Asklemmy

44171 readers

1836 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy 🔍

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

Open-ended question
Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

Lemmyverse: community search
sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
!lemmy411@lemmy.ca: a community for finding communities

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~

founded 5 years ago

MODERATORS

What discussion you know you are on the wrong side of? (lemmy.ml)

submitted 1 month ago by lorty@lemmy.ml to c/asklemmy@lemmy.ml

159 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Maybe you haven't been convinced by a good enough argument. Maybe you just don't want to admit you are wrong. Or maybe the chaos is the objective, but what are you knowingly on the wrong side of?

In my case: I don't think any games are obliged to offer an easy mode. If developers want to tailor a specific experience, they don't have to dilute it with easier or harder modes that aren't actually interesting and/or anything more than poorly done numbers adjustments. BUT I also know that for the people that need and want them, it helps a LOT. But I can't really accept making the game worse so that some people get to play it. They wouldn't actually be playing the same game after all...

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] comfy@lemmy.ml -2 points 4 weeks ago (1 children)

Why wouldn’t the developer want as many people as possible to buy the game though?

I've never made art (incl. games) with the intention of having as many people view it as possible. Many developers make games as a hobby rather than for mere profit, and some try to draw a compromise in the middle.

I know this doesn't apply as much to major well-known games created by professional game development companies, but there are other incentives guiding development beyond maximizing purchases.

[–] MrJameGumb@lemmy.world 3 points 4 weeks ago (1 children)

And how many boutique niche Indy games made solely for their artistic merit have you played that actually had an easy mode?

[–] comfy@lemmy.ml 1 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

made solely for their artistic merit

There's a huge middle-ground between pure artistic pursuit and callous profit maximization.

Plenty of the bigger non-profit games (like FOSS games) have easy modes. I'm actually having a hard time trying to think of ones which don't. And I'd call them all niche and indie, made primarily for enjoyment over market interests. In games like STK, it's clear from the bug tracker and forum that the primary devs (passionate and experienced players) are trying to balance their intended experience against accessibility - if some of them just made the game how they think it should be played, it would be very different.