It's called scalability. It's so profoundly selfish and egocentric that so many people (not singling you out) are arguing against the idea of multiple difficulty settings. It amazes me that so many people seem to think that THEIR experiences, abilities and skill sets are the median with which all others players are working.
I say good for you. No, really, I'm glad you had a good, hard time... but wtf does that have to do with me?
Different servers for different skill levels. Where's the problem?
@ daxrocket
Another inane analogy.
You do realize video games, by definition, are simulated events designed to allow (even retards) to do what could probably never happen in the physical realm? Right?
Well said. I am in a similar position with the series. I enjoyed much of Demon's Souls, but at a certain point, it just felt disrespectful of my time. So much money From COULD have made. Oh well.
For you.
Why do I need to get good at a game? I just want to be able to get my money's worth and enjoy a play-through before I move on to the next game. There are so many, I can barely keep up.
Are you afraid that you wouldn't be able to resist playing on an easy setting?
An "easy" setting may present the same level of challenge for another player that "difficult" does for you. An across-the-board difficulty setting may make a game unplayable for someone else.
@ DragonKnight
Those are about the dumbest possible analogies you could have come up with and if you can't figure out why, you need a serious firmware upgrade.
Also, your last sentence is full-retard ass backwards.
Did it occur to you that the reasons for which you play games ARE NOT the same for other people?
@kalkano
Your answer to the question was a perfect one.
Nevermind all the dislikes. They are just elitist a$$holes who think exclusivity is a GOOD thing.
From everyone and anyone else' perspective (including the developers, publishers, distributors, retailers and anyone who's NOT an a$$hole), the more people who can enjoy a game, the better.
The problem starts with the marketers who, for some reason are constantly pushing the not...
Stop blaming the libs and the left for idiots. I lean to the left and I agree with you that some of this sh*t is out of control. Don't assume that because some sh*t happens that you don't like, it must be "Liberal left".
Sounds to me like you played Ground Zeroes and completely missed The Phantom Pain.
...said some publication that has nothing to do with and knows nothing about the gaming industry.
"consumer reach and affinity"!? Really? Adweek has just announced to the world that they have no f*cking idea what they're talking about with their sycophantic list of corporate creeps. Outside of Konami, I can't think of any gaming related corps that have garnered more hate than EA and Activision.
I'm half way through MGSV:TPP and I can already unequivocally say that it's a masterpiece. To each their own, but I think you're nuts. Hideo is a little crazy too if he actually believes that.
"moot" as in up for debate?
I'm not interested in the team. I don't mean to be rude (honestly), but did you miss the part where the question was posed "Is An Overwatch Singleplayer Campaign Really Necessary?".
My answer was about as concise as I can get.
Uh, if they want my money, then yes (and from all the other people who are not interested in MP -there are a lot of us you know).
Bioware games are only "political" if you have personal hang-ups that you can't get past.
I say NO! to politics in gaming in general, but I can get behind your proposal.
Mind you, I AM currently being paid by the C.I.A. to assist what will become known as the Taliban to fight Russians in MGSV:TPP. That sounds pretty political.
You do realize that Secret World is mp, as are half of Funcom's biggest titles, right?
Yeah me too.