Git Gud – You Should Be Able to Skip Cutscenes, But Never Gameplay

This is an editorial piece. The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily represent the views and opinions of, and should not be attributed to, Niche Gamer as an organization.

A few games have released in the past couple weeks that have set a new standard for not just style and visuals, but also solid gameplay mechanics and challenging difficulty. Those games are Ruiner and Cuphead, both games that I personally reviewed and thoroughly enjoyed. Unfortunately, some other game journalists or critics are infantile buffoons, so they want easier games.

Various diatribes from the regular collection of websites have arisen, like Rock Paper Shotgun who actually pointed to Ubisoft’s new supplementary combat-free educational mode in Assassin’s Creed: Origins in demanding a “skip boss fight” button, or Polygon who actually considered whether or not it’s okay for a video game to be challenging.

All of this ceaseless whining boils down to a central argument: games should be more inclusive so that more people can play them. Most of these writers go a step further by saying games with highly challenging or complicated gameplay are therefore exclusionary, some even going as far to say they are deliberately shunning the casual market “whale” gamer archetype.

I think this is all complete nonsense and as game journalists or critics it’s your job to be at least competent in playing video games, whether it’s via a controller or a mouse and keyboard. Not every game has to be designed with everyone in mind, because that defeats the purpose of creating a product for a target market demographic.

Video games are products, a fact lots of holier-than-thou game writers, critics, and journalists like to avoid or even vehemently deny. Therefore, game journalists and critics are literally product reviewers or enthusiast press, a reality that was pretty much widely accepted a decade ago before a regressive and poisonous groupthink started to embarrass themselves and the industry.

Many of these so-called pundits and “personalities” want gaming to forcibly evolve into something more presentable to people who don’t play video games. Do you see how absolutely ridiculous this kind of thinking looks? The very definition of what a game is breaks down because the framework for what makes a game is inherently subjective, and yet these bloggers want to define that.

The beautiful thing about the video games industry is that it has expanded and gotten more popular because of how inclusive it is and how it can easily tap into a massive range of specialized markets. If your thing is playing digital sports games, there are loads of those. If you’re a gearhead and want to drive cars when not driving your car, you can do that too.

Cuphead is an anomaly in a sea of sequels and tacky block-like indie games that are trying to capitalize on the next big craze for livestreamers or YouTubers. Many detractors of this game are literally demanding that it have an easier mode, while some aren’t even happy with that – they’re mad that the easy mode literally has content you can only get to in the regular difficulty.

My question to these bloggers is why should a developer turn back their vision so they can maybe garner more sales? If a developer is confident in their product, if they’ve built a superb game with a fair but challenging level of difficulty, this becomes a non-issue. Shouldn’t the focus be on making a superior product, thus securing the path for critical acclaim and more sales?

You can have the most inclusive game with some of the most socially-progressive themes in recent gaming history and no one could care about it – which is the case with Sunset and its endless praise from the very same gaming critics. Actual gamers didn’t buy the game in droves, because it just didn’t appeal to them nor did it really feel like a game.

My personal theory is that a lot of the gaming press and critics are simply stuck in an industry they really don’t like and want to make it more of what they like – maybe something in film or interactive art, interpretive dance, live theater, or poetry readings. Perhaps they want something exciting and divisive like politics, lots of them seem to be quick to boil things down to politics.

Why should people who clearly don’t enjoy the very concept of a game or game-play be allowed to dictate how games are made? How games are played from beginning to finish? Asking a developer to add a button to skip gameplay is the most ludicrous thing I’ve ever heard, but it honestly doesn’t surprise me when other game critics will literally fail tutorials.

It boggles my mind when I hear people complain about gameplay. I have to focus on leaving myself and my own consciousness so that I can try to enter the state of a deluded critic or journalist that simply wants to “press X to continue” an interactive cutscene. This is why I’ve never been a fan of visual novels, but western-made VNs are all the rage now with the other critics.

To me, a game has some kind of fail and win conditions while also having an overall goal. I think this is a reasonable yet basic concept of a game, but as the very nature of games has changed and been expanded upon, there might be multiple winning conditions, as well as multiple ways to fail. Maybe this goes back to the failed “everyone’s a winner” mantra parroted after I grew up.

I don’t think everyone is a winner, I think you have to learn what it means to lose and following that learn what it takes to finally win. The feeling of winning after losing is a miraculous and character-building thing sadly maligned by more thin-skinned people. Sure, a game can be unfair and that should be called out – however, a game that is only challenging is totally OK.

Lots of these commentators have a blind vision that “video games are art,” while they have no vision themselves and can’t wrap their heads around why some people (like myself) will play a game repeatedly until they get better. This is a core concept of games, digital or in real life, and once again something these bloggers have no understanding of.

Video games can indeed be art, but the regular crowd of critics simply want to divide up the industry with banal demands instead of focusing on finding better games. If a game doesn’t appeal to you simply move on or assign it to someone else – don’t blame the developer for pursuing a vision. Also stop being helpless babies and learn to actually play video games for once.

How do you guys feel about more challenging gameplay in video games? Should games consider providing a “skip gameplay” button for players that want to just watch a movie instead? Do modern gaming journalists simply want to be movie critics instead? Sound off in the comments below!

Cuphead is now available for Windows PC and Xbox One. In case you missed it, you can find our review for the game here (we recommend it with our highest praise!).

Brandon Orselli


Big Papa Overlord at Niche Gamer. Italian. Dad. Outlaw fighting for a better game industry. I also write about music, food, & beer. Also an IT guy.

  • Hiecchi

    “but western-made VNs are all the rage now with the other critics” Can you explain this a little more?

  • Like all the TellTale games. Games like Gone Home and Sunset

  • CrusaderEsper

    But Japanese-made VNs are still all considered trash even if they never had any adult content in them. It’s double standards.


    Can we skip the games entirely and just get the trophies/achievements?

  • This goes back to my theory of mainstream game journalists wanting games to be more “presentable” to their peers. Removing all the gameplay and making them interactive movies makes them just like movies

  • Renaissance_nerd

    This, this right here is why I support niche gamer.

  • Ace

    Eh, I don’t see what’s so bad about putting in a skip gameplay button in a game. The players that want to play the game will still play the game. It’s like irrationally getting mad at people who choose to play easy mode. Just because you played it on normal mode doesn’t give give you the entitlement to believe that everyone should play the game exactly as you played it. However, that’s completely different beast from a game where all you do is press buttons that “skip gameplay.” I’d chalk it up to a company trying to serve a specific audience; once again, this is something that all companies do in any industry.

    But it seems that you’re actually just disappointed that people did not enjoy a game the way you personally enjoy it and that these people wrote reviews on them.

    And your quote “My personal theory is that a lot of the gaming press and critics are
    simply stuck in an industry they really don’t like and want to make it
    more of what they like – maybe something in film or interactive art,
    interpretive dance, live theater, or poetry readings.” This is a really wide over-generalized comment. Do you have the facts to back this up or did you just look at 3 or 4 people and decided that those people represented the entire organization that they wrote for? Think about it rationally: would someone purposefully choose to get into an industry they hated? I know that some people feel that they have to pay the bills so they’ll take any job they can get, but I’d like to think that most job seekers are looking for employment in a job they’re skilled at or/and or an industry they have experience with.

  • Uncle Ocelot

    “My personal theory is that a lot of the gaming press and critics are simply stuck in an industry they really don’t like and want to make it more of what they like”
    I’d say this is pretty damn close to the mark, a lot of these people clearly have some contempt for a lot of the industry and it’s fans.

  • Uncle Ocelot

    The Japanese are “problematic”.

  • Shinobu

    No wonder all these shitter’s love walking simulators so much.

  • Magnifico Ginormous

    Bingo I don’t see this talked about enough but a lot of them clearly are insecure about their job being about something they feel isn’t “mature”and think too much about what people who don’t give a shit about games would think about them, I’d speculate the source of this is butthurt over Ebert’s comments on games which would fester up until spawning a sort of religion around 2011.

  • Dewey Defeats Truman

    Here’s the thing that gets me: Video games are absolutely art. However, the gameplay is the key component to that piece of art. The Last of Us had a woefully generic story I could find in any other zombie apocalypse scenario but the frantic gunfights were what kept me playing to the end. I don’t think Bayonetta is an amazing game because the main character is a hot woman, it’s an amazing game because the weapons feel really damn good to use and witch time is the best mechanic in any game ever.

    I’ve played a lot of games this year, and while I’ve got my definite biases towards some series like with Sonic Mania I’d honestly say the best game I played in 2017 was Tony Hawk’s Pro Skater 3. It’s not visually stunning by todays standards, it isn’t like I’m invested in the story of “Tony Hawk and pals skate around some cool locales.” But the gameplay is just so solid, so perfect in its 2-minute bursts of easy to learn, difficult to master trick combos that I dumped a month of my life into it with no regrets.

  • CrusaderEsper

    And so many of us would be willing to trade professions with them in a heartbeat. Closest I got was QA testing and I miss that job terribly. Sure, I could go back into it, but since I haven’t been doing it for the last 9 years I wouldn’t be making enough to live on. I would have needed to be grinding away at that job earning raises and promotions for all that time to be doing that now.

  • The Clansman

    Yeah, these people are losers who are stuck reviewing stuff they don’t like, skipping gameplay would make it easier for them and their SJW friends wouldn’t think they have a job writing about toys. They can kindly fuck off, nobody wants them, they’re losers any way.

  • ProtomanBlues

    People are always trying to “bridge the gap between movies and games.” I say “why?” If anything people should be focusing on what makes a game a game and making those parts improved/innovative/expended upon.

  • I wanted to add a little addendum here too: saying adding a skip gameplay button is the same as an easier difficulty is NOT the same thing. It’d be like skipping to the end of a movie, or a book.

  • mewnani

    Modern gaming journalists can’t even be film critics. They’d whine about sexualized women and gun violence in films.

    If they don’t want to get good at video games they should just settle for watching someone else. They might as well be trying to get the NFL to ban touchdowns so football games can be more fair.

  • Casey

    What I don’t get is how Ubisoft gets away with putting an “educational mode” in their series in which the pope used magical powers to fight the main character for a device made by aliens.

    Fucking ubisoft.

  • mewnani

    Well at this point it’s not like the inclusion of such a mode could possible make the game any worse….

  • Donwel

    A lot of them have degrees in film or creative arts I hear, and they failed hard in getting into those industries so they moved onto games writing. Because it’s apparently the next best thing.

  • Captain Vidya

    Seriously, are we going to have to have this talk, or at least something like it, every time a remotely challenging game comes out? This year we’ve had Crash, then Sonic Mania (I don’t fucking know how) and now we have Cuphead. Can’t we have SOMETHING that requires some brainpower to overcome amidst the sea of “button -> awesome” without “”””””””””games journalists”””””””””” bitching and moaning about having to think about what they’re doing?

  • Donwel

    I wouldn’t even say difficulty is the problem here, look at games like Dark Souls and to a lesser extent fappy bird. Two games well known for their difficulty, but managed to attain some level of mainstream success, now this could be down to marketing but it’s more likely its popularity among youtubers or even core gamers.
    It’s the same thing that happened with the Wii/DS and also what we’re seeing with the Switch to some degree. Casuals flock to the latest “in” thing whether they like it or not, because apparently being one of the cool kids is more important than not spending your money on things you don’t like.

  • uncle_alfred

    I always think that they mix up games being inclusive to everyone, with games being accessible to everyone.
    Should games be accessible? Sure, if you can afford it, you can play it, no matter of gender, skill level or whatever other reason.
    But should they be more inclusive no matter what? If you like bland, boring stuff, sure. Because that is what you get when they want to make “inclusive” product for everyone, it starts lacking any character.
    I will never understand why people won’t accept one single fact (in case of video games), if you really want to avoid one part of a game that actually defines it as a video game, a gameplay, you don’t really want to play it. Just fucking skip it, not every game has to cater to everyone.
    I don’t even have problems with easy modes in games. But when you are ready to spend money on game, only to avoid engaging in vital parts of it, it just boggles my mind.
    I know that you can make argument of “i don’t like this part of the game, don’t you have some parts of the game you wish you could skip”.
    Yeah, sure i have, everyone have parts they hate in games. But when they pester through them, it is usually because they are minor things, or game does something else exceptionally well.
    Just because i hate racing in, let’s say, Need for Speed, i don’t whine about not wanting to win races and having to race in general, i just don’t play this game.

  • Kain Yusanagi

    TLoU was more about the character interactions within the generic zombie story. That’s where the story really shined. People that ignore that and focus only on the most broadest concepts are doing both themselves and the game a disservice. If they don’t like that, that’s fine, but pretending it’s nothing is just as bad as these journos with how they pretend gameplay is pointless.

  • Donwel

    My sister used to read the ends of books first, I could never understand why.

  • Kain Yusanagi

    Because it’s about the tools, procedures, etc. used within reality. As Brandon wrote in their article on it: “Separate from the main game, Discovery Tour annotates the game world with dozens of interactive tours curated by historians and Egyptologists.” It’s about exploring what was, rebuilt in a game, not their alternative history stuff.

  • Kain Yusanagi

    Tons do. They’re just irrelevant and no one cares what they say other than other film critics at Sundance, or whatever.

  • TheOnceAndFutureKing

    Spot on, when the press is filled with SJWs who suck at games while having open contempt for them along with the communities, then its no surprise they push their Marxist horseshit about how all games should play like something you’d see in the bonus feature of a DVD menu.

    Long live the gamers and the enthusiast journalists.


    The Phillips CD-i would be lightning in a bottle if it released today.

  • TheOnceAndFutureKing

    I think Miyamoto said something once about how videogames and movies are two separate experiences that should be kept apart, I agree 100% with this.

  • TheOnceAndFutureKing

    You would be amazed how little of an influence the mainstream gaming press has on a game’s success compared to niche communities and Youtube streamers.

  • TheOnceAndFutureKing

    Along with the Sega CD and 3DO

  • Mr0303

    In my view giving the option to skip gameplay, means that you as a developer have no confidence in your product or your audience. Difficulty levels are quite welcome to accommodate players with varying ability, but removing the whole interaction and learning process is absolutely contrary to the essentials of game design.


    Hey I had a 3DO. Unlike the CD-i, there were plenty of go through the motions to see what happens next games, but also plenty of great REAL games. I think there’s room for both types, but the vast majority should be gamey games. Besides, if we only focused on gameplay, how else would we get gems like Yakyuken Special!?

  • TheOnceAndFutureKing

    Thats not bad, but it doesn’t hold a candle to Marky Mark on Sega CD

  • Riosine

    The irony here is if you really keep practicing, and searching for bugs, you can reach to a point where can actually sequence break games


    Lol! I remember that! Sadly, I never “played” it.

  • GrimFate

    I hate this “inclusive” mindset for art. Part of this stupid mindset of “if I can’t enjoy this then it is problematic and should be changed or not exist at all”. God forbid we actually have some art that is tailored to a specific audience, rather than everything having to have any actual individuality because that won’t appeal to everyone. We can’t have choice, if those choices fall outside their sphere of what is acceptable. I want a story about a large-breasted female right-wing lawyer who fights for free speech during the day and eliminates ISIS terror cells during the night? Too bad! The people who don’t want it, who could simply choose to ignore it and not buy it, will fight against its actual existence.

    How about these sites just accept that not every game is for them and either skip them or give them a bad review (so we can easily identify which reviewers do not match our own tastes), rather than arguing those games should be changed (and likely worsened) to accomodate their tastes.

  • Dewey Defeats Truman

    “Story in a game is like a story in a porn movie. It’s expected to be there, but it’s not that important.”

    -John Carmack

  • Arenegeth

    I never really cared if people wanted to pay $60 to ‘just get through the story’ instead of reading a book or watching a series/movie, or even skip through the entire game, or in the old days, cause we acting like this shit is new, beat the game on god mode.

    As long as the base game itself is not dumbed down, in its core, as in base mechanics, level design and the oh so dreaded and condescending to gamers like me, hand holding.

    I really don’t give a fuck, if some goony bearded schmuck from San Fran, can’t be bothered to learn basic game mechanics and just wants to sit through a game, because his spine is so far up his asshole, it started playing billiards with his eyeballs. Let him.

    So yeah, they can add all the ‘skip’ gameplay modes they like for these nutsuckers, maybe they’ll shut the fuck up, go ‘watch’ a game while Jamal the Bull takes care of the wife/girlfriend as he’s supposed to, and leave the rest of us to actually play, a thing called a game! How bout’ them apples?

  • Belfry

    Gone Home: 10/10 does exactly what it tries to. If you like having some actual “game” in your game go play COD, loser.

    Cuphead: This game doesn’t cater to people who don’t actually want to play it; and it would be better if it did, loser.

    Whole argument to skip content reminds me of that kid on the Bioware forums everyone got mad at because he wanted to switch off the “gay stuff” or whatever in Dragon Age. “What’s wrong with engaging with the game how I want?” “It’s just an option — you don’t need to use it.” etc.

    I want to swan dive into a wood chipper.

    But let’s actually address it. A “skip this part” button is the laziest solution and really inhibits the game’s design in a few ways.

    First: It requires that the skippable part isn’t used as a discreet tutorial or test on a mechanic. Skipping segments like that would require the game never raise difficulty or simply not use those mechanics later, else everything after is a complete wash. This guy goes into more detail here:

    Second: It requires these segments be completely episodic and isolated with no lasting rewards, punishments, or story consequences that are not 100% predetermined. This is a baffling oversight since games have been using rewards to allow players to mitigate later difficulty spikes since… forever. Play well in easier parts you’re given more lives, items, exp, w/e for the harder parts. Hell, you’d think they’d at least remember Papers Please given how much they flaunted it.

    Third: Did I say skipping content is a lazy solution? It’s lazy. If a dev wants to court players who don’t like a style of play giving them alternatives is better than simply saying “fuck it”. Obvious example: Deus Ex gives players so many ways to deal with an area that “the combat kinds sucks” isn’t really a huge barrier. If for some stupid reason a dev wants to try to be everything to everyone (I’m looking at you, Star Citizen) it’s not going to happen with such a broad, one-size-fits-all approach.

    Fuck that was long.

    tldr: Game design is complicated and journos didn’t solve everything by accidentally inventing cheat codes.

  • Donwel

    The “games are art” thing has always confused the fuck out of me, they’re more computer science. Without the art you can still make a game, without the programming you’ve got fuck all.

  • Neojames82

    In related stuff about Bioware/Dragon Age, remember when that horrible woman Jennifer Helper wanted to put in a “skip combat” button in the game? That she just wanted to watch it as a movie…AND SHE WROTE FOR THE FUCKING GAME!!!

    Course I remember her also saying she doesn’t really like playing video games in the first place…which is kinda funny since she worked for a GAMING COMPANY!!! God, sorry, that shit still gets to me. Just glad she isn’t really working in the industry anymore.

  • Matz

    I don’t know whose fault is of all this bullshit

    In one part we have a bunch of “professional” videogame journalists that don’t even like videogames, they studied to write news and articles about politics, movies, etc, but since they couldn’t get the job they wanted they had to settle with a job about something they don’t even like and they’re trying to change something only to please themselves and the few people that care about their opinions just because their jobs sucks

    On the other hand, we have game devs, lately videogames are becoming extremely easy, take for example Super Mario Bros, the old games on the NES and SNES are still challenging and I still have some problems trying to complete those games even with all the experience that I’ve gained through all the years, now look at any Super Mario Bros, they’re easy as fuck and I end those games with 80 lives or more, and don’t forget all the “Super Easy” Power Ups that Nintendo has put in recent games, what I want to say is that games nowadays likes to hand-hold the players so they don’t have problems beating the games

    The idea of Skipping Bosses might not sound as something bad in the short therm, I mean, if you want challenge you can still fight the boss, but with some time game developers might see that the majority of players skip bosses, so they will start to make boring and less interesting boss fights until boss fights and even gameplay is a thing of the past. I have been scared of what will become of the videogame industry since some years and thanks to recent bullshit my fears are stronger

  • GrimFate

    I guess consider programming to be to games as paper is to books. The art is assets and interaction, as the writing is with a book; the programming is just the foundation on which the art can be set, as paper is for writing and printing.

  • deadmancrawling

    I see no damage in including a mode to ease people into a game, I’m pretty much retarded for some genres so I always appreciate that.
    But removing challenge is an insult to the art of designing a game and to the designers themselves. If you see the blog posts from the devs you will catch that they are REALLY passionate about shoot em ups, and I don’t think they like them only for their unique aesthetics.
    If I was a Cuphead dev I would be fucking pissed, imagine all those snobby guys who call themselves game critics telling you that all the fine-tuning, all that research, all those nights spent slaving away coding and testing and coding and testing so that your game is juuuuust right, all that means absolutely jackshit in the end.
    But hey, the drawings are nice!

  • TheOnceAndFutureKing

    Thats because you’re a neckbeard virgin dudebro brogrammer ableist who thinks gameplay defines the experience of a game.

  • TheOnceAndFutureKing

    100% this. I’m not against story in a game entirely, good examples are Metal Gear Solid or Final Fantasy 6, but its really the interaction and gameplay that defines it.

    Case and point, look at why most MGS fans consider part 4 the worst, because it was 9 hours of cutscenes with hardly any gameplay, which sucked anyways.

  • deadmancrawling

    Also, really, you can watch a game on youtube if you really wanna know how it ends, it makes no sense at all

  • TheOnceAndFutureKing

    It’s more inclusive if you pay twenty to fifty dollars to stare at it on your TV instead.

  • deadmancrawling

    I sometimes read the end of an article to know if the conclusion is not something I’ve seen a million times before.
    It must be something similar.

  • TheOnceAndFutureKing

    If I was the devs, I would just link the critics to some 1930’s cartoons if gameplay is too much for them.

  • Kiryu

    That would explain why most AAA games have state of the art graphics but mediocre gameplay.

  • Casey

    Huh. That strikes me two ways then.
    1. It sounds kind of neat, a little bit of a nice experience to play around with on the side.
    2. It pisses me the fuck off that they whine about how much it costs to make games and shit and then they waste extra dev time and money adding stuff like this in.

  • sanic

    You buy a game because you want to play it, this attitude of wanting to skip entire chunks to get through it faster is confusing unless the reason is that you don’t actually want to play the game…

  • CatCouch

    This looks like the Women in games debate again; it’s a worthwhile topic
    that’s presented in an insulting manner that defeats it’s own purpose.
    Games offer a wide range of experiences, trying to curb any of them
    because they don’t fit your personal tastes, or dare I say politics, is
    quite antithetical to the idea of inclusiveness to begin with.

    I think it might actually be about people working in an industry they don’t like. It’s far too common for me to look up coverage on a game I’m interested in only to read the writer’s personal disdain for the basic concept of the game and learn little about the game itself. Man, some reviewers even call for censorship in their reviews. If you cared about the industry at all you wouldn’t want censorship to protect you from a scantily clad woman or something.

    The sheer volume of writers who all share the same disdainful views of this industry and the people who consume the products is puzzling to me. How did that happen, particularly the hate towards the audience?

  • entropy

    I thought Fappy Bird only gets difficult as you get older.


    Funnily enough, NieR:Automata did something similar, where they let you buy trophies after a certain point. Of course, you have to beat the game first. And I completely understand wanting to skip some of the grind for a couple of those trophies, like the Pod upgrades.

  • Kain Yusanagi

    TBF, they’ve been asked to do shit like this for years by teachers and educators of all stripes.

  • grgspunk

    Videogames are not art. THEY’RE BETTER.

    Anyone who asserts otherwise for the sake of pushing politics needs to get the fuck out of the videogames market. We as real gamers need to start vetting out all newfags that try to come into the industry to make it conform to their petty ideals.

    That’s right. I’m pushing for “exclusivity”, not “inclusivity”. There are way too many idiots out there that try to use my videogame market/community to push a political agenda.

    Let’s drive these assholes out.

  • Could not agree more.

  • NukeA6

    Fuck videogame journalism. I don’t who hires these hipster losers but that needs to stop. They’re a mockery to all gamers and are some of the most incompetent people around. They should stick to something they’re actually good at like serving sugary shit in coffee shops or mopping floors.

  • Kiryu

    Well said.

  • Riosine

    (Sigh) the Press Can’t even make their way through google to a Mod / Hack / trainer which usually have all the features they are whining for

    I guess thats just show how disconnected they are to the world surrounding them.

    Now I don’t Think they care either way, what they claiming clearly has a solution, So they just crying loudly to attract equally reactionary Internet Traffic that been steadly declining on their sites

  • AuraMaster DX (austin9568)

    It’ll be a sad day when boss fights go the way of Saturday morning cartoons.

  • AuraMaster DX (austin9568)
  • Riosine

    Yeah Skipping a final boss fight would have been something unthinkable back in the nes/snes era

  • Sir Caccola
  • uncle_alfred

    Problem is when boundary is pushed once again, and just like some shitty DLC that where unthinkable some years ago are a damn norm now.
    We could see in few years that the whole gameplay will start being a “feature” to the interactive story thingie, i mean, to the game.
    Although it might be too extreme of an example.

  • uncle_alfred

    >Games offer a wide range of experiences, trying to curb any of them because they don’t fit your personal tastes, or dare I say politics, is quite antithetical to the idea of inclusiveness to begin with.
    This so much, we should be inclusive to everyone.
    Except of course those game developers that want to create a game, we should dictate what they should add to their games and what is worthwhile, what is acceptable, and not problematic.
    And then they will complain that the idea of video games being an art eluded them once again.

  • That’s why SJWs and feminists are authoritarians.

    Anything they don’t like, they don’t want anyone else to get to enjoy it.

    The “inclusive” and “diversity” crap are just smokescreens to implement and enforce censorship.


    I don’t follow trophies/achievements. Whatever ones I get, I don’t pay attention to. So maybe I don’t get the concept, but it sounds like any trophy worth purchasing is a trophy worthy removing.


    Bro, you just like blew my brain and shit. Way heinous.

  • Feniks

    Or alternatively how about letting people do what they want? If someone wants to skip the gameplay how does that impact you? Muh gamer cred!

  • TheOnceAndFutureKing

    Games are art, just not the avant-garde postmodern definition of art SJWs like to call it when they talk about walking simulators.

  • TheOnceAndFutureKing

    It’s all about power, thats why there have been several moments where SJWs with positions of power openly brag about how they’re getting back at “gators” and “neckbeards” with their censorship.

  • Bret Hart

    Of course these San Francisco hipster fucks would demand gameplay to be removed. When you grow up with everything handed to your never use to being challenged, which must really eat them inside knowing those gamers they hate say “Well at least I don’t suck at games when it’s my job to report on them.”

  • grgspunk

    Make no mistake, though. I’m in it to defend vidya, not advocate for any specific partisan political agenda. There is a reason why I didn’t specifically mention the term “SJW” in my post.

    As much as there have been assholes of the left-wing variety fucking with the videogame market as of late, don’t even for a second get the impression that I trust the alt-rightists to do any better than the SJWs have. Those right-wing fucktards have just as much experience in fucking with videogames just as much as the “marxist” SJWs do–Don’t think I’ve forgotten about how cancerous they can be.

  • It’s not with actual money; it’s with in-game currency. The first NieR was notorious for insanely difficult trophies, such as growing a lunar tear and collecting eagle eggs. Automata allows you to skip those if you want.

  • Alex Drake

    Typical non argument. Go back to RPS you’re among your kin there

  • Alien Invader Studio

    The problem is too many weak effeminate cucks who need to be removed.

  • Shattno

    I don’t want to be the guy who screams “Source!?”, but seriously, how do you know that?

  • Shattno

    Haha, what? Please, make me a game without art. Because without art all that’s left is math.

  • Donwel

    Are you just pretending to be retarded or are you legitimately stupid? Plenty of games have been made without art you fucking two year old.
    You’re exactly the kind of person this article is talking about; idiots who run their mouth about and are “into” gaming whilst knowing nothing of the history of it.
    How do you think games were made back in the seventies? Stories can be told with more than just pretty pictures.

  • julien andre

    POSSIBLE MINOR SPOILERS FOR NIER:AUTOMATAFunnily enough, NieR:Automata did something similar, where they let you buy trophies after a certain point. Of course, you have to beat the game first. And I completely understand wanting to skip some of the grind for a couple of those trophies, like the Pod upgrades.

  • Shattno

    I say “why not?” It can definitely be both, and as technology advances I think it will be more or less inevitable.

  • uncle_alfred

    It would be think of the children all over again.

  • Shattno

    Are YOU just pretending to be retarded or are you legitimately stupid? I have a degree i CS and have been playing computer games since the mid 80s, thank you very much. You do realise that a story is also art? Every way of expressing the game state with more than just the current values of the variables is considered to be art.

  • Shattno

    First of all: nichegamer salt patrol gets salty over the fact that some people want to play games differently. No surprises here.

    Secondly: I think skipping gameplay can be OK sometimes, not so much for difficulty but more for tedium. Like in some strategy games, doing more or less the same battle over and over can be really boring, so it’s nice to be able to simulate it.

  • 100% noob

    Mainstream gaming journalists aren’t for games nor the idea of actually playing a game, they only care about watering down what makes gaming unique from any other entertainment and that’s why they need to leave.

    If you are going to write about a game, at least be able to play and beat it.

  • TheOnceAndFutureKing

    Former Blizzard employee Mark Kern on twitter showed that websites only get around tens of thousands of clicks for a game, while Youtubers and dedicated communities get around hundreds of thousands of clicks.

    You can find it on his twitter, he got shit from butthurt journalists about it.

  • Shattno

    Fuck, I can’t find it, the guy tweets way to much, he seems to be a grade A asshole tho.
    Whatever, I was hoping you had some statistics or something, really interesting subject.

  • Ruggarell

    I was wondering why we all of a sudden within the past few years got games where all you do i fucking walk and look aka walking simulators.

  • TheOnceAndFutureKing

    Seems pretty chill to me, but I can’t find it either, I just remember it was in the middle of the summer around July or August.

    Best way to compare it I guess is to compare the hits a site gets a month to the views a Youtuber gets in a month.

  • Mir Teiwaz

    There’s a place in the market for easier games—even nearly gameplay devoid games like interactive art and visual novels—but obviously Cuphead wasn’t trying to be one of them.

    Why people want a game to be something it isn’t baffles me. It’s not like this game came out of nowhere. We’ve known what the difficulty would be like for at least a year.

  • Chino Gambino

    The SJW press don’t think games are art, they think they can be art once you remove all the game aspects from them. That’s why crappy art installations about lesbians like Gone Home and Life is Strange are games “growing up” into actual art. Really they wish games were another form of TV programming and you can see it in their critiques, they are divorced from the form of the medium.

  • TheOnceAndFutureKing

    This should help. This is a study showing that only 3% of gamers are influenced by game journalists when purchasing a game.

  • mewnani

    There’s playing games differently, and then there’s not playing games at all. If you don’t want to play a game, you can always watch someone else play it, but if you’re badgering the video game industry to make their games easier so you don’t have to play through them, maybe you should reconsider you profession of reviewing and playing video games.


    wow. just wow.

  • This was a great piece and I think you’ve aptly described modern gaming critics/reviewers. The way I see it games are art, but they are functional art. My father is finisher, meaning he finished furniture adding paint, stain,gold leaf, and such. You could have the best looking chair in the world, but if you can’t sit on it or it breaks from being sat on then you’ve got a bad chair. It needs to be functional first and foremost! From what I understand, before Splatoon was Splatoon the characters were just cubes during development and the idea of them being squid kids came later. People love the game because it was function before form and designed as a game first.

  • combat

    I don’t think it’s valid to say that gameplay should never be skippable. It’s a matter of what the appeal of the game is. The point of cuphead is all gameplay, having an option to skip it is ludicrous, it’s the equivalent of removing all the ice cream from a sundae and saying the cherry on top is still a sundae.

    But, would ‘To The Moon’ really lose all that much without the puzzles and the little gameplay it has? Plenty of JRPGs thrive off narrative, I’m sure a lot of people played persona 4 in spite of the gameplay. Don’t get me wrong, I crank the difficulty up in the games I play, I think if the characters are struggling the player should be too; but it’s not always vital.


    I could be wrong as I’m not totally keen on the concept, but is it not the point of trophies/achievements to secure some sort of bragging rights or some sort of sense of self-satisfaction that you achieved the certain task or requirement in question? What’s the point of buying it, even through in-game currency, if you haven’t achieved that particular goal while others may have by actually doing the work; as mundane or ridiculous as it may be? I’m a sucker for old school score boards, so I’m sure that I’m missing something.

  • You don’t have to purchase the trophies if you don’t want to, as the grindy trophies in particular were a massive headache for a lot of people in the past. But I don’t disagree with you, which is why I only bought two trophies and earned the rest of them.


    I think you have to earn the story in games like Persona or other JRPG’s.. If not, in today’s world, you can always watch the summary, story compilations, or presentations online. I can almost bet my last dollar that some folks would skip right through the gameplay in CupHead, given the chance after a few sad attempts just to see what’s next in the presentation. Instead, those folks are now forced to if they want to, and in the end, come out better for it. Others of course, will just head straight to YouTube.

  • TheOnceAndFutureKing

    The skipping gameplay button kind of reminds of that old joke about how all food in the future will be in pill form.

  • Shattno

    If only twitter could implement a decent search function…
    Yeah, I mean you could but I was hoping someone had already done all the work, and besides hits aren’t really indicative of how much something is influencing something.
    Actually the more I think about it the less sure I am of what I want.

  • TheOnceAndFutureKing

    Gameplay and watching a movie are not synonymous, one is active and the other is passive.

    The people who push for “bridging the gap” do so by suggesting the removal or watering down of gameplay altogether, basically resulting in a movie.

    Technology advancing doesn’t decide anything, its what the gamers buy. If most gamers just wanted to sit and watch a game, then all the walking simulators shilled heavily by the press would sell record numbers.

  • Shattno

    Yeah sure, while that might be true, I still don’t se why people get their panties in a bunch over it. To me both sides sound like babies crying over non problems.

  • combat

    For To the Moon, my argument is that some people would have a better experience if they did not have to do the ‘puzzles’, because to some it’s just an irritation. Although for accessibility’s sake I would say it’s better if someone who does have the kind of problems that would prevent them from finishing the game would be able to. I don’t see why it matters if Persona is a series of games, if what people play them for is the story and it’s not particularly well integrated into the gameplay what reason should you need to have to earn the story other than convention? How is the player any better off if they do not like the gameplay? Calling them ultimately games sounds reductive to me, what games do people play for the plot other than video games?

    I don’t think static content is a replacement. Even if the battles handle themselves there is still something to be said for controlling the characters yourself instead of watching. Some people just want to play persona 4: lite life sim with weird otherworldly scenes.

    I don’t support a gameplay skip for cuphead, because it completely invalidates the reason to play the game. I also don’t support an easy mode for dark souls. But people who don’t care about gameplay were never in the target audiences for those games. Games journos completely lost the plot because they don’t see the benefits of exclusivity, I’m not arguing for that, I’m arguing that some games do not benefit from exclusivity because they were never about the challenge in the first place.

  • Shattno

    Of course they are not synonymous, but they share a lot of things. I think you’re misunderstanding me, I’m not saying games will become movies, I’m saying that you could buy a product that could be played as a (if you wish, extremely hard) game or watch like a movie. As technology advances this will be easier to do.

  • TheOnceAndFutureKing

    Has nothing to do with technology, this could have been done from the beginning, the only reason why it wasn’t is because most gamers play games for the interaction and gameplay mechanics.

    Its an asinine feature anyways, why pay $50+ for a new game just to watch it when we already have the technology to watch Lets Plays and Speedruns on Youtube for free?

  • Shattno

    Ok, I’m talking AI and machine learning levels of a game playing itself, so it’s definitely about technology. And you would still be paying for a game, just with more features. Also, you’d be surprised what people pay $50 for if you put “machine learning” on the box.


    Then why not just go to YouTube? Should the devs feel inclined to just include something in their games that baisically amount to officially sanctioned “YouTube” videos?

  • Alex Drake

    People are getting upset because this is a slippery slope that can end very badly once something sets a precedent

  • TheOnceAndFutureKing

    There only so much you can do in a videogame, so it doesn’t matter if you watch an AI or a human play it, its going to be the same outcome most of the time, unless there is a game with an infinitely self changing story/campaign/objectives which is impossible to develop anyways.

  • combat

    Because there is value in feeling like you are controlling a character. There is no challenge in running the protag around town in persona 4 but it adds to the immersion factor. I assure you, to those who are playing games for the narrative they would not get the same experience from a youtube video that they would from playing a game from a casual no-combat mode.

    I guess I should clarify that “skipping gameplay” means “skipping challenging gameplay” in this case, not literally just compiling cutscenes.

    Should they feel inclined to give the consumer the option to focus on what they see as the strengths of the game? I don’t know, depends how many consumers would use it.

  • Mr_SP

    Oh, yeah. I used the Pod upgrade one. There’s a distinction between dealing with a challenge, and doing the same boring thing for a few hours for a relatively pointless label attached to your account.


    I agree, the movement and control creates an intamcy –part of the story-telling.

    I understand that you’re talking about the option to remove arbitrary gameplay, but that all comes down to perception. What is and what isn’t? Some are more obvious than others. Some would argue that even the movement is arbitrary. In games like Persona or FF, I’d argue that even the grind is part of the story-telling and overall experience. With the overall experience being the intended reward. Removing it can cheapen the integrity of the games and easily lead to (more?) discord than usual.

    One can argue that the core of Cuphead is gameplay. I’m 100% certain the devs would agree. But I’m also sure that some would be completely on board with an invincibility option arguing that it would help them both appreciate the gameplay, aesthetics, and as with To The Moon with regard to whatever little gameplay there is, whatever little story there is.

    With that, yes, it’s about exclusivity too. I’ve never played Dungeons & Dragons, but I’ve always appreciated it and its core in video game rpgs. I’m sorry, but I don’t think you get to sit in a well crafted D&D story with out actually playing the game. (Which as a board game, at least the one other type of game that you play for plot.)

  • Shattno

    I think you are completely missing the point, it’s all about how cool machine learning is. Also nothing is impossible, and it’s actually plausible that we are living in such a game you are talking about.

  • Shattno

    Yeah, this is the argument both sides always have, still not buying it.

  • TheOnceAndFutureKing

    My point isn’t about how cool AI is or isn’t, I’m just saying its stupid and pointless to make games pandering to people who don’t like gameplay when we already have the technology to watch gameplay for free.

    The difference is the universe is infinite while videogames will always be finite. So theorizing about a self playing infinite videogame is nothing more than mental masturbation.

  • Shattno

    But that’s MY entire point. And I think it’s definitely worth it, instead of making a movie or a TV-show and then a video game based on that, you make just the game and then you charge people to watch the game play itself, it’s brilliant.

    Also, if the universe is infinite, then a game in that universe can also be infinite, just like there are infinite even integers inside the infinite integers.

  • TheOnceAndFutureKing

    Except its basically a CGI movie like Advent Children or Ratchet And Clank when you take the interaction away from it. Fundamentally its not a game anymore if the entire experience is passive and requires no interaction whatsoever. Watching cutscenes and action is really nothing groundbreaking when we already have movies and shows lmao.

    There are infinite possibilities and outcomes for videogame ideas, but a videogame itself is a finite product. Every single videogame has boundaries and limits to what you can do, like I said there is no such thing as an infinitely self expanding game, so I don’t even know where you’re going with this anymore.

  • Shattno

    Ok, you are missing my point, what I’m saying is that in the future when technology becomes more advanced, movies and games will be the same product, so you either play the movie or watch the game depending on how you look at it. It will be interactive if you want it to be or not if that’s what you want.

    A video game can easily have an infinite loop, making it theoretically infinite. And sure, games have boundaries and limits, for now, and there is no such game, for now, but it might be in the future, it’s certainly possible. I’m not really going anywhere, i just like discussing infinity.

  • combat

    The grind is certainly part of the experience of persona, but is it by any means integral? Is it even positive? What would players who didn’t have to do combat really miss out on? It seems like a stretch to me to say that someone needs to experience the gameplay of (recent) Persona to get the positive parts of the experience.

    I understand that the best experience for most games is through playing the games. I’d go even further and say the vast majority of gamers should be playing the vast majority of games on the highest difficulty they can conceivably beat, but the fact of the matter is most people don’t even play through games that way. They just breeze through.

    It would be up to the devs what is integral and what isn’t, of course. That’s a fundamental part of design, knowing what the appeal of your product is and why your audience will consume it. There’s plenty of mechanics in games that are completely optional, at least if your goal is just beating the game. I do not think you need to parry once in Dark Souls.

    I don’t see how you’d strip the gameplay out of D&D and keep the valuable parts of the experience. The closest thing you can do is just sit in the corner and watch people play D&D. I do not think you can have a valuable no gameplay mode when the gameplay is that interwoven into the plot.

  • NegFactor

    At first, I wanted to give you grief for decrying some of these journalists as infantile buffoons and whiners for having a different opinion on stuff. Honestly, I think you’re right about this. There’s a lot to consider and I don’t feel like there’s even remotely enough positives from trying to force inclusivity to rationalize it for many genres.

    First, let me address the Polygon article in a short breath. It’s nice that they want to suggest that developers could be depriving people with motor skill issues from the opportunity to enjoy a game, but that’s about as relevant as suggesting that every game come with voice-command activation and a constant narration of every aspect of the game so that blind people can enjoy it — it’s just not happening (at least, not anytime soon) regardless of how noble your endeavors are and it’s ludicrous to expect it at this point in time. Also, they reference the “Skip Boss” article, which is a train wreck on its own.

    The Skip Boss article from RPS is hard to take seriously, despite there being some neat ideas to consider that aren’t even mentioned in the article. First, the writer uses the actions of AC:U to justify their platform, but just shits on them several times, which makes it feel like a backhanded compliment for them to choose to make what amounts to a point-of-entry for this person’s suggestion. Still, let’s look at what’s worth considering.

    When the justification you make is that a feature like Skip Boss or Skip Gameplay is fine because people aren’t required to take advantage of it, I feel like this person has never considered the perspective of the developers. We can argue that the work they put into bosses are chunks of gameplay are irrelevant simply by suggesting that some players never delve into optional content that requires programming work/time, so making said bosses optional would just be an equivalent to segmenting more content toward the optional side of the game. What this doesn’t consider is if any sort of rebalancing (both gameplay and story-wise) is necessary as a result.

    If you take a JRPG for example, grinding typically frustrates people because it feels like a mechanic used to pad out a game’s length. Assuming a game can find that sweet spot where encounters feel just right for the most part, how awkward is it when bosses are simply skipped that have been expanded upon during the story just because you’re having trouble with them? Take Final Fantasy IV as an example. You get to meet each of the four fiends and learn about them over time throughout the game. Some are more personable than others, but you (the player) know about their existence and have the foresight to generally know a challenge is coming from them in each instance. When you get to a late point in the game and are required to fight all four of them back-to-back, the game acknowledges that it’s a sincere challenge and even goes as far as to heal you before the fight starts (because Rubicant is kinda cool like that!). None of these fights require any lengthy grinding to prepare for, but each do require a bit of strategy on the part of the player. Assuming you wanted to skip these fights and had the opportunity to do so, you could…but do you deserve the experience that comes with doing so? And do you really understand the importance of the fiends if you simply choose not to fight them because losing once or twice was frustrating?

    People argue that they should have a right to be able to access every part of the game since they’ve purchased it. Maybe there’s some merit in this point, but I feel like you also lose the point of the game itself when you’re allowed to skip every difficult part as if you’re in some sort of Debug or Spectactor mode. The games essentially becoming walking simulators that guide you to the next point. If you don’t have to fight any bosses in JRPGs, there’s no incentive to fight regular monsters also, as you just run from them and get your free experience reward for pressing a button when you get to the bosses. The same can largely be said for some ARPGs, as well. And if you’re content with just running everywhere as if the game were just a speedrun, you could play any given Souls-type game until you’re capable of reaching a boss and never have to worry about combat — but then, you’re not really spending any intimate time with the areas of the game that the developer wanted you to enjoy…you’re just trying to shortcut the game so you can hypothetically be “wowed” by the next area you’re going to run through due to a lack of incentive from needing to prepare for bosses.

    I talked with my wife about this and she did have an idea I thought was rather novel and could be used to make a Skip Boss button something worth appreciating: a developer could make a game in which you were free to skip any boss you wanted and receive the rewards just as you normally would, but when you reached the point right before the final boss, you would have a mandatory boss rush of every single boss you skipped back-to-back as a result. I think something like this in a Souls-type game could be fascinating and given the increase in strength that you probably have from progressing through the game normally, you could use the Boss Skip to stave off a few bosses until later and maybe have an easier time with them then. Moreover, someone who wants a really intense challenge can stack the bosses they’d like at the end or even create an entire boss rush set. Most importantly, people who think they should be able to see the game up to the end and be able to access all the levels would get just that — the only thing they would be denied is the end itself, which is they can either treat as an incentive to go back and get better at dealing with bosses or go watch the ending and call it a day.

    I wanted to expand more on this, but due to time constraints, I’ll leave it at that.

  • TheOnceAndFutureKing

    Except we already have that. If people want to watch a story unfold, there are movies and platforms to watch people play videogames, I don’t see how a tacked on spectator mode really changes anything.

    I’m not talking about looping, I’m talking about outcomes. Videogames all have programmed outcomes and boundaries, for example in a Mario game all you can do is beat the levels and aimlessly wander around the levels after completing the game, the game itself doesn’t just create infinitely new levels and powerups. We don’t have this technology and nothing proves that we ever will, you might as well be talking about super powers.

  • Shattno

    No we don’t have games that turn into movies and movies that turn into games. Haven’t you ever watched a movie and felt, shit that guy is dumb as fuck, he makes a lot of stupid choices. Wouldn’t it be cool to just take control and play his part for a while? And with games, sometimes you just don’t feel like doing a part, so you could let the game play itself for a while until you are ready to jump in again. I’m telling you, this is the future!

    Peter Molyneux talked about that in some interview i read, he imagined this game where you where a race car driver in some race but then you could drive your car off the track and out on the streets and just roam the city, and the you’d get out of the car and get a job at a bakery and bake bread for a living, getting an apartment in a nice neighborhood and meeting a nice girl and settle down and have kids and grow old together. Kind of like Roy: A Life Well Lived from Rick and Morty.

    Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic, so yes, I might as well be talking about super powers, but it doesn’t matter as it is purely speculation.

  • Kain Yusanagi

    TBQH teachers and educators of all stripes have been asking for this sort of thing for a long time. Considering how well Minecraft is doing for that aspect, I’m not surprised. Furthermore, it’s a separate mode from the main game, as well.

    I agree on the whining about $ bit though. Especially when it’s Ubisoft.

  • randomdude

    Part of the reason I play games like War Thunder. Stats become meaningless in the traditional sense, each unit have weak point and armor construction angles to factor in. If you can manipulate your machine in a way that maximizes its strength and your tactics and maneuvers are sound, even machines a couple ranks up become easy.

    There is just something about being able to grow as a player instead of just in levels.

  • TheOnceAndFutureKing

    If I watch a movie where I don’t identify with the protagonist, I just watch a better movie instead. If I get an itch to play a game while watching a movie, then I’ll play a game. The two can’t be one, its like saying “wouldn’t you like to be the quarter back in a football game while watching the game on T.V at home?”.

    I prefer to have total control in a videogame since the whole point is the interaction, my attention span isn’t that low where I have to let a fucking videogame play itself for me. This is the future for people with ADHD and IQs below 70, or snowflakes who want to write more self indulgent articles about walking simulators.

    Well we have GTA with mods which can allow for lots of cool stuff, or the Sims and dating simulators for the other boring stuff. In terms of a virtual reality with infinite possibilities, that will never be reality in our lifetime.

  • FlameChocobo

    It’s so frustrating to see a lot of journos bashing games for “being too difficult,” and not caring that gameplay is the most important thing about video games. It’s really disappointing that there are other people that care more about aspects that are less significant than gameplay, such as graphics whores, and “SJWs.”

    Crap like this shows that you can’t out-toxic the gaming journalism. I hope some of the games journalists who complain about everything get fired so we don’t have to deal with unwarranted bashing towards games. But knowing these douchepigs in suits (Manager on the gaming website such as Kotaku and Polygon,) I highly doubt it will happen.

  • NegFactor

    And when you start thinking boss battles are just filler, it begs the question of why even have encounters? If you can just run through the normal encounters because you can skip the boss battles, the games suddenly lose most of their focus on gameplay in the first place. I can get behind making a JRPG that doesn’t require excessive grinding to beat bosses just so developers can pad their hours, but if you can just skip a boss battle and reap the rewards, you simply can ignore every fight along the way in most cases, which turns the game into a walking or running simulator with only the most basic RPG elements — hell, you don’t even need money for equipment because you’re not using it anyway!

    I think the biggest failing this idea has (the Skip Boss or Skip Gameplay feature) is that it’s going to raise a question of the integrity of every journalist that tries to review a product — did they actually play the game as it was meant to be played or did they just skip stuff they didn’t like?

  • NegFactor

    I think the most disturbing aspect of an ability to skip battles or entire segments of gameplay is the potential for garbage review standards. How do you trust the integrity of writers reviewing a game if they can simply say they played it through legitimately and leave it at that? At that point, you either trust them or you don’t, and given the track record of some major fumbles by reviewers in the past, it could be a push that renders reviews without proof (read as, gameplay videos) moot and dead, if not at least even more untrustworthy than before.

  • Shattno

    I’m hearing a lot om me me me here, why should everything be tailored to your personal preferences? I wonder who’s the snowflake here…

    Saying something never will be reality in our lifetime is making a lot of assumptions about the rate of technological advances and the lifespan of this generation, two things we know very little about, just saying.

  • Mr_SP

    True. Though I want boss battles to be designed as if they’re inherently important. Where the battle itself tells a story that’s integral to the plot, not reliant on cutscenes to spell it out. Though I’d say that’s the some pretty high-end game development right there.

    But, yeah, a game journo should be reviewing a product by giving their opinions on all the features and “I don’t like the gameplay in this game” is fine. I’m not even against journos who don’t like most gameplay styles – I certainly don’t like FPS much – but if they don’t like what the people reading them like, why should anyone listen to them as a reviewer?

    …Yeah. I think that’s the real question to be asked here. Who, exactly, are these game journos for? Because, well… it doesn’t seem like gamers are their audience. Which is fine… as long as you aren’t in a gaming magazine that caters to gamers as a primary readerbase.

  • TheOnceAndFutureKing

    Citation needed lol, where did I say everything should cater to me? If I’m not mistaken, you’re the one who said this shitty idea is future for all videogames.

    You can’t create an infinitely self developing and self playing videogame, why is this still hard for you to grasp?

  • ender424

    I mean honestly I would like a mode where I can explore some of Dark Souls levels just to study and appreciate the designs since I can’t beat it for shit but I’m not gonna bitch about the lack of such mode or difficulty or ‘inclusion’ or whatever else the fuck these journos are complaining about.

    It WOULD be nice but it ain’t there so oh f’in well.

  • Phasmatis75

    They didn’t want to be games journalists, but it was the only industry thdy could get work in.

  • CrimReps

    When games get difficult like the ura loops in Dodonpachi, THEN we talk, I agree completely with your article.

  • Zanard Bell

    That’s why the phrase ‘this is a pure game’ sounds like honey in my ears, because when I buy a video game, I do not purchase it for the graphics, story or sound, at least mainly. The gameplay is what’s important.

    That’s why Quake 3 has appeal to me, because the only things that stands between you and that enemy trying to frag you is your accuracy and how fast you move.

    Walking simulators and movie games like “The Last of Us” may be interesting for some people, and sure enough with a bit of advertising can sell millions, but that doesn’t represent them as a good videogame. Sales =/= good gameplay, which is what people like the gaming journos are conflating.

  • SiliconNooB

    Game journos aren’t gamers, and do not appreciate gameplay – that’s why they felate complete dross like Gone Home, Firewatch, and Life Is Tumblr!

  • SiliconNooB

    Anyone who wants to skip gameplay should just be watching a movie instead.

  • Tiffany Eris Watts

    If you’re not good at games, that means you’re a noob & your opinion doesn’t matter.
    No one starts out good at anything, just keep playing until you get better.
    I beat Metal Gear Solid 4 on Big Boss Extreme difficulty & that was stupid hard… the part where you have to sneak past all the robots was a nightmare. I wasn’t good at the game when I started.

  • Theodore Gecowets

    Video games already have skip gameplay buttons in them. There is a foolproof way to gain every bit of the storyline and see everything in a game, while never having to be challenged yourself. They’re called letsplays. Go on YouTube and search the game you want to see. Without fail, there will be a youtuber playing it.

  • Zero Kurapika

    This is a decent old style game. I think the “easy” mode it’s basically a way to make fun of the scrubs that cannot beat the normal mode.

  • Shabbernigdo Xingjian

    I grew up playing stupid hard games ( Contra / Ghoul n ghosts / Zelda and its confusing as hell lay out / The later levels in the mega man games ) so i always just kept playing and cussing till i was able to beat the level and to me that is the way it should be. Play till your good enough to beat it and if you never get that good too bad. Hell now days you can always just you tube and see the end of the game if you really want too : P

  • El Rodrigo

    Here’s something everybody needs to know about Cuphead.


    Play that if you want it so badly.

    Also, shout out to Andrew Dobson, one of the ‘infantile buffoons’ who saw fit to be contrarian about Cuphead’s qualities and dismissed it as ‘unappealing’ and a waste of artistic effort. Sorry, Dobbo, not every game can be Minecraft where everything is a nice, friendly sugar bowl for babies like you.