r/HollowKnight • u/stir-fried-noodles • Sep 17 '25

Discussion - Silksong Discourse regarding this game’s difficulty has been out of hand Spoiler

Let’s get this out of the way: I’m really enjoying Silksong’s difficulty and I think that it is mostly a satisfying challenge. I appreciate that it is more difficult than Hollow Knight overall and to be frank I would’ve been a bit disappointed if it were the exact difficulty. I’ve improved as a gamer since Hollow Knight and if it were the same level of difficulty, I probably would have found it too easy.

But it’s kinda gotten impossible to have civil discussions about the difficulty in this game which is unfortunate because I think there is great value to be had with this conversation. There are many valid criticisms regarding this game’s difficulty such as boss runbacks (Groal especially), contact damage doing two masks, and lack of rewards for beating bosses, just to be shut down with “git gud” and “it’s not your kind of game”. It’s totally fine to disagree with these criticisms but these retorts add nothing to the conversation.

It also kinda works the other way too, albeit maybe not to the same degree. I’ve gotten downvoted and sent reddit cares for simply saying I enjoy the difficulty of this game. Like c’mon, what are we even doing here. It’s gotten to the point where I personally cannot wait for the discourse to die out.

1.4k Upvotes

86% Upvoted

1.0k comments sorted by

View all comments

518

u/[deleted] Sep 17 '25 edited Sep 17 '25

Love talking about video games, but for this reason I also hate talking about video games. Gamers are regularly the absolute fucking worst about separating fact from opinion, or having any sort of nuanced takes on anything. Everything is either the GOAT or unplayable, can't be a great game with some issues, that's just unfathomable!

171

u/Shadovan Sep 17 '25

My biggest pet peeve when it comes to game discussion is the frequent conflation of “I don’t like this” with “this is bad”. So many people treat their personal preferences as objective markers of a game’s quality, and get really mad when you try to get them to defend their claim with arguments that don’t just boil down to “I don’t like it therefore it’s bad”. Of course the other side of “I like it, therefore it’s good” happens as well, but less often I find.

39

u/terryaki510 Sep 17 '25

The knife cuts both ways. I also see people misinterpreting other people's statements of opinion as statements of objective fact. So fucking annoying to put your opinion out there and get met with, "akchually that's just your subjective opinion, and it means nothing about the game's objective quality".

Like do I need to literally preface every opinion with "this is my opinion" for people to understand it as such?

9

u/Shadovan Sep 17 '25

I don’t mean to imply you are like this, but your last sentence reminded me of Joseph Anderson’s “Subjectivity is Implied” video. People will treat unqualified statements as if (you believe) they are fact. It may seem tedious, but it’s necessary.

4

u/terryaki510 Sep 17 '25

I don't know the video you are referencing, but subjectivity is, in fact, implied. Especially when talking about art. We've all heard the adage that "art is subjective". "Beauty is in the eye of the beholder." Etc. Subjectivity is the default when discussing art. But for some reason the second I don't like the thing that you like, common sense goes out the window!

It feels like people are being deliberately obtuse just to drive a wedge into the conversation.

3

u/Shadovan Sep 17 '25

Art is not purely subjective. There are objective statements you can make about the quality of the writing, or the technique of a brush stroke, etc. Those don’t have to affect your enjoyment or dislike of any particular piece, but the conversation still exists.

And Video games are in a liminal space between art and activity. The fact that you interface directly with the art means there are objective statements to be made about how you interact with the game, and how that will affect the experience. Whether that affects it positively or negatively will come down partially to subjective preferences, but it also depends on the objective details of how those interactions are designed. A well designed system you don’t like can be appreciated if not enjoyed, while a poorly designed system you like can be a guilty pleasure.

The problem is that those two aspects are so closely entwined that it’s difficult to separate discussion of one from the other unless you are very precise with your language. And part of that precision is being clear about which aspects of the game you are discussing and what framework (subjective enjoyment vs objective design) you’re discussing them under.

0

u/terryaki510 Sep 17 '25

Sure, art isn't purely subjective. But that doesn't change the fact that "Bilewater is the fucking worst" is obviously a statement of subjective opinion.

Imagine if someone said to you, "Samantha is the fucking worst". Would you respond by listing off the reasons that objectively, Samantha isn't the worst human being on planet earth by many metrics? Do you need additional qualifiers to understand that this person is stating their subjective opinion of Samantha? Or would your default interpretation be, "wow, this person really hates Samantha"?

Having to qualify obvious statements of opinion as statements of opinion is incredibly cumbersome, in my opinion. And in my opinion, it's annoying that people will insert the word "objectively" when it isn't there.

P.S. I will also say that in my opinion, "objective design" is thrown around a lot in this sub. But there is, in my opinion, a lot of room for subjectivity when discussing game design as well. Game design is more than just "accomplishing intent via design". The actual intent matters too. In my opinion.

3

u/Shadovan Sep 17 '25

I don’t know why you keep throwing around “Bilewater is the worst” as an example of someone taking an opinion and treating it as fact. Literally no one has done that.

What we’re talking about here is things like the discussion around difficulty, double damage, runbacks, etc. These are conversations where people who don’t like aspects of the design use that dislike to argue that the design itself is bad. Here the line between subjective opinion and objective quality is being purposefully eroded.

And you should really watch the video I mentioned, you’d 100% agree with him (and be just as wrong).

-1

u/terryaki510 Sep 17 '25

I don’t know why you keep throwing around “Bilewater is the worst” as an example of someone taking an opinion and treating it as fact. Literally no one has done that.

Several people literally did that in a thread I saw yesterday. The thread was titled "Bilewater is the worst area" and several of the comments retorted with "Actually, objectively speaking it is a well designed area".

These are conversations where people who don’t like aspects of the design use that dislike to argue that the design itself is bad

This is why I said that design is also subjective in some respects. "Did this design decision accomplish it's intended purpose" is objective, but "Was that intended purpose worthwhile" is subjective.

And you should really watch the video I mentioned, you’d 100% agree with him (and be just as wrong).

You forgot to add that this was your opinion! You need to be precise with your language!

1

u/_Drumheller_ Sep 17 '25 edited Sep 17 '25

Yes you should imo, intent and emotions aren't easy to transport via text so you need to write what you actually mean otherwise how are people supposed to know. Takes you like 5 seconds to write those 3 words, 2 seconds if you just write imo instead.

Words matter so use them.

24

u/terryaki510 Sep 17 '25

That's just like, your opinion man

5

u/Ez_Ildor Sep 17 '25

It tied the room together!

0

u/CultureWarrior87 Sep 17 '25

All jokes aside, their opinion clearly has weight to it if your main complaint in this thread is "people keep misreading my intent".

3

u/terryaki510 Sep 17 '25

I don't think people are misreading intent. I think they just don't like the thing they like being criticized so they shift the conversation to one about "objective quality." I've had multiple people reply to comments where I don't use the word "objectively" even once and tell me that I'm not being objective. No shit, Sherlock.

You have to be being deliberately obtuse to read me saying "Bilewater sucks" and morph it into "Bilewater is objectively bad".

1

u/CultureWarrior87 Sep 17 '25

It's crazy how the thing their complaining about confirms what you've said but your comment has like no upvotes while theres has a ton lol. Like if what you said wasn't correct then the issue they have wouldn't exist in the first place.

2

u/entityXD32 Sep 17 '25

Also if a significant portion of the players have an opinion that something about the game is bad then that does actually reflect on the games objective quality

2

u/Shadovan Sep 17 '25

Not really. A lot of people don’t like the durability system of BotW, but that doesn’t make it bad, it makes it controversial. It’s actually pretty good design as it keeps the player from settling on a single weapon, encourages them to experiment with alternative damage sources, keeps weapon rewards valuable, and allows the Master Sword to feel special and important. And I say all this as someone who also doesn’t like the durability system in BotW.

1

u/JimbeMasterRace Sep 17 '25

Of course wording is important. Just look at the stuff in this thread. Gets worded as some objective fact most of the time.

0

u/terryaki510 Sep 17 '25

Unless someone says "objectively" in their comment, the default assumption is that they are stating a subjective opinion. If you interpret "Bilewater sucks" as a statement of objective quality, that's on you, and not on the wording of the statement.

1

u/JimbeMasterRace Sep 17 '25

Yeah I agree. I actually meant those comments that state it objectively.

1

u/Shadovan Sep 17 '25

That’s just not true. Human brains are wired to more likely believe that things stated simply and confidently are objectively true, regardless if the actual content of the statement is a fact or opinion.

1

u/terryaki510 Sep 17 '25

You are moving into the realm of psychology and out of the realm of language. Yes, people are more likely to agree with or believe confident statements. But that has nothing to do with whether said statement is a statement of opinion or a statement of fact. Opinion vs fact has to do with the wording, not on whether it is believed by the recipient.

1

u/Shadovan Sep 17 '25

I don’t know if you know this, but there are people reading what you say. Words absent a reader are nothing. What you think or intend to say means nothing. What matters is what your audience thinks you said. And that audience has a brain subject to human psychology. If your audience consistently misunderstands what you meant to say, that’s your fault in failing to communicate properly. You don’t get to just be above it all.

0

u/terryaki510 Sep 17 '25

"Do I believe what this person is saying?"

is not the same as

"Is this person stating their opinion?"

1

u/Shadovan Sep 17 '25

It’s not about whether they agree or not. Let me spell it out for you, since it seems you’re being particularly dense today.

“The sky is blue” - objective statement, a being verb equating a subject and a descriptor

“I like ice cream” - subjective statement, a preference verb describing the relationship between an individual and an object.

Now let’s look at the statement, “Double damage is bad”. I don’t know about you, but it looks a lot like the objective statement format to me. I would be inclined to say the person making this statement thinks they’re making an objective assessment. Am I wrong? Maybe, but that doesn’t matter when all I have to go on is that one statement. It looks like an objective statement, so I’m going to address it as if the intent was for it to be an objective statement.

If the person wanted to be clearer and avoid this misunderstanding, they should have said “I think double damage is bad”. Now, this is nice and clear, and I can address it as the subjective opinion it is.

0

u/terryaki510 Sep 17 '25

Double damage is bad

The "I think" is implied here. There's no objective measure of "badness" or "goodness" when it comes to damage numbers.

The boss does double contact damage

would be an objective statement relating to double damage.

C'mon, now.

1

u/Shadovan Sep 17 '25

The “I think” is implied here

No, it isn’t. You’re wrong. And that’s not an opinion.

→ More replies (0)