36
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 05 Aug 2025
36 points (90.9% liked)
Games
20770 readers
386 users here now
Video game news oriented community. No NanoUFO is not a bot :)
Posts.
- News oriented content (general reviews, previews or retrospectives allowed).
- Broad discussion posts (preferably not only about a specific game).
- No humor/memes etc..
- No affiliate links
- No advertising.
- No clickbait, editorialized, sensational titles. State the game in question in the title. No all caps.
- No self promotion.
- No duplicate posts, newer post will be deleted unless there is more discussion in one of the posts.
- No politics.
Comments.
- No personal attacks.
- Obey instance rules.
- No low effort comments(one or two words, emoji etc..)
- Please use spoiler tags for spoilers.
My goal is just to have a community where people can go and see what new game news is out for the day and comment on it.
Other communities:
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Slowing the game down and reducing the damage done by bosses isn't rocket science. It's like ten lines of code, which have been written so many times an AI can probably provide them.
Different people have different capacities to engage with a game. The world is a better place with some simple accessibility concessions.
We don't need to make excuses for game developers who don't even do the minimum, unless it's their first game.
Edit: To me, the "Watch a playthrough" argument misses something fundamental about why people choose games over movies.
Aight I see aim not getting through to you. Let's try though.
No, lowering damage and slowing attacks is not all I proposed nor would that fix the issue. Complexity in move-set must also be decreased. Also in the game world enemy placement and quantity must be adjusted to lower dificulty. Otherwise it'll be, mostly, just as hard
No, properly slowing attacks is not easy to do. You are not programmer or an animator. No, AI can't magic this up for you either a month ago I saw an app hobbled together with AI that had three whole stacks in it with three seperate apps because somebody tried to add a new view with statistics on it with AI tooling.
Once more, for accessibility, should we have low to no horror settings in horror games? Low to no puzzle options in puzzle games? Etc.
You call these people lazy but don't have any clue what they actually do. No. It's not lazyness. They could make shitty difficulty settings that don't fix peoples problems or they could spend many hours doing it right.
Edit: To respond to their edit, I think the just add a difficulty slider argument fundamentally doesn't understand why people play these types of games
Um, Actually, I am a developer.
I agree with you that it's not always enough. But you're making an all or nothing argument. I find it disingenuous.
Developers with more experience throw in some accessibility features.
It is a hard problem, but that's no reason not to make an effort.
I find the whole "purity of artistic vision" argument privileged and ableist.
Software can do better than other art mediums. Accessibility is worth striving for.
Developers who don't add accessibility aren't some high minded artists, they just haven't fully mastered their craft, yet.
Disingenuous? I think that's projection.
Not once have I stated it was high art to not add this in. That's a wild statement.
I'm simply stating not doing so isn't lazy, or gate keeping. The devs ar e focusing elsewhere. To focus here, they spend more money or take something else out. As a dev you should know this.
This is a feature. You can focus on a subset of all possible features. Not implementing one does not make you a worse dev your code is what matters. A dev should know this. You have x amount of time (money) a dev thus can implement y features.
A house should have a garage. Not building one doesn't make you a lesser builder you just didn't have the finds and chose to build a nursery instead with the money. Focus was elsewhere.
Edit: It's clear to me this persons not going to engage. They ignore my arguments, make up new ones, and don't seem to care for the discussion. I'm going to disengage
As a dev you keep throwing around the word accessibility very loosely. This is very weird. Are we talking about accessibility for disabled people or for people who simply find the game difficult? The latter is the main conversation here. The prior is ableism through low expectations. You're nolonger talking about an "easy mode" either. Accessibility settings aren't "easy modes" disabled people don't need to be coddled.
Also, as a dev, you should know seemingly simple features are not commonly simple. Any dev past junior should know this. No Dev past junior should make these claims unless speaking directly about tech.
Edit: On top of this, I've made no all or nothing argument. Lowering damage and speed does very little to help. Essentially nothing.
Please, under any engine of choice, give me a top level on how you're implement variable speed.
You throw a lot of hatred towards devs (calling them lazy gatekeepers who are poor in craft who can't implement something AI can) what are your creds?
I'm a fullstack software dev with 7 years experience and a specialization in accessible ui (disability, not dislike for the combat system) and multiplatform codebases. You?
The way you have phrased the question indicates there's much you can still learn about modern accessibility approaches.
Horror games can provide toggles for particular kinds of elements.
Puzzle games can have more hints.
Great developers know this, and use these approaches.
I am not saying every developer must implement accessibility options.
I am saying I won't listen to them brag about their skills, if they do not.
Yes, horror games should have settings to lower the horror because everyone has different preferences and tolerances.
Horror devs are lazy and gatekeeping for not implementing this? That is the original statement from the thread.
It is a horror game. The point is horror. Sure, if a Dev wants to add the slider, full send. Thats a positive. Devs who want to focus on the fundamental concept are not lazy. They have different priorities.
Not all games must cater to all gamers. Sometimes a game isn't for you. You have different prefferences, that's ok. Different games cater to your preferences.
Some games don't cater to mine and that's fine too
Yes, they are lazy and gatekeeping. Difficulty options are accessibility options and development who don't include those are worthless.
Worthless, wow, hateful words friend. I can see we're not going to get anywhere you ignore my points and throw around vitriol. Wish you the best though.
I will state two last things. One, you ignored the horror game aspect and thus my argument. Two, Difficulty options and low horror settings are not an accessibility feature. That's abalism through low expectations. Support for accessible tools, contrast colouring, larger text, etc. Are though. Still, though something to strive for, the devs who don't add these are over worked individuals with too much on their plate already.
Know you are valued friend these devs are just trying to make something good out here
I read everything you wrote and disagree with every point.
No? Increase time between moves that are difficult to dodge or parry, reduce damage that those moves deal. Difficulty is reduced while complexity remains the same.
I've never met anyone who actually has trouble with normal enemies in these games, it's always bosses that give us trouble. But also, see my first point.