three types) finding charms feels much less meaningful. You can only ever have two main combat charms, so you can never find something that’ll let you totally change things like you may in HK1.
Maybe it’s only the beginning (I’m about 12h in, so not that early) of the game that feels this way, but yeah so far it doesn’t feel like extra exploration will bail you out if you’re stuck.
Would be a lot more effective if I didn’t have to go pick up my shade. Which often can’t be accessed without locking yourself into the fight again.
I wouldn’t mind checkpoints before the boss even if it’s not a bench and more of a “retry” option.
But the annoyance of run backs raises the stakes of the fight a bit. Like, “Please let me win this time so I don’t have to do another run back.”
But I was annoyed at a particular fight that started without warning and I had not really explored the new area yet, so I didn’t have a chance to find a closer bench.
I disagree, runbacks are as much difficulty as having to recover your currency after death, or even having to recover your items after dying in Minecraft. It’s a punishment for dying, and a way to make you treat it seriously.
It can incentivise the wrong things, punish experimentation and make players stick with what they know, even if better options exist. You’re free to dislike it, and it has downsides, but dismissing it as “not difficulty” is just dishonest.
The crystal boss that you first encounter sitting on the save bench though, that’s was just evil 😆
git gud
Once you
Tap for spoiler
Get the run/dash ability
, none of this is even a problem. You can jump and glide over any normal enemy in the game back to a boss room in about two to three minutes.
So glad they fixed the slow/boring difficulty curve the first game had. I shouldn’t need to slog through 20 hours of gameplay before I feel challenged.
Binged it all weekend, it’s a great game, but folks whining about some of the game’s earlier challenges are unlikely to finish it.
The runbacks don’t bother me too much so far. I do think there’s some skills in the runback, but it relies heavily on the level designer as well. An ideal runback:
These factors make a run both interesting game play and still a form of progression. A badly designed run lacks these factors, being just a slow slog to get back into the boss fight.
My biggest complaint so far is the double damage. Every boss and so many common enemies do nothing but double damage. Why even have 5 HP instead of 3? And it being 5 (and bind healing 3) have compounding effects with this problem. Taking a single hit on the way to a boss actually costs you an entire “boss hit” so runbacks are worse all around. Trying to heal mid boss only gets you “one and a half” hits back which takes a lot of silk to build up and probably is a worse deal for you than just using the silk to power more attacks.
Double damage would suck a lot less (and be a better mechanic) if you had 6 HP to start, or if you healed 4 at a time, or if bosses didnt always do 2 damage. There’s no tension to avoiding punishing hits because every move is equally punishing. It makes fights feel very conservative which is maybe intentionally meant to evoke Hornet as a careful hunter, using traps and plans to take down big foes.
I find the opposite though, she feels fragile and reactive. I wish starting damage was higher too. I had this issue in Hollow Knight as well, everything takes too many hits. Common enemies are spongy, bosses take at least 33% too long across the board. Especially it gets annoying since a lot of bosses so far get spammier and faster towards their final phases, so you spend so much time dodging the same attacks and looking for openings to chip hits in. Skills and traps don’t do enough damage to feel especially useful either.
I also hate, and this is another compounding factor, the complete lack of enemy HP bars. On regular enemies this is annoying (gotta count my hits) but on bosses it feels negligent. Bosses have multiple phases and take so long to kill, it would be nice to know if my last run was just a hit or 2 away from the end or if I still had a 3rd phase to plan for. It adds to the poor perception of skills and traps as well. Sting Shard and Thread Storm both seem to hit several times, around a half-dozen, but neither seems to do much more damage than a couple of regular hits.
Overall I’m really loving Silksong, the art and music are top notch. The DLC for HK convinced me that Team Cherry and I disagree about some fundamental ideas in game design, and HKSS bears that out.
There’s one trap that actually is pretty strong if you know how to abuse it.
I’m not going to spoil where or how to get it, but flying beetles that home in on the enemy and repeatedly bump into it to deal damage can be pretty busted… especially when they still attack during phase change animations that stop the player from moving.
I also especially like a particular early game trap for this:
trap spoiler
the cluster spike trap, because if you throw it well just before initiating a boss cutscene, it can activate and hit them 6-7 times while they are doing their initial taunt.
I definitely agree that the constant double damage just feels horrible. Hollow Knight was always about balancing heals versus punishes (one reason I loved Dark Souls 2 so much) but you basically need to heal if you get tapped once and… yeah.
I think a bigger issue is that upgrades feel so much rarer. Part of it is that you have MUCH fewer equipped charms at any given time… so there is much less point in just giving you a new one every 10 or so minutes. And I am not sure if max health is lower but it similarly feels like I find a mask shared maybe every 2 hours or so which further lends itself to feeling weak. And no idea what the deal is with silk but a single pip when it takes like five pips to even do a heavy attack feels pointless?
And while some vendors do sell upgrades, it always feels like a struggle to afford them unless you are actively grinding because of the constant need to buy maps and so forth (something I hated in 1 as well, but that at least had a single currency). Although I did get a nice stretch where I just mopped up and bought out most shops so that is at least nice.
And same with the attacks. Apparently I may have actually ran past Threadstorm while exploring and never even noticed it? And that is the power everyone says to use.
.
IIRC, HK1 had a badge that turns these on. I’m not far enough into the new game to have found this yet, though.
I’m pretty early into the game as well, so I almost didn’t say anything. But even if theres a charm that adds HP bars later, I would be annoyed about it. Why wait so long? I’m over 10 hours in. Why take a slot with it? I get similar annoyances about the compass, but at least that one I can understand because maybe some people like the challenge of landmark navigation using just the maps. There is a skill there, and it is part of the skillset of Exploration (a major pillar of design in any metroidvania).
The yellow tools, in general, I’m iffy about the design of. So far I only have 3: compass, more shards, and auto-collect beads. Of these, auto-beads is the most obviously useful. You need many beads, and they get lost pretty easy. Shards are super common and don’t have many uses. But none of these are essential, and all of them get less useful the later into the game you get. The tradeoff is only meaningful early game, and seems to encourage a balance between memorizing the levels and grinding, neither are amazing activities.
Having the compass charm tied to ALL map markers would certainly up the utility of it, though it’s gating another feature behind both a purchase and a charm. I’ve also only found 1 semi useful trap\red-charm so far. Maybe having more traps and skills that required shell bits would put more pressure on needing them and make the charm that gives extras more appeal for a trap-heavy play style?
Again, I grant that maybe I’m too early in the game yet, but I feel like these systems should be coming together and cohering more after a half-dozen bosses and 10 hours of play.
The game is so much more massive than I ever expected. I can tell you that you're still super early in the game based on what you've found. There are many, many red tools and while you'll absolutely have favorites, there are definitely some that seem underwhelming until you find a specific situation or region where they excel.
There is a crazy huge amount of content and capability in the game, and if it seems like a slow burn for you now, IMHO that's because the game does a pretty good job of pacing new things so that you have time to evaluate and master each new piece of kit as it comes up.
The other thing about shards is that you have to sort of learn to find a balance with how much trap usage you employ; what seems to me to be the intended design (based purely on vibes) is that you mostly only use them against certain bosses/arena rooms or in situations where your needle can't easily work due to the terrain.
I thought similarly to you at first, with shards being a huge surplus and not necessary. I think this is an introduction period of sorts where you can get used to how the controls work and experiment freely. But then there were wide stretches of the game where I had a relative drought of them. Now that (I THINK??) I'm approaching the end, I've learned to use my shards reserve as a sort of measurement for whether I'm comfortable enough fighting in a certain situation. If it dips below half, I'm leaning too much on traps and need to take a step back and think harder about how to approach things with needle combat.
On the topic of yellow tools... I can definitely relate to the compass feeling mandatory, but there were several places for me where I had compelling reason to choose to forego it for something else. That was legitimately interesting and I don't have many other examples of games where that's possible. There are a bunch more yellow tools you'll find with more interesting effects as well. And eventually (being deliberately vague) you will reach a point where you won't feel like you're sacrificing as much to keep the compass equipped if you want. (Though there is also a point where you will have seen enough of the world that you won't need it, strictly speaking, because you either have the areas memorized or can navigate based on room shapes and major landmarks without your precise location.)
Godspeed, fellow hunter
I, uh, have kinda given up on progressing for the foreseeable future. I’m bad at platforming, and after struggling for probably around half an hour to get through one aection that was particularly difficult for me, I was met with a surprise boss fight. Nearest bench before that section. It’s brutal. It takes me about 5ish minutes to do that section now, but fuck I wish I were exaggerating. None of the other fights have anywhere near as nasty a runback and it honestly feels like they forgot a bench.
The game is hard and that’s fine, but that instance I feel ok bitching about and don’t feel like I’m a qhiny pathetic fuck for doing so, which is incredibly telling given how easy it is to make me feel like a whiny pathetic fuck.
I'm not entirely sure which part of the game you're talking about but if you're talking about the section I think you're talking about then you're probably trying to go the wrong way as that section get significantly easier once you have more powers.
If something feels unbelievably difficult chances are you're supposed to go elsewhere. There are quite a few points at the start of the game where you get a difficulty spike and that just means there's a different route to take.
I checked with a friend, and I’m not missing anything sadly. It’s the boss at the end of the windy section, before you can go through the big fancy door.
Okay. I was thinking of another point. I just got to the point you were describing and after exploring every nook and cranny on the map there really isn't any other route. But I don't think the route to the boss is that dreadful.
spoiler how to quickly traverse it.
You can sprint jump the first 2 platform ignoring the first enemy. You then climb past the first shield enemy but instead of going right you scale the wall on the left. When you get to the top you can sprint jump to the bell that you can pogo off of and get on the platform with the cart in the background. From there if you want an easy passage to the far right wall wait for the black strong gust of wind. You then jump off and use glide. You will glide faster in the black gust of wind and it will skip the enemy there and get you straight in dashing length of the far right wall. Then you climb up and if you're confident with the 2 bell jump just go for that or wait until the enemy below comes up so you could kill it and then you've got all the time in the world to get the two bell jump done.
If you wait for the gust of wind it should take you about 45 seconds to get from the save point to the boss room
"Fragile and reactive" IMO is a fair take, but I think what the game is pushing you to do is become comfortable enough with your mobility to be aggressive while still avoiding hits. I don't know exactly where you are in progression, but you continue to tack on new capabilities to your kit that make it easier and easier to avoid things while still laying out damage.
I am sure there is enough room in the game design for people to take totally different approaches here, though. If you know a given enemy's movement well, you can absolutely be confident in using your silk for attacks instead of healing.
I agree with a lot of your commentary. A couple times so far a “good run back” has been the grind that let me buy some of the higher-cost items from shops. Sometimes it’s frustrating but usually once you get used to the path it goes quickly. There have been a few times where I didn’t realize there was a closer bench until after I already beat the fight lol.
Most of the bosses have 1-damage and 2-damage attacks. Also 6HP and increased healing are available relatively early (still a good way into the game but it’s a long game).
I have to strongly disagree with this. Especially when you start getting more traps/tools and upgrades for them, they get very strong and don’t require you to get dangerously close to the enemy like the basic attacks. Some of the bosses and many of the arenas I’ve gotten through mainly thanks to the consumable traps.
Like in most metroidvanias, you start off struggling against common enemies but as you get upgrades they become weaker relative to you. However I do agree that the trash mobs are a bit too tanky. Maybe somewhere between 50% and 25% less health would be ideal. I’m not sure I would adjust the bosses though.
Feels like healing in micro transactions form where you want to buy a thing that cost 3 currency but the shop only sells at five currency.
glad poe 2 added sprinting
Tangentially related but I agree. It makes the long run through sections of the campaign more bearable.
On a more related note, POE2 has checkpoints practically on top of the bosses during the story so you can bash your head against it as much as you want. The only time you’re punished for dying is endgame bosses.
yea agreed. in general though our attitudes with gaming have changed due to how many titles are available (over abundance) and the history of gaming, etc. we’ve become spoiled in ways. there needs to be a ‘penalty’ of sorts to encourage trial and error growth. get some true dopamine overcoming a trial.
there’s a place for all types of games and difficulties though. let the artists create their vision.
something that i think gets lost in the sauce in thrse discussions is whether fun is derived from playing or winning. people are comparing Silksong- and to get ahead of it right now i haven't played and am not criticizing either of the Hollow Knights- to old arcade and early console games and their legendary difficulty, but a lot of those games were meant to be complete and fun experiences even if you game over very early on. they also didn't have levels full of bespoke Stuff in them, it was the same few tiles and entities in different configurations., so being stuck on level 1 didn't mean you were missing out on a narrative and worldbuilding. with how the lines have blurred between games and narrative art forms in the last few decades, there are different incentives at play and someone stuck on world 1 of SMB isn't missing out nearly as much as someone stuck on whatever the first stage of Silksong is. it's all ultimately apples and oranges
The problem with “old difficulty” was that in arcades especially, and even on consoles by way of the industry being smaller and the same people working on both, were designed around quarter-munching.
Stuff was hard to get people to pay up.
I would have preferred modern ideas like bosses are hard because you have to learn their patterns- and to be clear, this is also present - but also the feeling that I’m not strong enough to do anything more than chip damage is a bit annoying.
I think there’s validity in all the arguments I’ve seen people making; but at the same time I’m glad the game’s not easy. I just don’t know if it always needs to be punishing through frustration.
(The thing that pisses me off the most are those
Tap for spoiler
Red flower buds you need to pogo off of. Do they REALLY need to be over spikes every time? Does my downward thrust really need to be at an angle to bounce off them?? I started out being ok with that movement and I’ve never regressed so fast or so hard at anything in a game before. I swear I’ve lost more lives and to that than bosses; and by the game’s very nature that means a run back every time! Ugh!
So that’s why I say there’s a difference between “tricky” hard and “annoying” hard.
This is why I stopped playing Elden Ring. I have no problem learning patterns for boss fights but the perpetual feeling that I’m fighting Godzilla with a badminton racket is obnoxious. Especially after I spent the last 20 hours of play grinding out equipment upgrades and levels. It doesn’t feel fun or rewarding.
Might I ask for which boss this applied to you? I only had this for optional bosses for which I was underleveled and never for required bosses.
I enjoyed getting the shit beaten out of me when fighting the Black Gargoyle in Caelid. I never struggled like that with the required bosses, except a bit for the final boss, which I enjoyed.
I can’t recall a boss that can’t be dealt with just being overleveled? Maybe Malenia? But she’s human sized not a giant boss. Yeah the final boss kinda sux though but hey it’s the end of the game already might as well power through it.
Hmm maybe the DLC, some of those are damn nasty fuckers.
Maliketh. First phase I can handle but his second phase can eat my whole ass. I stopped playing after 40 or so attempts. I like a challenge. I’ve beaten every Soulsborne game aside Demon and Sekiro. But there is a point where my frustration overrides the fun I’m having.
Maliketh was pretty easy for me, but everyone struggles at different points.
If your still interested there is an item in Farum Azula (same place as Maliketh), that helps with the fight: Blasphemous Claw.
Maliketh has also pretty low Stance; heavy attacks and/or weapon arts can easily stance break him for a critical attack.
Or you could cheese him with Moghwyn‘s Sacred Spear and maybe the Mimic Tear, but that is probably overkill.
Some arcades were actually a bit more manipulative than that in that they’d get harder depending on how long it was since you last put a quarter in.
Mortal Kombat was one. I noticed this pattern on the snes version of MK3 (can’t remember if it was ultimate or not that I had): I’d easily win one fight, then get demolished by the next fighter. Then continue and that same fighter would be easy, only for the next one after that to be much more difficult. I didn’t have to put quarters into my snes but they just used the same tuning from the arcade machines.
Eventually when I played that game, I was spending much more time on the space invaders minigame lol.
tip
If you’re having trouble with red flower buds, maybe explore a different area. I found them much easier after I unlocked some other things
Thanks for the reassurance. I was starting to do just that, but I’ve only had about 6 hours in game so far and of that I feel like I’m moving pretty slow. So perhaps there is hope yet!
I know what you mean with the downward thrust. It just fucks with my platforming.
a bit of a spoiler not but not really as I only mention the name of the ability and what it does.
There's a Wanderer Crest that makes your downward attack like it is in Hollow Knight. That was a game changer for me.
I recently started gaming again after a twenty year gap. Back in the day I used to go for high difficulty and complete everything. Now, I’m playing on easy difficulty setting. Partly cos I’m in my 50s, reactions are slower and my hands are a bit fucked up. Partly because I want to enjoy the story and the experience - if I get stuck on a fight and keep dying I get frustrated eventually and angry with myself for not being as good as I want to be. That feeling is not what I’m gaming for, so yeah, easy setting.
I haven’t played hollow knight because I’m told it’s frustrating and difficult, and, while the aesthetic really appeals to me I don’t wanna be frustrated. But I’m so happy for all the people who have been waiting for this and are enjoying it, sometimes we do get nice things!
I’m older also and am enjoying Hollow Knight a lot, it’s hard but I wouldn’t say frustrating, the game lets you say “Hmn this is not working out, I’m coming back here later after I get more skills or abilities” and it’s relatively non-linear for a metroidvania type game.
Part of why it was very popular is the difficulty straddled a good line between challenging and manageable enough to keep making progress. But every player has different experience levels, distractions or time-limits on how much we can dedicate to gaming so it should be standard to allow players to choose difficulty. However, in a game like Hollow Knight you might be able to adjust the difficulty of boss fights but that’s only part of the challenge, the rest of the challenge in inherent in the game’s layout and mechanics.
For me, much of the fun is making progress. i never finished the first game because I kept getting lost and stuck and unable to progress for extended periods. In a From Software game I can spend weeks on a single boss and masochistically enjoy every moment because I know what I have to do. The problem I had with Hollow Knight was I kept finding myself completely at a loss about where to go or what to do. I would spend days retreading the same empty caverns looking for a clue or a new path and not finding any. When I knew what I had to do, I enjoyed it immensely, but progression was often too obscure and my interest slowly evaporated.
This is the “metroidvania” genre part of the game but, it’s not for everyone.
That being said, both Hollow Knight and Silksong make the exploration a lot more streamlined than in older metroidvanias with the map features. When you don’t know where to go, check your map and look for paths that lead to areas that aren’t filled in yet. When you get a new power, see if you can remember any locations where that might be useful.
So far I have only found two or so runbacks that really bothered me. One is THAT BOSS (TLJ…) which isn’t actually too bad (once you figure out the safe path) but a single missed jump or tag by an enemy is 2 masks of damage. So just spend all your souls ahead of time and if you flub, end it all and respawn.
The other is a much earlier boss in Widow (?). The runback is actually zero danger and just a matter of holding R2 and running. My big issue is that there is an elevator right next to the bench. So you start the sprint back because you want to get it right this time and slam into a cage and have to wait for it to reach the top then hop back in to get back down and it just feels horrible.
But yeah. I actually like a good runback as a way to reset your brain and avoid getting on tilt against a boss. Elden Ring very much spoiled people by putting the bonfire right outside the fogwall for effectively every single boss and it just leads to making the same mistake over and over again until you warp away to do something else. But Silksong’s balance is definitely rough.
I haven't played Silksong yet, in part because truthfully, Hollow Knight was alright but not my favorite Metroidvania. The one thing I really disliked about the original was the runbacks. I remember getting stuck on one platforming section, and I could easily get to the halfway point where I kept dying to retrieve my money, but then drop it again because there was no turning back from this halfway point, had to keep trying to finish it. I wanted to just explore a different part of the map and come back to this section later, but sunk cost fallacy forced me to keep bashing my skull against it.
Which then felt like this mechanic conflicted with the exploration I expect from a Metroidvania. That's the real problem IMO.
You yourself admit it's a fallacy! This isn't exactly a "skill issue" situation, but in future efforts on these kind of games you might try being more thoughtful about when to take a break and spend accumulated currency.
Although as others have pointed out elsewhere in the thread, learning to accept not retrieving your stuff is sometimes necessary too. I lost around 1500 at a certain boss by getting too cocky trying to fight enemies on the runback instead of skipping them, and it took me a while to make peace with it lol.
If you do end up playing Silksong you should know that there is a mechanic specifically addressing this, where you can convert your currency into consumable items at a bit of a loss to keep them across deaths.
I do not like the idea of a mechanic that punishes me if I do choose to explore somewhere else in a genre that is supposed to be about exploration.
There are mechanisms in both games that allow you to remotely retrieve your body if you are desperate not to lose it. Hollow Knight is definitely less forgiving than Silksong in this respect though.
Not having the mechanic to begin with would be better than a thing that merely makes it less bad, because even then there's still an opportunity cost.
Exploration is a task that has inherent difficulty in the genre, it's uncommon to have actual points of no return as you describe, but if you can't see through a particular segment to the next checkpoint, yeah sometimes giving up will cost you. An actual point of no return probably means you're on the cusp of a sweet new ability though.
I am returning to Hollow Knight thanks to the Silksong hype. I had dropped it before because I was unsure where I needed to go to progress and was getting sick of running around the map trying to figure out which paths were actually available to me and which needed some equipment I didn’t have. Well, I did figure it out and basically have everything important unlocked so now I am enjoying it again.
If you do pick it up again, I have some advice. First, there’s a relic in an area called the Hive that will give you passive health regen if there’s a long enough gap between instances of damage. This means you can keep messing up a platforming section and as long as you don’t rush it you can heal back after messing up without needing new sources of soul. Second, there are some sections that are traversable with minimal equipment but become trivial with more. Deepnest was really annoying to me when I went through it and I frankly would have probably enjoyed it if I had one really helpful item unlocked (or even just a bit more health). Third, don’t worry too much about money. Normal enemies don’t give you much from farming and I think I’ve run out of stuff to spend it on mostly from other sources. So don’t be afraid to let it go. If you’ve unlocked the fast travel thing, just head back to vendors when you’ve noticed you accumulated a decent amount.
Like I said, I’m enjoying the game again after years away, but I really wish they had a better way of letting you know where you should go next and what isn’t available to you. Needing to go through zones again to check if something is now unlocked or not is tiresome. The pins help but they are not enough, and I didn’t think to reserve certain colors for certain types of obstacles the first time.
I did finish the original. But I remained annoyed with this mechanic the whole time.
We should definitely talk about how levying criticism, especially thoughtful criticism, is treated as a personal attack by other people playing the same game. It’s a bizarre form of tribalism.
We should also talk about how “Difficulty is part of the game and if you find it too difficult then this game is not for you” is not a personal attack, but a perfectly valid response to said criticism.
thanks. I hear a lot about this game and was wondering about it but Im a relaxagamer though so its good to know.
If the criticism is limited to “It’s too hard.” then I would agree. But that’s not a valid response to criticisms about specific design elements like “these power ups feel like they do nothing”, even if it’s a perception issue at hand you need to address the actual observation and not jump on with ‘git gud’.
I was learning a game a few months ago and struggling with understanding a specific character, so I went to the official discord and asked for advice, not complaining it was too hard, just asking for what kinds of strategies work and I was met with endless ‘try harder, scrub’ responses and literally no actual advice. I quit playing the game because the community was so up it’s own asshole.
And for sake of clarity. I don’t play HK, it’s not my preferred genre and my favorite game (that I can replay) is Noita so I am familiar with reviews that complain about difficulty. It’s fine for games to be hard and it’s also fine for people who find the games too hard to leave a review saying they found it too hard. That is part of informing buyers so people can only pick it up if they desire that kind of challenge.
It’s just a trend that is all too common in gaming. People like a game or a developer and become incapable of seeing an opinion that they disagree without taking it as a personal slight. It’s weird.
Part of that is definitely gatekeeping.
But a lot of it speaks to… people are REALLY stupid these days. You notice it a lot when buildcrafting comes up. If it is more complicated than “raise strength to the soft cap” then people start making up massive excuses on how it is too complicated to explain and you are a fool for asking and MAYBE to go watch their favorite youtuber and so forth. When I feel particularly trollish I make a “like bags of sand” joke but the reality is that they just do not have the ability to actually learn what they are talking about. They can barely even regurgitate what an influencer told them.
And that has more or less broken fighting game discourse online. Because it is no longer “oh yeah, so and so has a super easy 20 hit combo” and inherently has to be “your crouching light jab is a +4 but your crouching light kick is -2” because EVERYONE is an expert in frame counting and so forth.
Souls gamers more or less broke with Elden Ring. The base game is probably the most accessible any Souls game has ever been and most people learned fast they can just beat Malenia by doing an arcane bleed build or getting a big fricking hammer to stunlock her, but they felt like they were super cool for it (which is the point of a Souls game). Then the DLC came out. And people felt the need to shit on the games media folk saying “So… this shit is kinda hard?” before rapidly getting their poopy pushed in by silver knight equivalents.
And it very much broke people. The discourse went from “Git gud. But in all seriousness, Capra is a boss that is designed to make sure you know when to block and when to dodge” into “Git gud you fucking loser. I beat it with no problems”. And we are seeing similar discourse with Silksong as a lot of us talk about how some of the runbacks are REAL bad and get responded to with “That is just what Hollow Knight is”… even though there was like one bad runback in the entirety of that game (Mantis Lord… and Radiance is just a different kind of fuckery).
This excuse stopped working the day I opened a tough-as-nails game like Furi, saw it had a difficulty menu, said “That’s nice”, and went back to challenging myself against the bosses on default settings.
It’s such a huge cop-out of self control, and especially falls to acknowledge that the forms of difficulty in a game are often varied - and someone might suck at only one of them.
Steve Bannon recognized exactly this (with gamergate) and harnessed it for his fascist ends.
We have this debate monthly since the last decade. I don’t particularly like the way hollow knight handles saves, not the difficulty itself. It’s time consuming, not inherently hard…
Time consuming does not equal difficulty, remember this.
After you unlock godhome, you can practice against any boss youve fought once, so practicing against bosses is arguably easier than many other meteoidvanias, which is what you’re arguing the run backs prevent you from doing.
I don’t debate that but prior to this i have a lot of going back and forth, don’t you think?
Kids crying because a game is not a walkthrough? Maybe they should play something more suitable for their age group.
Why people resort to insulting anyone who criticizes things they like
It’s not about me liking it or not. I don’t even have that game. The point is that one should play games fitting ones abilities. There are people who will master this game, like I mastered Elite about forty years ago. Complaining about a game being difficult is either they overestimated their abilities, or they lack perseverance.
For the rest, there is always tictactoe or animal crossing.
Well whether you like it or not, you’re just insulting people for criticizing a game. Not even just for it’s difficulty, so you couldn’t be more off base.
Legitimately this mindset is why most gaming forums are so toxic. It makes it difficult to actually discuss problems with and opinions on games without people basically going “git gud.”
There is room to bring up the fact that some games are just not for everyone, but that also doesn’t invalidate the criticism they have.
Seems to me it’s usually “kids” that don’t mind difficult games. I’m in my 40s and I don’t have the time or inclination anymore to replay a boss for hours on end, but when I was younger I loved a challenge like that and would usually set difficulty to hard.
This is to be expected. Silksong gained so much hype that now you have a bunch of people trying it who are finding out it’s not their thing.
I know people these days are used to early access garbage being shoved out the door as a full release, and are ready to rush to the comments to explain why the game is wrong, but I promise you this is not one of those cases.
So far, every run back I’ve experienced in silksong has a purpose. If it’s not something you enjoy, I recommend not playing the game. But don’t be in that overlap of the Venn Diagram between people who are enjoying the game and people who are complaining they aren’t enjoying the game. Either stop playing, or finish it and then we can talk about its design.
Name one with purpose, then. There is the big cave with the boss. It is separated in two halves by a long ass platform. There are no enemies, exploration, rewards or challenges on the platform. The sole purpose of it is to make you run right and then left, instead of just facing the boss right away.
If it’s the one I’m thinking of, I barely consider that one a run back. It’s like 40s to get to the boss from the bench. And at that point I the game, I noticed myself start hitting the bounce plants much more consistently after having to do this run many times. Up until then I hadn’t been forced to repeat the same small section yet.
And (staying vague to avoid spoilers), the bench itself was particularly “surprising” specifically because of the long gap without any benches leading up to it, forcing you to repeat the same long platforming/combat sections over and over. Players would not have been “surprised” by it if they weren’t so desperate for a bench.
I'm loving it, and the runbacks and difficulty just feel like standard metroidvania to me. Yeah, it takes time and caution, but that's just the genre.
Yeah the game’s definitely harder than HK was, but by no means impossible. It’s not nearly as difficult as say Elden Ring for a recent-ish example. The true ending final boss didn’t even take me as many tries as Last Judge or that frog fucker lmao
None of the runbacks are egregious either. There’s just about always a bench barely 30-40 seconds away at absolute most.
Groal’s runback is egregious. Even if you find the closest bench.
If anything I find the walkbacks much shorter than in the original. There is always a bench 30s/1m away from each boss or tough platforming section. At least so far…
It's definitely fair most of the time. There are one or two places I've seen so far where it's deliberately ramped up (or appears that way at first.)
Yeah I am almost at the end of the act 1 (i think?) and so far the impression is that if something seems to have a long walk or having to repeat a hard parcour section, I didn’t find some hidden bench or shortcut to bypass said parcour section.
In general I can see this game being started as an expansion for HK, the difficulty is quite high and the curve steeper, but I can’t relate with most of the complains so far (the currency maybe a little, but it’s normal IMHO you can’t just shop everything at once from a new vendor you find).
Initially I was put off by the double damage, but the heal being short and x3 I think compensates for it (plus, you can do it mid air etc.).
the vastly increased traversal speed also helps mitigate the walkback tedium
Since when do metroidvanias not have save points right outside boss rooms? That’s been the standard since symphony of the night at least…
Doesn’t metroid only have save rooms?
Yes? metroid.retropixel.net/games/…/metroid3_map.gif
Notice how there is always one close to each boss.
They haven’t really been a thing in either Metroid or Castlevania for a long time, interestingly.
Did these people forget how ball-smackingly hard Hollow Knight was???
I imagine a non-insignificant portion of Silksong players never played HK and just jumped on the hype bandwagon. Which makes sense considering it was built up like it would literally pay off your mortgage and reunite you with your high school sweetheart.
HK can be trivialized pretty early on by stacking charms and upgrades. Silksong spaces out meaningful upgrades in a way that really forces you to learn the ins and outs of the game before you can start buildcrafting.
FWIW, all the final bosses are easier than HK’s true final boss. The difficulty scaling starts with a rough curve but evens out over time.
Yes.
I think time has made people look at Hollow Knight through rose tinted glasses. When I picked up the game in 2018, I got to the Soulmaster and gave up entirely because of its runback, it was just too annoying.
I ended up finishing the game a few years later and absolutely loving it, but runbacks are to this day my main criticism of the game, and I know a lot of people agree about that.
For this reason I hoped that they’d make things better in Silksong, but at least now I know what to expect so it doesn’t annoy me as much as it used to.
I was all-in on Hollow Knight. Beat it multiple times, including Path of Pain and the Nightmare King. But I’m struggling with Silksong.
I went back and started up Hollow Knight again just to sanity-check myself, and, yes, it’s definitely an easier game. Many fewer enemies can hit for 2 health; there’s more variety in paths in the early game, so if you hit a wall in one direction you can try another; and you get access to upgrades that actually feel impactful relatively early instead of skills that use up my magic pool that I can’t spare because I need them because I’m always one hit away from dying.
My pet theory is that Silksong is actually just exactly what they originally pitched: DLC for players that have mastered the highest skill points in Hollow Knight. And maybe that would be fine if I were coming straight into it off of the back of Godhome. But it’s been years since I was playing those areas, and my skills have atrophied. It’s okay for a DLC to expect mastery from the start, but a standalone game should have more of a curve.
I spent 3 hours stuck on one boss fight.
In most games, finally beating it would have me saying “thank fuck its over”.
In silksong, I’m saying “fuck yeah that was a good boss”. It’s a very different feeling, and one that I haven’t had the pleasure of enjoying in quite some time.
That said.
I think both hollow knight and silksong should have easy modes. It would be fine. It doesn’t hurt me any that someone else can have an easier time. People need to remember that video games are entertainment, and the sweaty “hardcore gamers” can fuck off with their usual judgemental elitism.
This is exactly it. I think the game is a goddamn masterpiece. The most infuriating fights feel like huge accomplishments, not just relief. Phenomenal game all around, but that difficulty curve isn’t for everyone. I can say the same about any Soulsborne game, love them to death but it’s definitely too much for some folks. Difficulty options are a good thing, if a compromise has to be made just have it disable achievements or w/e.
Why are these side scrollers premium price?? Seems like such a cash grab. That’s why franchises are going backwards into side scrollers, easy money, i avoid them
The game is 20 bucks. How the hell is that a premium price?
Silksong sparks debate about git gud and scrub
is nobody going to define what “runbacks” are?
I’m guessing it’s something like when you lose to a boss you have to travel a senselessly difficult and long way back to the boss to try again?
That does sound annoying and I hate when I even have to sit through a cutscene on each retry of a boss…
That's exactly it. The runbacks aren't too long in this game despite all the complaints, but some of them are tricky and can get annoying if you keep dying 10 seconds into a fight.
So it's basically the standard platformer formula going back three or more decades?
More like the Dark Souls formula of having to trek through heaps of enemies and traps to get back to the boss. Including the whole “lose all of your money on death” thing.
Modern from games barely have run backs anymore. Atleast in souls game you can bank your currency into stats or buy consumables, you can’t reliably do that in SS.
Yes you can! There’s plenty of places where you can turn prayer beads into consumable chains.
No, just those with bad level design. Nine Sols has plenty of challenging boss fights, zero run back. Same with Sekiro, and most newer titles.
There have been several boss fights so far where I die to the path to the boss more than the boss itself and it takes way longer to get to the boss than actually beating it.
That being said though, I do think there’s some merit to runbacks as an actual consequence for failure. I definitely strategize more cautiously because of it.
Some of these mother fuckers never dealt with nosk and it shows.
I mean, there are some really bad runbacks, but yeah most of them are fine.
How is it compared to HK?
This is the only thing I wanted to know from reviews, for whether or not to bother with Silksong. I love difficult boss fights, but cannot be arsed to spend more than half a minute doing a tedious chore in order to actually redo boss fights.
The worst one I’ve encountered apparently has a secret bench somewhere that makes it much better, and the second worst (the runback that I think everyone is talking about) is about as long as the runback to crystal guardian I think.
It is slightly worse then HK.
Most runbacks aren’t too bad, but fuck the Bilewater one. That shit was too hard and annoying. I had less trouble with the First Sinner than that boss.
The devs looked at blight town from dark souls 1 and thought 'we can do worse'. It really is a nightmare but somehow I killed the boss first try in the end
Lucky! I had to try more than ten times due to unlucky behavior in the waves before the boss, and finally managed to win only by using tools.
All the homies hate bilewater, actual dogshit even with the shortcut
Unskippable cut scenes should be dragged into the street and shot.
Along with unpausable cutscenes. My kid will cry exactly during your 10 minute cutscene, and I want to know the story.
Exactly. Lots of bosses don’t have convenient save points nearby, so you’re forced to walk back from the save point every time. And many of the treks are either long or just outright annoying (cheesy enemies, obstacle courses, etc). It’s like the 5 Minute Long Unskippable Cutscene’s more annoying older brother, because this unskippable cutscene requires actual gameplay and focus.
Hot take here, but I don’t mind them. Exactly because they take focus. They tell me when it’s time for a break. If I’m not up for the runback, then I’m not up for aother attempt at the boss.
Eh, make it optional. On hard difficulty make it a thing, medium difficulty allow it to be skipped.
Why? If you can’t get through that, you aren’t going to beat the boss.
I haven’t played silksong, but I’m just going off other games in the past for my experience.
If you make it through the hallway of meaningless denizens that just waste time and get to the boss, then die to the boss… Why waste time going through the meaningless denizens again to challenge the boss?
I can see it on higher difficulties when you need to make sure you get through the meaningless denizens perfectly in order to preserve your health and resources to have a better chance of defeating the boss.
But when you just want to experience the story on lower difficulty why make the denizens less powerful to make the boss easier when you can instead just put the save point in front of the boss in instead of the denizens? You’ve already made it through the denizens, it’s not like you’re skipping content.
Because if you can’t make it through the denizens, you can’t make it through the boss. It’s a filter.
What a weird take. It’s about respecting the players’ time. Making it through the denizens to the boss is not challenging whatsoever. Why would you think it is? It’s just tedious, and bad level design.
If it’s not challenging, why are you complaining?
Think of runback as an unskippable ad. My time is limited, and that’s not the part I enjoy.
Respect my time
You realize nobody is making you play the game?
It’s a balance between immersion and world building and tedium.
In silksong the run backs never seen so far that it is tedious. The save point is not right next to the boss fights but for the most part they aren’t egariously far. Plus the save points serve as rest spots for the multiple paths you take. A save point at every boss would be detrimental imo.
It’s not that you can’t make it through the denizens, making it through the denizens is usually easy. It’s just a waste of time for the most part.
I dont think there is any conversation to be had about an easy mode or boss runbacks. Any time this small dev team spends on an easy mode is time wasted IMO.
If its to hard you can play another game. I see this the same as people demanding a complex movie be changed to be easier to understand. Its just a dumb complaint and im sick of seeing these people flood every comment section of every slightly challenging game.
The difference between “I don’t like this” and “this is bad” is too often overlooked
I’m ok with there being a conversation on this topic, even if the arguments devolve to ‘waaah’ vs. ‘git gud’.
Ultimately though, I agree that a small dev team shouldn’t have to focus on a game-mode outside their vision - and any such demand for an easy-mode or other additions can and should be left up to mod makers.
It’s a single-player game, so in the end how the individual user wants to play is how they should be able to play.
They’re saying your taste in games isn’t valid and shouldn’t be catered for. Instead, theirs should be in every case.
People forgetting that when you ran out of lives you used to have to go back to the start of the whole game.
Zelda: Pwr off Rst. Must ensure progress is saved. Far end of the spectrum: Sewer Shark. Fuck that game, I didn’t want that beach life anyhow.
yes, i HATED that, and don’t think I ever finished any of those games.
that was not a good thing.
To you. It was for players who liked it that way. There are even popular rogue likes today.
would they still like it if there was a difficulty setting?
Hard to say. We have many examples of games with only one difficulty that are glorified for their challenging combat. We have an example of God of War with cool and challenging combat on max difficulty that for some reason did not receive such status like Souls games. I think Elden Ring can be an example of a challenging game with “difficulty setting” that was did receive other Souls treatment. So I think “difficulty settings” can work if done not as an option at the start of the game but by adding game mechanics or strategies that make it easier. Technically that’s what Silksong does for the most bits with a crest for easier platforming, usable tools for combat and boss specific weaknesses(Moorwing fight is trivial at the right corner of the arena, Widow can only hit you with one attack if you stand at the corner, and so on).
all of the things you say are completely, 100%, unaffected by a difficulty setting.
The only thing a difficulty setting changes is that some people can say “I am better than you, I beat [game X] and you didn’t”
that’s it.
and even that is a complete illusion, see the prominent worst business man in the world, paying someone to make PoE ranks for him. Also there are mods, cheats and plain lying.
This whole thing is excluding people, and for what? Literally worthless bragging rights.
It does seem so. These’s also an issue with balancing different difficulties and receiving bad reviews if not done correctly but I think it’s minor compared to allowing more people to enjoy your product.
And you’re forgetting that was a holdover from arcades designed solely to part people from their money.
As someone who isn’t necessarily big on the notion streamlining is “objectively” good game design… That more or less began to be disposed of the minute we had the technology, minus a few now-niche genres that rely on it. It was gradual, but mass market games as early as Zork in 1981, had save schemes.
We remember. It was bullshit back then. It’s still bullshit now.
Edit: I beat those games on three lives. It was still some bullshit.
Why is it bullshit? If you couldn’t die nobody would play those games. The stakes were the reason to play.
It wasn’t bullshit. You could get through those games in about an hour and that set of levels was the game. Games like Sonic sunk or swam based on whether playing through those levels over and over to achieve a better run was actually enjoyable. Not to say that today’s much longer games aren’t valid too, but they don’t have to be as tight.
I think it’s a great game for veterans who like challenges like myself.
But I have to call out team Cherry for their interviews: They said they wanted anyone to be able to pick up this as their first Hollow Knight game and just start playing… Sorry, but, bullshit. the difficulty ramp is too quick, double damage comes out to early and the boss fights get more challenging quickly. See the weaver for instance, a fight I’d place around the difficulty of Grimm, but there’s double damage and you probably only have 5 health.
Also they mentioned part of the game’s difficulty was due to Hornet’s competence and utility… Ghost is canonically a better fighter than Hornet, so by that logic they should have made the game easier (yes I’m being silly about this part).
I think its fine for a player new to the series but you’ve got to the type of person that is willing to learn and willing to die over and over. For people who play these kinds of games its not insane to expect them to pick it up.
Didn’t personally watch the interview in question (or forgot by now) so I don’t know what they meant, but it definitely feels like lore wise Silksong can stand as an independent game with what I’ve discovered so far.
Regarding difficulty, Hollow Knight isn’t the only game that could have prepared you for Silksong I think.
I think what it helps a lot with is familiarity and mindset. The overall game loop is very similar.
That said, I think it’s wise to give HK a try before buying Silksong. It’s a cheaper game, worth playing through if you’re into these kinds of experiences and if you don’t enjoy it, chances are Silksong will not be much fun for you either.
<img alt="" src="https://lemmy.world/pictrs/image/0310f551-5381-4217-8c04-82c47e96430e.gif">
I mean personally I don’t have any issues with an easy mode in games, casual play is nice when you come back home from work half dead. Silksong is advertised as a soulslike though. Feels a little counterintuitive to take away the aspects that define a soulslike, even if it makes the game accessible to a wider audience.
For me though, a lot of Souls games are about opening shortcuts and then running past anything left to get another go at the bosses.
You can’t reliably do that in 2 though with the sheer amount of ganking enemies.
Yeah, I wasn’t fond of 2. Although you could just kill them 12 times and never have them respawn. Quite tedious, especially in the DLC.
A tale as old as time, the more things change the more they stay the same.
Every game should have difficulty settings, the more, the better.
That goes for indi darlings too.
And all music should be under three minutes long. Every book should have page numbers. Photographers should have familiar subjects. Paintings should have a full explanation by the artist telling you exactly what they meant to communicate. /s
If the game isn’t for you, just move along. There are tons of games out there.
are you aware of the meaning of the word “setting” in this context?
Just in case I can explain:
It means you can switch something from one behaviour or effect to another, basically giving you a choice of how something should work. So, adding a difficulty setting changes nothing about your experience of the game.
do you need more words to explain this simple thing?
I can try to use simple language and shorter sentences if you require it?
Don’t coddle whiners, make them git gud or get out.
Runbacks are a lame attempt at artificially increasing difficulty. I’ll happily die on that hill. I love difficult games, but there is a fine line between frustration and difficult.
Elden Ring (at least all the bits I played through) and Sekiro absolutely nailed it. None of the run backs were particularly egregious, and it let me really focus on experimenting and learning to feel out the difficult fights. Celeste is another good example. I have dropped hours on some of the later levels trying to master them, but never once got frustrated.
Hollow Knight I never finished because I got stuck on a boss and the runback was just way too long and annoying. I loved everything else about the game and want to finish it eventually.
Edit: I think they have their place as “mods” that you could enable to increase difficulty, and i’d actually probably enjoy it that way. Just designing the game around them is where i draw the line.
To be fair, From has like many games to learn from that while Cherry only has HK. I’ll never forget the sheer pain of the Frigid Outskirts from Dark Souls 2.
At least that’s an optional area. Now, the run back from pre-SotFS No Man’s Wharf? That was a pain.
The run to Blue Smelter nearly gave me a coronary.
Although DS2 gave us a reprieve with despawning enemies eventually, making runbacks feel rather poignant when you’re walking an empty world.
I hate that I only completed Frigid Outskirts because all the horses respawned. The bosses were absolute rock there too.
Yeah, I remember a few sad runbacks with populations looking pretty sparse…
Unpopular opinion but I like boss runbacks.
To me it feels like “if you don’t survive the journey, you’re too weak for the boss itself” it brings me down and makes me calmer until I reach the boss.
I like them because it forces you to try to salvage a fight instead of just conceding after a bad start. The time spent getting to the boss is investment you don’t want to waste.
I think this is really just an issue of the tools and abilities not being inherently linked to the related bosses.
FYI quickhop attacking is faster than ground combos and you can weave in the trio dagger throws when you are dodging away from close attacks. Also your attack will negate enemy attacks weapon hitbox(but you still have to dodge bodily contact). The poison tool upgrade is overbalanced and makes a lot of fights a joke.
This is a really good point.
I’ve also found myself messing up the run back but committing to the fight anyway with a few masks down. You can either heal back up by breaking the cocoon, or practice starting the fight low and keep the silk for later (one of the best changes from the first game IMO is making the cocoon an asset in contrast to the ghost that would harass you).
Another aspect is the run back itself. When you struggle a lot with a boss (as I often do), you will have to do the run back so many times that you passively start getting better at traversing the map. And even if the specific combos you used on the boss itself don’t necessarily translate to other bosses, the movement skills likely will keep being useful.
I like them because I will think what I did wrong, not just going to do that wrong thing again until I get lucky with my wrong strategy.
I think this discussion has more merit when framing this from an ableism viewpoint. Games having accessibility sliders to either slow down puzzles or enemies helps players who have a disability.
A game that comes to mind is Crosscode! You had options that could change the speed and damage for various things in the game. Was nice because sometimes I’d change the settings when I had been stuck and frustrated on a puzzle which made the game far more enjoyable.
skill issue
For myself? Definitely! But someone shouldn’t be prevented from playing a game because of a disability. Just like how Frostbite engine games have great accessibility options for colour blindness.
Tbh it’s a reflex and dexterity game, among other things, so it is not for everyone. In the same way a game that requires memorising melodies is not for me, since I suck hard at it.
I suppose there could be a mod that simply doesn’t let you die and you can explore the whole world. There is no other way to make a platforming section easier, unless you add more anchor points etc., which requires actually changing the world (essentially, you remove the platforming section), so those could still be a problem.
Celeste is a game about reflexes and dexterity. They implemented tons of accessibility features, including ways to make platforming easier.
And the game is fundamentally not the same with some of those accessibility features enabled. Good on the devs for targeting a wider audience but fundamentally they have different game play experiences.
Not every designer wants to have multiple experiences in their game. That should be entirely up to the designer and demanding them add entirely new experiences is unreasonable.
Color blindness support, rebindable controls, subtitles, on screen audio visual cues. There’s plenty of things that can help the disabled that don’t change fundamental aspects of the game. If a developer adds these but doesn’t want to compromise the intended gameplay as they see it then they shouldn’t have to.
End of the day. It’s art that is being sold to be consumed. If you don’t like the art, then it’s not for you.
I have never heard of the game, i guess you are referring to celeste.ink/wiki/Assist_Mode?
I can see they have lots of options! However the platforming seems to be slightly different? In case of HK I suppose that invincibility-like mode is what I suggested brought to the extreme (I.e. you can just walk over spikes etc). Maybe the other thing that could work is slowing the game down so that timing is easier to get.
I think it’s an interesting discussion accessibility from this point of view. I think everyone draws the line at some point, between accessibility and simply making a game with some principles that represent the soul of the game.
Colorblind accessibility is easy to implement and pretty much everybody can do it after reading a wikipedia article on colorblindness.
On the other hand, balancing a game for several difficulties is not easy and takes a lot of time. Plus, it doesn’t always make sense. Part of the game is the struggle. If you’re skipping the struggle, then you’re missing a part of the game.
Disability, accessibility and gameplay accessibility are two different things and should be treated as such. There is also a very hard line between what is possible to help someone with a disability. Enjoy a medium that requires certain minimal physical traits.
The color blindness deafness rebindable controls as many things that can help the disabled and these should be expected whenever possible. Hell a lot of these are built directly into your operating system and don’t require any effort from a game developer. They just need to make sure not to get in the way of already existing tools.
But gameplay accessibility is an entirely different beast and even very minimal. Gameplay accessibility can create an entirely new gameplay experience to the point where it’s not the same game. If the developer wants to add those, it should be up to the developer and what they’re targeting, both as an audience and as an artist.
We should always demand disability accessibility. We should never demand gameplay accessibility.
The main goal of a game is to be fun, not to be a bragging right; even more in a single player game.
If someone, for any reason, prefers a more casual experience, let them have it. On the other hand, if you prefer to brag, go for it and cramp up the difficulty.
There us no point of gating a single player game. Single player games should be accessible for all.
The main goal of a game is to be whatever the creators and/or you want it to be. Frustrating difficulty can still be fun, just like feeling scared in a horror game is fun. It simply has to be done right.
Keep in mind it’s already very hard to make a good, balanced game. Adding difficulty sliders increases that exponentially. Even if you add a few presets - that’s still a lot more work, which indie studios may not have resources for.
Many FromSoft games don’t strike that balance right. The ones I’ve tried, even the ones I successfully beat, gave me a groan of “Fucking FINALLY, now what mediocre reward and fresh hell do I get for that!? In fact, why am I playing this…?”
Another example, Stellar Blade. I enjoyed the difficulty, and got pretty good at the parries against bosses; but usually only hit about 60% of them. That wasn’t good enough for the very final boss, which takes off about half your health for each one you miss. Only for that fight, I ended up turning down the difficulty - and it was still tough! And, I still felt rewarded at the end.
One final example, Another Crab’s Treasure. It has some hard fights, and many difficulty options. I’m glad those were there…but I also just never used them. Also, it now has a NG+ that gets even harder.
There doesn’t need to be sliders or options menu settings. Elden Ring handles difficulty settings beautifully: upgrading your flask is optional and increases both the frequency and amount of healing that can be received. Using summons is optional and can make some fights an absolute cakewalk. Same with all the different crafting items. If you want, almost every dungeon in the game can be skipped or revisited if it’s too hard.
All Team Cherry had to do was change the timing or location for access to certain tools in the game.
To be fair while Elden Ring is the most popular From game it’s also by many accounts a downgrade from their previous titles. It’s fun but not nearly Bloodborne, not Dark Souls with it’s ups and downs but establishing the genre, not even Sekiro which is weird for the series but still doesn’t have any game to compare where it shines. Personally if I had to choose between three Elden like games and one Bloodborne, I wouldn’t even think.
I used Elden Ring as an example, but all of Fromsoft’s Souls games have had similar ways of adjusting difficulty. Bloodborne still had summons, still had tons of optional areas and alternate paths, and even had the cum dungeon if you want to cheese it on levels and skip the grind.
And it’s not like From is the only company doing difficulty this way. Most Mario games are pretty straightforward for casual players, but advanced players who master the controls can often find secret levels or alternate collectibles. It’s an added, optional challenge a player self-imposes to make the game harder. Or Celeste and the optional strawberries and post-game levels.
A single player game shouldn’t be accessible to all. It should be accessible to everyone the creator intends it to be accessible to.
Devaluing and demanding an artist or team of artists compromise their vision and intent is flat out a shit take. You have to be a massive self centered asshole to think it’s even remotely acceptable.
Nintendo expects Mario games to be played by everyone, thus it’s reasonable to expect accessibility features and difficulty controls. To allow for the widest range of players.
A Mario game with out either implicit or explicit difficulty controls would be a fair thing to criticize when Nintendo’s clearly stated goal is to reach the boardest audiences and be a game for the whole family.
But a game made by say kojima IS NOT trying to reach the boardest audience. Thus, expecting any amount of control over the experience is just being an asshole on the part of the player. The game is designed for himself first and foremost. He’s making something he wants to make. Tell a story he wants to tell. If the player enjoys it then all the better.
Games are after all first and foremost art. Art can be a product or can be a passion. A product even if art is reasonable to expect it to be made for the consumer first and cater to them But never should any reasonable person. Assume a passion should bend the knee.
Fun is not the same for everyone.
Some people like visual novels. Others prefer games with frame perfect precision that push the player’s reaction, attention and concentration.
Nothing could be for everyone and that’s fine. Something not being for you does not make it a bad design.
A high difficulty is not inherently good game design. Making a game more approachable through lower difficulty settings with additional checkpoints doesn’t make it worse for people who like a challenge. It just makes it enjoyable to more people.
Claiming it’s down to “artistic vision” just feels dishonest. You could claim Studio Ghibli movies should never be dubbed or subbed. You just have to learn Japanese to enjoy them, just don’t watch them if that’s not for you… but why? How is it a bad thing if more people can enjoy something?
Cup Head is a great example. It’s a fantastic game with an art style that younger kids love. But it’s too difficult for most kids, which doesn’t make the game better, it just locks them out from a game they’d otherwise love.
I feel this is a false equivalence.
If you wanted to make a movie analogy, I’d say it’s more like a movie having subtle subtext or context which would make it’s message or intent more difficult to comprehend.
Imagine if someone watched The Cabin in the Woods (satire movie about horror movies) and said it was a bad movie because it wasn’t scary.
I think its fair to say that person would have low film literacy at least.
How do we compensate for that? Should movies start offering accessibility features so every viewer can have the ability to know foreshadowing, film cliches, or meta-narrative devices?
I feel like giving viewers an option before a movie to say “i have low media literacy”, which would result in popups during the movie to say “hey, this is a callback to the Hellraiser franchise” would be insulting to the creators.
The film wasn’t made for casual movie viewers, it was made for a specific audience. The creators aren’t obliged to make it more easily digestible.
Edit:
Satire falls apart when it’s spoon fed.
If difficulty is part of the games design, then reducing it is functionally similar to explicitly stating irony to a viewer.
Cabin in the woods was a satire movie??? I like the movie…
I can’t tell if you’re being ironic or not lol.
I’ll write my response as if you’re being sincere;
Cabin in the Woods is one of my all time favourite movies, but the entire premise is built around horror movie tropes.
The “gods” mentioned at the end of the movie are the movie viewers themselves. They “demand blood” (watching a splatter movie for the sake of watching people get killed).
It’s a requirement that “the virgin” be the last one killed, but the death is optional (this is a staple of horror movies; the ‘Final Girl’)
One of the literary devices the movie toys with is the idea that ALL the horror movies we’ve seen are part of the same universe, and the guys in the offices are the ones pulling the strings to entertain us.
The entire movie is one giant nudge-nudge, wink-wink for people who love to get meta with horror movies.
If you enjoyed it regardless, that’s fine, but my point was that it would be a bad product if it tried to accommodate for viewers such as yourself.
No I really did like the movie and yes it was full of stereo types like the chad, the stoner, the girl etc but I never came to think of it as satire or that we are the gods demanding the blood. But it was a good movie, I liked it.
Glad you liked it anyway lol.
Small aside: the characters aren’t stereotypes, they’re archetypes. This is another example of the satire, as well as the gas station attendant from the start (I think he was called the Harbinger?)
Oh yeah arch types it is. Did you know you can buy the cup-bong on the internet lol
But The Cabin In The Woods is exactly what I’m talking about. A product with mass appeal that still caters to a small group of people. Much like Paul Verhovens old movies. You can watch them as dumb action or social criticism.
And movies have several accessibility features. Things like subtitles, which often translate cultural references or jokes that don’t directly translate to viewers from foreign countries. Descriptive audio tracks for visually impaired, directors commentary to learn things behind the scenes. Many services and devices also allow you to even out dynamics and enhance speech.
The problem with games that have a too high difficulty threshold isn’t that you’re missing out on some hidden subtext. It’s that you will never get to see 70% of the game, for absolutely no good reason.
Cuphead is such a good example of this, according to xbox achievement stats 31% never made it past the first part of the game, 72% never got to the end of the game.
Accessibility in film delivers the same work to more people. Accessibility in games can cross the line into creating a different work entirely, because the interaction itself is the art, not just the visuals or sound.
Saying “most players never saw the end of Cuphead” isn’t proof of failure; it’s proof of selectivity. Just like not everyone finishes Infinite Jest, but it doesn’t mean Wallace failed as a writer.
Cuphead was made to invoke arcade game feelings. The gameplay is brutal by design. That’s the point.
It’s like watching Terrifier and throwing up half way through, storming out of the cinema and saying “the acting was good but it was too violent, I wish I could watch a version of the movie without the gore”
But it doesn’t, accessibility in film does not deliver the same work to more people. Films are translated, dubbed and subbed to be approachable. Adding voice acting from talent that were never involved in the original film. It’s all about adapting the film to fit a wider audience.
The fact that gamers think games are somehow different and the “git gud” approach is just pointless elitism. How would Cuphead, Super Meatboy or Silk Song be a worse game if they had an easy game mode where you had more life and/or checkpoints? How does that setting change the experience of someone playing in normal, veteran or hardcore mode?
(Ill reply to both parts in separate replies)
Subtitles/dubs are translations. They adapt language, not pacing, cinematography, editing, or structure. That’s fundamentally different from altering a game’s difficulty, which changes the mechanics, the thing the art is built from and differentiates it from other mediums.
A better analogy:
Subtitles are like adding glasses so more people can see the same painting.
Easy mode is like repainting sections of the canvas so it’s “clearer.” You can call both “accessibility,” but one preserves the work, the other mutates it.
Furthermore, language isn’t a good metric by which to compare analogies because games are also translated.
“How would the game be worse if it had an easy mode?”
Adding an easy mode changes the experience even for hardcore players because:
Design intent shifts. Once multiple difficulties exist, developers design around them. Balancing, encounter pacing, even story beats get shaped by the lowest common denominator.
Cultural meaning shifts. If a work is known as “brutal but fair,” its identity collapses when an easy bypass exists. (Dark Souls without consequence isn’t Dark Souls; Cuphead without punishment isn’t Cuphead.)
Easy mode doesn’t just let more people in; it makes it a different game. Saying “just don’t play easy” is like saying “why not release a PG-rated Terrifier with no gore? Horror fans can still watch the R version, so what’s the harm?”
The harm is you no longer made Terrifier.
Terrifier is available in several cut versions for specific regions / services. Which is incredibly common for movies in general and have been since the 70s. Which you do to reach a wider audience.
Both Silk Song and Cuphead already have additional difficulties. They’re already balancing difficulties, they’ve just decided to gate keep gamers who are not able to play difficult games.
If Gears Of War and Call Of Duty had hardcore and veteran as the only difficulty setting, it wouldn’t make them more interesting games or make a statement about the horrors of war and the fragility of man. It would just make less people enjoy them, for no good reason.
A high difficulty threshold is bad game design. And it’s exclusive to people who have physical disabilities or limitations, or other reasons to why they can’t play overly difficult games.
And I say that as someone who loves to beat games in the higher difficulty tiers. But as someone who also wants more people to be able to enjoy the games I enjoy and who’s happy game design has improved since the 80s.
“But as someone who also wants more people to be able to enjoy the games I enjoy”
Its really not about you is it? I get where you are coming from but in the end its people who make the games who decite what kind of experience they want to make. Sometimes their visio does not click with everyone and that is allright.
No, that’s exactly my point, it’s not about me. And of course game developers and publishers are free to do what they want. But their decisions can and should be criticized if you don’t agree with them.
Many years back a friend working with a group of disabled teens and young adults called me asking about Guitar Hero. He wanted to know if there was some practice or easy mode where the song didn’t abruptly stop if you didn’t play well enough. At that time, unfortunately there wasn’t.
I can’t remember if Guitar Hero ever got a no fail mode, but Rockband did, which opens the game up to a new crowd of gamers.
I feel like you are pushing the goal post with bringing up disabilites in to talk about difficulty. It rough but not everything is made for everyone.
Difficulty is part of the games identify and its design choice.
Of course people can share their opinions and critisize anything they want. I just find it a bit arrogant when people say things like that. I mean do you really think you know more about game design than Ari Gibson and William Pellen? Or Miyazaki? Fromsoftware basically started a completely new genre and it showed people want hard games that dont hold their hands.
I still remember how fresh demon souls felt when it came and kicked my ass. If there would have been a difficulty slider in it i would have made it easier for my self, but i would have lost a huge experience.
What you and I experience as challenging or punishing is unplayable for someone that’s younger, has a lower skill level or certain types of disabilities.
For them, a lower difficulty level just means they’re playing the same level of challenge that I am.
I’ve never claimed that I know more about game design than Miyazaki. I’ve just said that I think a high difficulty threshold is bad game design cause it’s exclusive. I think games should strive to be inclusive. One of the most downloaded mods for Elden Ring is an easy mode.
And im saying exclusivity is not inherently bad thing. There is plenty of games to play.
Your elden ring easymode for example. In nexus it has 180 000 downloads while the game had over 30 000 000 sales in pc alone. 0,6% of players have felt it neccessary to make it easier for them self. And i think its neat they have option to make it so. But 99,4% have played the game in the way developers intended and how they build the experience. If there were build in easymode im sure many players who strugled to beat the game would have changed the dificulty to easier and they would have watered down the experience the game was build upon.
Why everything should be for everybody? And why artists should care about your opikion when they are creating what they want to create.
Cup head is great example. Everything in the game is meticiusly hand crafted. The big part why its so popular is the difficulty that forces you to focus on the aninations and sprites. The difficulty also is economical in game as labor intensive as cup head. Because every sprite was hand drawn devs could not just churn unlimited levels and the games lenght came from the difficulty. Making the game easy would ruin the pacing of the game.
Games are art form like any other. There are mainstream movies, plays, songs, paintings and games etc etc etc. that try to reach as large audience as they can. But there is also obscure art pieces that only small group of people can enjoy. And both ways are fine
I find it obnoxious when people bitch about desing choices that devs have consciously made. Its not like they have any obligations to make a game in one way or another.
Is it not fair for the game developers’ artistic vision to not be accessible to all? Accessibility is nice, expands the potential audience, but if it compromises my artistic vision and I’m ok with giving up reach and money to preserve it, that doesn’t make my game bad or my vision invalid.
It would be ridiculous to call up the bar or the ama and complain to them that becoming a lawyer or a doctor is not accessible to all.
One last addition, adding control remapping, color options, and text to speech are true accessibility. Easy mode is fake accessibility
Easy mode is not fake accessibility. Celeste has the correct idea in allowing players adjust the difficulty for accessibility purposes. Not everyone has the same reaction speed, same cognitive abilities, same eyesight. There are people who can only use one hand and that automatically makes reacting to attacks many times harder, should they be excluded from being able to enjoy the game because they are not physically capable enough for the boss fights? And boss fights are probably 5% of the game anyway!
I agree with making accessible controllers with special layouts and allowing custom control bindings to accommodate those who are differently abled.
Those can be accommodated without meaningfully altering the game. Changing the gameplay is different however. Not that adding more difficulty options is a bad thing, I don’t mean to disparage anyone by calling it fake accessibility, just that I don’t think it’s the same as other options because it fundamentally changes the experience compared to other options that I considered “real”
That’s an interesting take. You think game developers should not make games that require hands, vision, hearing, etc to enjoy them?
No, I think if something can be done to allow more people to enjoy the game, then it should not be considered a bad thing to do it. You can not make it accessible to everyone in the world, but if there are time and resources to add accessibility, it should not be neglected.
And I don’t agree with the use of artistic intent as an excuse to not include specific accessibility options: take closed captions for example, they are made to allow deaf and hard of hearing people enjoy the content even when they can’t hear the sound. A lot of media is built on sound being a cornerstone of the experience, and people who will use closed captions will have no notion of it, but does it mean that they should be excluded completely?
Just because people who use the accessibility options will not experience everything in a way the author intended does not mean they should not be experience it at all, and in this day no one really complains about game including captions or colourblind options, but anything that might affect difficulty is, for some reason, out of the question and is only subject to the artist’s vision of it.
Oh I totally agree with you.
Cuphead is a throwback in every sense. Making it easy would just make it a throwaway game that is seen once and never again.
Following up on this, I think the studio ghibli is a good example of where community adding accessibility in the form of mods or cheats (or fan subs or dubs in the case of ghibli)
Yes, community mods that add accessibility options are great. But unfortunately they’re generally limited to certain platforms.
I’m about 10 hours into silksong and it’s amazing, don’t get me wrong. But the majority of the boss fights seem… cheap?
Like, their difficulty doesn’t come from their various attacks, or their environment. Instead, it usually comes from the fact that they do double damage, or the fact that they spam the same two attacks over and over way too quickly, or the fact that they can do the same add summon three times in a row and make what was a controllable situation practically impossible
Now, I’ve 112% the OG hollow knight and beaten true radiance, so I’m not against difficult boss fights. In fact I relish the feeling of learning their moves and patterns after every single death
But when the moves are “ram into wall. Then ram into wall again” it becomes incredibly annoying
Some of the boss fights felt amazing once you start learning their attack patterns, but then others were just… lacking. The savage fly one comes to mind. It wasn’t particularly a difficult boss itself. But when it summoned ads, it became a fight around rng. It wasn’t a fun fight at all. Felt like the devs realised it was too easy and chucked in ads then left it there.
Separately, why on earth the boss doesn’t receive damage for slamming down on the spiky enemy when its spikes are deployed… Missed opportunity!
The Beastfly in the Chapel isn’t too bad, since you can leverage its slam to take out any ads, however there is another arena where you fight it again and it spawns flying ads who shoot projectiles which deal double damage AND the boss breaks the platforms you’re standing on.
Feels like bullshit fighting against it.
I disagree about the fly that they just wanted to make you die more.
The boss itself is super easy, it has two attacks which are not only easily dodged but also leave a lot of opportunities to attack and move around.
So in essence the boss is a bag with silk to heal or use magic attacks while the real problem you face is using those resources to control the minions it summons.
So yeah if you go with the strategy to kill the boss fast you will suffer but if you act as a hunter to control the fight you will win.
Just my take on this boss after 100+ tries, and do consider it a good and interesting boss fight.
Or you can just rely on luck and brute force.
My biggest complaint is the sheer lack of rewards when I finish a fight. Give me any currency.
I have spent so much of this game broke, unable to buy the things I need to advance any side plots.
I’m currently stuck on the fight for the Music in the top left of the citadel. The double boss at the end is brutal. But because no enemy in that fight drops monster parts, I have to quit to grinding it to go grind more materials to build equipment, despite having slain 20+ enemies each run.
The game screams passion and devs spend seven years making it the way they like it. It is also a dirt cheap.
Critisism is fair and everybody has right for opininion. My opinion is that people who are bitching about the boss runs can shove it up to theirs.
Don’t like it, don’t buy it. I’m happy for team cherry and their success. It’s not for me but I don’t resent them that it isn’t. This nothing burger discussion is yet another herring designed to drive clicks and traffic off of the work of people who ACTUALLY create something of worth. Modern parasitism at its best.
Very well said
Sigh this shit again, if it’s the creators decision to have a game with finely tuned hard difficulty, so be it, that’s the creators creative decision and it should be respected
“death of the author” suggests some of the author’s intent is lost when a work is consumed by the audience.
Then it’s not the developer’s fault anymore that the game is hard.
It exists by itself.
Go a degree I guess as the audiences own experiences will determine there own interpretation of the work, but in this situation I don’t think someone’s own experiences is going to impact too much the fact that silksong is hard as nails at points
I can accept stupid decisions. I don’t have to respect them.
Respect is a weird word. It seems to have 2 nearly opposite meanings (kind of like literally):
So the first one implies that respect must be earned. The second implies that everyone must be respected by default (their due regard), thus respect is unearned.
I’ve always heard:
Respect is given, not earned.
Trust is earned and easy to lose.
Don’t confuse politeness with respect.
No you don’t, so you can either mod the game or not play the game right?
In my opinion, the game is not particularly difficult. That is, if you’ve played through the original Hollow Knight. Which most people haven’t. In fact, it looks to me like a lot of people jumping on the hype don’t have too much experience with metroidvanias and soulslikes.
It’s a sequel, so intended to be played after the original. Why do we care what people who haven’t played the first game think?
It’s difficult for me and I like it. I played Hollow Knight but didn’t finish it because it was too frustrating late game. Silksong to me is not frustrating because difficulty is mainly in figuring out how to pass the challenge, not doing reflexes which I don’t have. Most of the things I heard people complain about are solved by not rushing around with failing strategy but by thinking what the game recently suggested you to do for this particular encounter.
I actually think bringing in Hollow Knight experience aka “I already know everything” might be the reason why some people are frustrated. Like I heard a person who claimed to get all the achievements in HK complain that the second phase of one boss is terrible because they spent a hundred tries to dodge all the projectiles while you can just stand at the corner of the arena where non of them will hit you and use the tools this game gives you to win the fight.
I personally think Outer Wilds should give you the whole lore as an audiobook, not everyone wants to go hunting for clues and reading a bunch of old conversations between dead people in order to figure out what’s going on…
I mean, an audio book of Outer Wilds would be dope.
as an outer wilds fanatic, i think that would be a great option!
If you’re not able to commit to learning new strategies and using game mechanics to adapt to a game’s difficulty, and experience it as the developers intended, maybe it’s not for you. You can always watch a lore video or let’s play by other gamers to get the story if that’s the goal. This is Dark Souls 2 all over again, and I will personally say as someone who initially hated it, then gave it another chance; When you persist and triumph through grit, the game leaves a lasting impression and sense of accomplishment that you cheat yourself out of with a difficulty slider. That’s my favorite game in the series now, which is a deeply unpopular opinion, unsurprisingly.
This debate pops up every now and then and my opinion remains the same, there are plenty of games that aren’t meant to be a challenge to choose from. Part of games that are built to be a challenge is being able to reflect on how far you grew in the process, and people hate to hear it but ‘git gud’ is a real thing for those who believe things worth doing are hard.
Yeah I think as long as the devs are forward about it no problem. I have plenty of ‘hard things’ in my day to day life and I’m not looking for more of that in a videogame. Give me a Stardew or Factorio everytime - I want to relax and design things. Different games are for different people and that’s a good thing. Any game made to satisfy everyone will almost certainly satisfy no one.
Absolutely, it’s important to know what you like and want. Hell, lots of people work off vibes and go through phases where certain game types stimulate them, then fall off of those. Like MMOs and online FPS used to be my main thing, now I stick to single player story driven games. I’m not about to go loudly pout about how Stellaris doesn’t work for me and should be changed to appeal specifically to my wants, too busy with other games (and life).
In this thread: people complaining who are apparently bad at game mechanics and can’t or won’t learn to improve.
Just beat Widow second attempt.
The run back has you start on one screen, traverse two screens, and done. I got as high as 12 Mississippi counting during it.
There are mods and cheats for this game already—and they even run on Linux. I turn 50 next month: though I’m still playing, I don’t have as much time for gaming as I used to and my reflexes aren’t what they were. I haven’t entirely removed the challenge with mods, but I feel no shame in tweaking this game to go easier on me and chew up less of my time as punishment for failure. I wish they had these as accessibility options built-in, but I’m fine with hacking it.
Anybody telling me I should “git gud” can pound sand: I’m already good at a bunch of things that get me a paycheck. I play games so I can relax and be terrible at something for fun. I’m certainly not playing for bragging rights.
I think this game is not for you then.Harfd games are hard so that you can feelproufd of yourself after completing something hardet than you though you could. You may not complete the story but if you “git gud” you may actually enjoy it more.
Some games are not meant to be relaxing. Why would you even play a hard game if you want something easy?
I’m very provoced by this. Sorry.