Accessibility: Is It Good? Superdude's Game Rant

Mar. 14, 2014

Accessibility: Is It Good? Superdude’s Game Rant

In part 2 of my X-part series where I basically state my views of game design and review games I like, I discuss what we, the community,  mean when we say “Game Accessibility,” what actually ends up happening when changing are made with accessibility in mind, some examples of this in the field, and whether or not Game Accessibility is good for the gaming community as a whole.

Disclaimers: This is all opinionated. If I hurt your feelings, you can send me a message about how badly I stubbed your opinion toe and ravage me with profanity, but don’t expect me to take you seriously. If you speak constructively, I will greet you as we all should be greeted. As Gentleman and Gentleladies. Now you know.

Also, I’m probably going to be rough on a few topics. There’s a quote by some American patriot that has stuck with me, and i’m paraphrasing when I quote him, but it went something like: “I love America more than any other country, and because of this love, I deserve the right to criticize it extensively.” In other words, I’m rough because I care so much. Don’t view this as hatred, but constructive criticism. Negatively constructive criticism.

So there’s this thread in Dark Souls 2 General Discussion discussing the new warping-from-the-beginning mechanic, and it’s actual effects on how the game’s played. I said that insta-warping, for some , is a good thing, because it can make the game more accessible for more casual players. Turns out, you aren’t supposed to say Dark Souls and casual in the same sentence. I had a lot of people accusing me of trying to make the game more like Skyrim; and one particular person who’s name I do not remember said I’m trying to make it more like Call of Dogcuss and CANDY CRUSH. (Don’t claim that I enjoy Candy Crush. That’s blasphemous, insulting, and below the belt. I take extreme offense to that) I argued with a few of them about this, until the conversion moved back to “insta-warping ruins game progression and the need to observe your envi. adequately,” which I agreed with, and still do. But this is not about insta-warping’s effect on DS2’s progression.

I thought more about what was said to me, and what I had said about Gaming Accessibility, and the casual-hardcore gaming experience. (Yes, Gaming Accessibility is going to be capitalized from now onward). After thinking about it for so long, I began to realize the “Gaming Accessibility is not what it seems. That being said, what does accessibility actually mean??

What does Accessibility mean?

Author’s note: I do not enjoy the terms “Casual” or “Hardcore.” I feel that using these terms to plaster a title or genre onto a game, when in reality the labels Casual and Harcore just show a certain person’s idea of who plays the game, and are opinionated statements 90% of the time. But for lack of better words, I’m using them. I apologize, to you and to myself..

In the view of the public, accessibility means making certain choices designed to bring the game to a wider audience. For a more casual game, this means throwing a hard mode in, certain difficulty modifiers the change the inherit rules of the game, mechanics that work as a Panic Button, carrying the player when they give up (looking at you, Nintendo), or pasting the IP over a completely different game genre it its entirety. The last example is most apparent in the new Plants vs Zombies: Garden Warfare, and the other examples are countless. Mario Kart, Tetris, Bejeweled,  Peggle, New Super Mario Bros., et cetera. I would say more, but i’m extremely bad at naming examples, but hey. Six game franchises. Five IPs (Could you call Tetris or Bejeweled IPs? I mean, they’re only puzzle games, no real story elements. So three, maybe? I have no idea…) Obvious standouts: Nintendo games (I neglected to mention too many in fear that you guys thought i’m a Nintendo hater. Love those guys, I swear), and casual puzzle games. I just so happened to name three from Popcap, but i’m more acquainted with them, so yeah. I paid a little more attention to them. Sorry for the bias. But it’s negative bias, so does is really matter? (I think not)

For “hardcore” games, and I quote because I feel the universe’s version of “hardcore” is heavily different than mine, Game Accessibility usually means the inclusion of an Easy mode, inhibitors allowing for easier progression through an otherwise tough area, or a co-op aspect is added, leading you through the game with double the thinking/gaming power. Examples are easier to come across for this section, with games like Gears of War, essentially every military shooter (CoD, MoH, GED, etc.), Skyrim, Fallout, Halo, Mass Effect, shooter X, shooter Y, shooter Z, et cetera. Obvious standouts: THEY’RE ALL SHOOTERS. I believe our generation of gamers don’t understand that hardcore doesn’t exclusively correlate with shooters. There are of course others that i’m leaving out (Darksiders could’ve fit as well), but i’m trying to make a point here. Too cussing many shooters out there, and all of them are considered hardcore games.

The rules aren’t exclusive, either. Hardcore games have features made to make the game harder, and Casual games have features made to make them easier. Most all “Hardcore” games have a locked mode, harder than the actual hard mode, which is unlocked after the game’s first completion. Some puzzle games have a hint system that will show your next move if you’re stumped. Granted, slapping this hint button will always lead to a failed game, but it’s an easy-button if you have no ways to progress.

So, as we probably already know, but I stated anyway, Game Accessibility means making a game with tweaks that are designed to make said game appeal to a wider audience. Know, that’s a nice idea, but…

What does Accessibility actually do?

Look at this sentence, spoken earlier:

“Most all ‘Hardcore’ games have a locked mode, harder than the actual hard mode, which is unlocked after the game’s first completion.”

Notice how incredibly specific that statement is? Only after beating a game to completion does a new game mode unlock, one that’s more difficult than Hard mode, and in some special cases adds more factors to making the game harder. This statement is extremely specific, yet it’s been a trope of certain “Hardcore” video games since the last generation, maybe longer. (I’m referring to the One/4/U as current-gen. Get your gens straight people.)

I will call it stealing for lack of a better word. Games will steal content from other, successful games if order to imitate, or steal, some of that success or fanbase. An example of this is Horde mode from Gears of War 2. In GoW2, Horde mode was introduced, which was basically you running around slightly modified versions of the multiplayer maps killing extensive amounts of the game’s bad guys, the Locust. Soon after, other games starting stealing this new game mode, plastering on a new name.

(Paragraph break: Some may argue that Call of Dogcrap: World at Willy Wonka’s starting this trend with their Nazi Zombies mode. I do not know the chronological release of the games, and although i’m pretty sure WaW released first, Gears 2’s Horde mode started the trend, so that’s what’s referred to as “first.” Sorry people-who-like-that-game-better.)

Modern Warfare 3’s Survival mode, Mass Effect 3’s multiplayer missions, Black ops 1 &2’s nazi zombies (although they were their first, so you can’t really get mad at them), the Batman Arkham game’s infini-fight mode. I would spout more, but i’m bad with examples, so my brain’s out. I know their are more, countless more.

When Gears of War Judgement came around, Epic software found themselves trying to re-redefine the shooter genre, and in my opinion, they failed. In an effort to make games appeal to a wider audience, every game mimics the other, trying to find a ground feel as a genre. The theory? “We can steal the other’s success!” The result? Every single game ends up the same. Certain games break from the mold, trying to differentiate themselves from the group and be the ripest for the buying, Battlefield and Gears are probably the best examples, but it’s a very contradictory message. X of War steals gameplay in an effort to find new fans, and then X of War has to fight to create new, never-before-seen gameplay in order to stand out. This new gameplay will in turn be stolen by Y’s Onslaught in order to broaden Y’s fanbase. See the vicious cycle? Despite the immediate payoffs, this behavior is counter intuitive to the gaming industry, and therefore, destructive.

Point #2. I’ll simply throw it at you.  Game Accessibilty leads to lazy game design.” If we can mimic other people’s work, why would we make fresh content? Taking it is SO much easier!” There are many now common elements to games that contribute to lazy design. The compass, showing you where everything that needs to be done is at all times. The fast travel system, allowing you to move wherever you need to at any point in time.

In Dark Souls, walking everywhere never felt like a chore. In fact, it felt like a challenge. Going from Blight to Firelink? Bring it on! Sounds like fun! Secondly, if I didn’t want to walk somewhere for souls or items, I just didn’t. I went somewhere else. Or did PvP. Or farmed. There are all sorts of different ways in which you can acquire what you need, maybe less for items than souls, but you get what I mean.

In Skyrim, which I used to be a fan of, (emphasis on “used”) going anywhere on foot felt like the worst thing you could possible get me to do. Why? Lazy game design is the culprit. Let me explain:

Fast-travel is available from the beginning, so going to a point I hadn’t discovered felt like a chore and a waste of my valuable playing time. “Just, why? Why walk when I can press a button and be there? Why explore the world when, for 20 to 50 gold, I can go to ANY CORNER of the entirety of Skyrim?” It leads to laziness. A sense of entitlement. And the world doesn’t help matters.

In Dark Souls, walking through the same stretch of map may be tiring, but it often isn’t. Why? Because it’s a beautifully crafted world. Think of all the memorable things you’ve seen going through Lordran. (SPOILERS) A cave composed entirely of crystal. The innards of the world, holding a lake with archtrees moving farther than your eyes can see, one of them, holding the last Everlasting dragon. A lost city, sitting above a lake of fire. Another lost city, held together by the illusions of a god. Yet another lost city, flooded to hold back the terrors hiding nears the city’s true bottom, with what’s left of the city holding inhospitable ghosts. A chilled land, holding that which the gods feared. And finally, an ash-covered place, masking the glory which once embodied the place; leaving a creep, a chill, to what must have been a glorious landscape a thousand years ago. There’s so much to look at, to love, to take in in Dark Souls. What are we looking at in Skyrim? Dead grass. Snow. Black and white mountains. To it’s credit, there’s the swamp lands near the Eastern side of the world, and the underground city below, but the swamp is simply brown instead of the usual white or grey. And the underground city holds huge glowing mushrooms, which add green to the naturally occurring black. The colors are washed out. There’s no variation. IT’S ALL YOU EVER LOOK AT. Just black and some other washed out colors.

(Spoilers End) Lazy game design goes hand-in-hand with accessibility because it allows for shortcuts to be made. Why create a nice world when players are just going to warp through it? Lets just keep throwing in arbitrary missions so that we don’t need to make a cohesive story that has depth. They’ll be so caught up in finding the Dark Brotherhood and becoming a Werewolf, they won’t even think about how Alduin found a portal to Sovngarde! Or how the people who sealed away Alduin got the Elder Scroll in the first place! A game could be so much more, but then it’s shortcutted into something that’s basically broken. Uninteresting.

So yeah. We get it, Superdude. “Accessibility is Diablo.” But it’s not purely bad, is it? It can be changed, right!?

Can Accessibility be good?

So I was originally opposed to those who said Game Accessibility was bad inside of the Insta-Warping mechanic discussion, but the person who changed my mind, who’s name I also don’t know or remember, had this to say: (Paraphrasing)

” Communism works great in theory, but it kinda hasn’t worked in real life. True accessibility is the same. You can’t truly bring together every audience and have a game that satisfies all.”

This ingenious quote is completely true. Accessibility CAN be good! It can be more than good, perfect, even! But, is that achievable, realistically? No. We can not make a game that satisfies the most hardcore of gamers whilst also catering to the most casual of players, all while creating a perfect game that doesn’t have to sacrifice for either medium. It’s simply not possible. But we can get close…

Dark Souls 2 handled Accessibility very well. Difficulty is a ground bass, and the game’s always been “Look, that was your fault. Practice, train, and do better next time,” and it rarely ever felt cheap. (Except for Seath.) If casuals feel it’s too much, cool. This community doesn’t want you around anyway. Dark Souls 2 has game modifiers, making it harder, BUT ONLY FOR THOSE WHO ACTIVATE IT. If you don’t feel confident, you don’t ever have to touch the difficulty modifiers. Ever. Now, earlier, I may have said that game modifiers was a bad thing. But these have been seamlessly added to the game, existing, but not in a mod folder, or a special game mode available only for the next week. It’s a part of the world, and I believe seemless difficulty modifiers are a good way to handle difficulty. I’ll stop harping, but I’ll once again claim that this is the closest we’ve come to a truly accessible game.

In the end, what can be said? Accessibility is one of those things you can strive for, but never truly achieve. Currently, I feel that the gaming industry is handling Accessibility very wrong, and it needs to be changed soon if we want a healthy gaming environment, especially in the “Hardcore” section. Guitar hero dies off because of what they call “over-saturation of the market.” They became so plentiful that people completely lost interest in them. At this rate, the same can soon be said for the shooting genre; and the trend is already apparent in a lot of people. The “shooters will sell” idea is an unhealthy one, and the stealing of content, is even unhealthier, if not dangerous. Hopefully, the “Hardcore” genre will find their way out of their mess, even if it hasn’t turned into a mess yet. As for Accessibility, hopefully, we’ll reach that perfect game, if not later, than on the eleventh of March…

Agree or (most likely) disagree? Let me know in the comments below! Or, send me a message! I’ll open a thread in Off Topic for further discussion of this topic outside the comments, for any who don’t want to be here. Lastly, tell me what you think. Same opinions? This is purely me, and I understand that my approach is kind of commanding and heavily opinionated here, that’s just how it formed. Sorry if I stubbed your opinion toes.

COMMENTSPLEASEANDTHANKYOU

No way are you done yet, read more gaming articleshere

That one dude you see on your computer, you basically comments on everything because he’s an avid fan of all things gamey and stuff. Yeah… that guy. Right there. See him? Yeah…he’s kinda weird.

You must belogged into post a comment.