In many ways, the discussion about Elden Ring isn’t actually about Elden Ring at all. It’s about who’s allowed to have a voice in gaming, and which segments of gamers are catered to. It’s about the very existence of difficulty modes being abhorrent to a small but vocal subset of gamers, and the toxic discourse over easy mode. If you can’t “git gud,” as they say, you shouldn’t be gaming at all.
Many people believe the difficulty in Elden Ring is crucial to the gameplay, and that it creates a community around these incredibly hard experiences. I respect that—especially anything that creates a nontoxic community, because that can be hard to find. But I also can’t help noticing that a large swath of gamers, the “filthy casuals” as we’re often called, are pleading just to be included at a basic level—and being ridiculed and attacked for it. (I haven’t even addressed the plight of disabled gamers, who often need accessibility settings to be able to play at all.)
This isn’t entirely Elden Ring’s problem, or fault. The issue lies with a certain coterie of “fans” who find exclusion and gatekeeping vital to their experience. Including an easy mode doesn’t take anything away from the people who find satisfaction in a very difficult game. It’s not as if that mode will disappear. Yet they argue continually that wide appeal and playability options will somehow diminish their experience. It won’t.
FromSoftware has made it clear that death is integral to its games, so maybe it’s a moot point. I might be writing all this for nothing. Perhaps I should just cut my losses and walk away, but maybe there’s a compromise to be made here. Remedy Entertainment did it with Control, introducing an assist mode about a year after the game’s launch. It allowed players to tweak difficulty settings, made it more accessible, and opened the game up to an entirely new population of gamers. It’s pretty safe to say that anyone who’s a huge fan of FromSoftware will play Elden Ring in its first year of release. Maybe a year-one patch can include more accessibility settings and difficulty modes, opening the game up to new hordes.
This will likely never happen. But I don’t want the people who are hostile to casual gamers, who use that as an insult to keep people out of the discussion, to control the narrative about gaming. Elden Ring isn’t for me, and that’s OK. But I’m still a gamer, and this hill is one on which I’m perfectly happy to meet a quick death.
More Great WIRED Stories
- 📩 The latest on tech, science, and more: Get our newsletters!
- How Telegram became the anti-Facebook
- Wind turbines could mess with ships' radar signals
- The governor of Colorado is high on blockchain
- The age of everything culture is here
- An internet troll targets nonalcoholic spirits startups
- 👁️ Explore AI like never before with our new database
- 📱 Torn between the latest phones? Never fear—check out our iPhone buying guide and favorite Android phones
As someone deeply immersed in the world of gaming, I've spent countless hours exploring the nuances of game design, player communities, and the evolving discourse surrounding the industry. My expertise extends beyond mere gameplay mechanics; I've delved into the socio-cultural aspects that shape the gaming landscape, including discussions around accessibility, difficulty modes, and the very essence of what it means to be a gamer.
The article you've presented touches on a hot-button issue within the gaming community—Elden Ring's difficulty and the broader implications it carries. The discussion extends beyond the game itself, raising questions about inclusivity, toxicity, and the role of gatekeeping in the gaming world.
1. Elden Ring's Difficulty and Community Dynamics: The article highlights the polarized opinions regarding Elden Ring's difficulty. On one hand, there's a sentiment that the game's challenging nature fosters a unique and tight-knit community. Some argue that the difficulty is integral to the gameplay experience, creating a sense of accomplishment for those who persevere.
2. Inclusion of Difficulty Modes and Accessibility: The article introduces the concept of "easy mode" and the resistance from a subset of gamers who view it as detrimental to their experience. It also touches on the plea from a significant portion of players, often labeled as "filthy casuals," who seek basic inclusion and accessibility features. The mention of disabled gamers highlights the importance of making games accessible to a diverse audience.
3. Gatekeeping and Exclusion in Gaming: A crucial aspect discussed is the presence of a certain group of fans who thrive on exclusion and gatekeeping. This group perceives the inclusion of accessibility features or easy modes as a threat to their gaming experience, leading to a toxic discourse that marginalizes certain players.
4. Comparisons with Other Games and Possible Solutions: The article draws a parallel with Remedy Entertainment's game Control, which introduced an assist mode post-launch. This move increased accessibility and expanded the player base without detracting from the experience of existing players. The suggestion is made that similar measures could be taken for Elden Ring, potentially through a post-launch patch.
5. The Stance of FromSoftware: FromSoftware's stance on the integral role of death in its games is acknowledged, presenting a potential roadblock to the implementation of easier difficulty modes. The article contemplates the possibility of compromise and the potential impact of such changes on the gaming community.
In conclusion, the article advocates for a more inclusive gaming environment and challenges the narrative controlled by those hostile to casual gamers. It recognizes the unique appeal of Elden Ring while suggesting that the gaming industry should strive for broader accessibility without compromising the experiences of dedicated players.
