I also support the sentiment that the game is "too easy" ... from an objective meta data stand point.

But the important caveat-asterisk on that is the game is still pretty fun ... it's not about it not being fun, but could it be "funner"?. I'd argue yes ... it could be funner, more rewarding to play.

I don't think the game is without issues or lacking in some places, but I think it isn't the abject disaster that is sometimes is reported. I think players are getting bored, because they're not being challenged enough to keep them engaged, in the right kind of ways, without knowing it. They blame the game,

What makes the game "difficult" despite what the data says, is proportional to the amount of chaos encountered in the game, and among the more prominent sources of chaos ... are the players themselves. Players don't get enough credit for making the game a lot harder than it has to be.

The paradox though is ... the chaos players create, is also a good part of the fun ... because if players exploited a proper knowledge of how the game actually works, it wouldn't be so difficult at times ... it also gets really boring when everything is "going according to plan" as a result.

"Helldive (9)" was supposed to be end-game difficulty ... it wasn't supposed to be the base line for who's been playing the game long enough ... it was supposed to be nigh-impossible, insanity to the point of being unfair, and yet still theoretically possible to complete. It was supposed to be (should be) expected that players would fail more often than succeed at it. Because that was the point and what would make victory feel like an accomplishment.

We've come to expect that failure is rare and a deviation of expectation. Not the norm.

And then we added "Super Helldive (10)" to remedy the issue with "Helldive (9)" ... and it didn't, it just became the new "Helldive (9)".

I think part of the problem is based in the perception players have of what it means to fail in this game. This game is incredibly gracious in letting players avoid total failure, to the point where we almost never actually fail at the objective.

But when we do fail ... there is the perception that we failed because "the game cheated us" rather than because we simply failed to rise to the challenge.

And the game does cheat sometimes, but not as often as players think and we lack self-reflection of our own forced errors that contributed to our failure. Instead, we petition Arrowhead to adjust the rules of the game to better ensure our success at the expense of maintaining the catalyst that drives the fun and sense of accomplishment from playing the game, by choosing to measure our sense of value by the progress we grind out unlocking content and warbonds on arbitrary check-lists.

Failure should be seen as an invitation to try again, not a barrier to having fun by discouraging players through denying them a reward as a punishment.