I played that game too!
This is why I like Dark Souls.
I hate that game.
I hate it so much, coz of crap like that.
I sold it
#NoRegrets
I've never rage quit an RPG so furiously before
Video Game Difficulties: Too Hard or Too Easy?
- Thread starter Ryukouki
- Start date
- Views 10,014
- Replies 99
- Likes 1
I hate that game.
I hate it so much, coz of crap like that.
I sold it
#NoRegrets
I've never rage quit an RPG so furiously before
- Joined
- Jun 24, 2012
- Messages
- 1,039
- Trophies
- 1
- Age
- 32
- Location
- Kanto <- Hyrule -> Unova
- Website
- maxlempira.deviantart.com
- XP
- 1,751
- Country
I think, like you said before, we're getting older and with that, becoming more skilled, what I've notice is, I can beat, for example, Super Mario 3D Land very easily, but to my nieces (10 and 8) the game becomes so complicated that they gets angry because they can't beat some levels (3th World onwards) at least, that's what I've noticed, and can be a very good example of how we are becoming more skilled, another example, I remember when I played Crash Bandicoot in my "golden" days, about 15 years ago, that game were really really difficult, at least the first one, insomuch that I never beat it, then 15 years later, when I could get again another PS1, I played the same games as when I'm 6, what happen!? this is the easiest game ever!! why I can't beat it before!? ... hahaha ...
You failed a great game :'(
what
The Fire Emblem series is actually pretty predictable, and highly regulated by its own rulesets. It's hardly a luck-fested adventure :/
I've platinumed both Demon Souls & Dark Souls, those were the only difficult games this generation
The point is that all the challenge comes from gambling. RPGs don't require fast reflexes and usually neither much memorization.
The hand holding in many modern games has become fairly ridiculous. I can't recall the last game I played that I can say really challenged me as a gamer to get from start to finish in a fashion that didn't require the repetition of some mundane task in order to proceed through much of the game. It seems that developers are, these days, trying harder to tell a story than they are to make a game. Take big console releases like Uncharted: fun games, but good god, everything short of Crushing is ridiculously easy, with crushing just amping up the damage so much that you'll struggle no matter what, not because you're bad at the game, but because you can't dodge bullets like Neo. Moving to the handheld platforms, you already hit the nail on the head when talking about Super Mario 3D Land. I got that game, and damn it. I'm terrible at Mario, and I blazed through that game. I got halfway through the special levels, and it was still so easy that I just sold it. I was done with a game that didn't even try to challenge me, and that's without usage of the cheat suit.
I feel one of the biggest problems is that classically difficult games were either difficult due to hardware limitations, or were simply bound by the limitations of the time in thinking and skill (see: old NES games that were ridiculously hard to increase play time, or simply because they were just about broken). These days, we can do just about anything with a game that a developer is willing to try to get done, which also means that primarily we see fake difficulty, as being able to do anything you want opens the door to a lot of broken bullshit. For games that have done real difficulty right, Catherine comes to mind as a somewhat recent release that has genuinely challenged gamers to think in order to progress. Very few games do genuinely difficult right anymore though. It's the idea that the challenge will come with a feeling of reward upon completion. You feel like you earned the victory through skill rather than forcing yourself to deal with bullshit for long enough to get to the end. Demon's Souls and Dark Souls are also very good modern examples of this within a genre that can present great difficulty when trying to make it hard without it being stupidly repetitive.
It's hard to say if difficulty can really be a thing anymore though amongst the majority of games. Many gamers have come to expect either a cinematic experience, or they are simply more tuned to the easiness of modern gaming as a whole. The biggest problem may be that most gamers don't want to be challenged anymore. They want to game for the sake of gaming, even if it may hurt the overall experience. The idea that you may die in a game 30 times in a well thought out challenge while slowly becoming a genuinely better player is becoming rather rare. I think open world gaming has come to establish a genre that can still maintain the idea of genuine difficulty, but even then, those games only really achieve that due to the non-linearity of the experience as a whole. You have a choice to throw yourself into dangerous, challenging situations, or to take it slow. It keeps everybody happy. I'd say for most other game types though, anymore, we're going to be hard pressed to find legitimately difficult experiences. Nintendo has ruined themselves trying to cater to casual gamers during the Wii/DS generation, and unfortunately, they are unlikely to recover from that as we now have six, nearly seven years of established expectations. That's just one company too. I'm sure with a bit of thinking, it wouldn't be too hard to find other companies that have picked easy over hard to sell games to the modern, more casual crowd of gamers.
I feel one of the biggest problems is that classically difficult games were either difficult due to hardware limitations, or were simply bound by the limitations of the time in thinking and skill (see: old NES games that were ridiculously hard to increase play time, or simply because they were just about broken). These days, we can do just about anything with a game that a developer is willing to try to get done, which also means that primarily we see fake difficulty, as being able to do anything you want opens the door to a lot of broken bullshit. For games that have done real difficulty right, Catherine comes to mind as a somewhat recent release that has genuinely challenged gamers to think in order to progress. Very few games do genuinely difficult right anymore though. It's the idea that the challenge will come with a feeling of reward upon completion. You feel like you earned the victory through skill rather than forcing yourself to deal with bullshit for long enough to get to the end. Demon's Souls and Dark Souls are also very good modern examples of this within a genre that can present great difficulty when trying to make it hard without it being stupidly repetitive.
It's hard to say if difficulty can really be a thing anymore though amongst the majority of games. Many gamers have come to expect either a cinematic experience, or they are simply more tuned to the easiness of modern gaming as a whole. The biggest problem may be that most gamers don't want to be challenged anymore. They want to game for the sake of gaming, even if it may hurt the overall experience. The idea that you may die in a game 30 times in a well thought out challenge while slowly becoming a genuinely better player is becoming rather rare. I think open world gaming has come to establish a genre that can still maintain the idea of genuine difficulty, but even then, those games only really achieve that due to the non-linearity of the experience as a whole. You have a choice to throw yourself into dangerous, challenging situations, or to take it slow. It keeps everybody happy. I'd say for most other game types though, anymore, we're going to be hard pressed to find legitimately difficult experiences. Nintendo has ruined themselves trying to cater to casual gamers during the Wii/DS generation, and unfortunately, they are unlikely to recover from that as we now have six, nearly seven years of established expectations. That's just one company too. I'm sure with a bit of thinking, it wouldn't be too hard to find other companies that have picked easy over hard to sell games to the modern, more casual crowd of gamers.
That is a really good point that I didn't think about at the time of writing. And yeah, it's a bit of a shame that games as of late are more of a cinematic experience. Like Final Fantasy XIII, which was so ballsy linear and simplistic that I ended up not beating the game and returning it a few weeks later. ._.
For the sake of simplicity, let's not call grind-happy RPGs like Dragon Quest or NIS's 'strategy' games difficult. Finding 5 hours a day with which to toil away at some character's stats is difficult, but in the end it doesn't require any more effort or brainpower on your part (this is why people set up challenges for themselves like low-level, no magic, etc.). *and of course, Ryukouki's example of rerolling a game to get the desired results plays into this as well.
I'll just use this topic to forward my theory of PC gaming habits taking over gaming as a whole: Games like Ninja Gaiden and God Hand were only hard because dying meant you had to go all the way back to the beginning of a level (or back to the beginning of the game, as is the case with games that still use lives). Demon's Souls was something of an extension of that, minus the pain of losing your progress (if you can progress to the same point over and over, you'll eventually gain the strength to not get ****ed the next time. It's only when you get too ambitious/careless that the game rips you a new one).
PC games, on the other hand, have largely allowed players to save anywhere, at any time. I'm guessing this is in part because computers allow easy quick access to memory, while cartridges and later games that interface with little memory cards did not. In any case, starting with the XBox and moving up to the PS3, we've seen more and more PC-style games landing on consoles, and with them, the standards of PC gaming, including autosave and 'save-states'.
So even if Nintendo has made their platformers easier, they are no less difficult than a PS360 shooter that has checkpoints or allows you to save at any time.
Whether or not this impacts the enjoyment of a game is a different debate. First of all, what Ryukouki believes is a 'doable' challenge is completely subjective. I'm reminded of the Simpson's episode where Lisa states that she just wants a challenge that she herself can do, not one that is difficult by way of her own physicality or lack thereof:
We can say that Game A is 'too easy', and therefore not fun because it doesn't take us very long to exhaust the game's content (however enjoyable it is), and Game B is 'too hard', because we don't have the time/patience/skill to exhaust the content (ie; can't unlock everything because one challenge requires you to finish a certain difficulty mode). However, in each of these cases, we're talking about our enjoyment of the game coming strictly from whether or not we can complete it, and how long it takes to do so. Personally, I love roguelikes (of which Demon's Souls is sort-of a derivative), because the gameplay itself is fun. I can die 100 times and still feel satisfied playing, despite the fact that I might not get any closer to the end each time (or with full knowledge that I will NEVER get to the end).
I'll just use this topic to forward my theory of PC gaming habits taking over gaming as a whole: Games like Ninja Gaiden and God Hand were only hard because dying meant you had to go all the way back to the beginning of a level (or back to the beginning of the game, as is the case with games that still use lives). Demon's Souls was something of an extension of that, minus the pain of losing your progress (if you can progress to the same point over and over, you'll eventually gain the strength to not get ****ed the next time. It's only when you get too ambitious/careless that the game rips you a new one).
PC games, on the other hand, have largely allowed players to save anywhere, at any time. I'm guessing this is in part because computers allow easy quick access to memory, while cartridges and later games that interface with little memory cards did not. In any case, starting with the XBox and moving up to the PS3, we've seen more and more PC-style games landing on consoles, and with them, the standards of PC gaming, including autosave and 'save-states'.
So even if Nintendo has made their platformers easier, they are no less difficult than a PS360 shooter that has checkpoints or allows you to save at any time.
Whether or not this impacts the enjoyment of a game is a different debate. First of all, what Ryukouki believes is a 'doable' challenge is completely subjective. I'm reminded of the Simpson's episode where Lisa states that she just wants a challenge that she herself can do, not one that is difficult by way of her own physicality or lack thereof:
We can say that Game A is 'too easy', and therefore not fun because it doesn't take us very long to exhaust the game's content (however enjoyable it is), and Game B is 'too hard', because we don't have the time/patience/skill to exhaust the content (ie; can't unlock everything because one challenge requires you to finish a certain difficulty mode). However, in each of these cases, we're talking about our enjoyment of the game coming strictly from whether or not we can complete it, and how long it takes to do so. Personally, I love roguelikes (of which Demon's Souls is sort-of a derivative), because the gameplay itself is fun. I can die 100 times and still feel satisfied playing, despite the fact that I might not get any closer to the end each time (or with full knowledge that I will NEVER get to the end).
D
Deleted User
Guest
Games are becoming easier because it appeals to a broader audience, people nowadays don't have enough time to sit down and play a hard time consuming game. Most people are casual gamers' these days yet people don't seem to realise that, sure it's a sad site, but video games are made to sell. We are the minority in the gaming community, take Angry Birds, "648M downloads" marked in 2012, that game sells well because it's easy mindless fun.
I cannot stress this enough, video games are a business, not a charity.
(Now lets all count down the days till Dark Souls 2)
I cannot stress this enough, video games are a business, not a charity.
(Now lets all count down the days till Dark Souls 2)
You're talking about NES hard games though. The reason why those were hard was because of actual hardware limitations. Or developers just made the games damn near impossible to increase replayability.
And every game is becoming easier. It's because developers are scared to push away the casual crowd when they make a huge chunk of the install base.
And every game is becoming easier. It's because developers are scared to push away the casual crowd when they make a huge chunk of the install base.
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2009
- Messages
- 2,941
- Trophies
- 0
- Age
- 27
- Location
- In Vulpes' Fur
- Website
- meekpicture.blogspot.com
- XP
- 628
- Country
I think that given the amount of indie games out there from a variety of really inventive developers, there's plenty of difficult games out there for those willing to look. Try Cloudberry Kingdom and tell me that's not difficult enough for you. Plenty of the indie games out there are horrifyingly difficult or plain challenging. Mainstream developers are much less willing to alienate an audience, so they avoid difficulties that are too high.
Modern gaming is getting easier. The 14/15 year olds that play modern games are like, "Fuck, this is too hard. Time to look up the online tutorials for beating this section of the game." So instead of keeping the games so hard that you have to look up a tutorial for help, they'll just make the games easier. Besides, if you've been doing something for more than 10 years, chances are that you'll be better at whatever it is you were doing for that ten years. (please no sex addicts comment replies to this)
A personal thought from me: did anyone else think Skyward Sword was hard to play? I don't mean Zelda II: Adventure of Link hard, but just a generally hard game?
A personal thought from me: did anyone else think Skyward Sword was hard to play? I don't mean Zelda II: Adventure of Link hard, but just a generally hard game?
That game was tough at times. I think I wanted to break my wiimote in the Lanayru mines several times.
We could even categorize games into 'those that punish mistakes' and 'those that allow for several mistakes'. This can be done by one-hit kills (like many old NES games) VS long/regenerating life bars, restarts VS checkpoints, or simply punishing (difficult, calculating opponents) VS leniency (weak opponents, room for error).
But of course this doesn't necessarily have anything to do with whether or not a game is enjoyable or not. For the most part, we are speaking about two, maybe three genres (action, RPG, shooting). What about sports games? Was WiEl/PES better than FIFA because you couldn't score a million goals per half? Hot Shots vs Tiger Woods? Gran Turismo vs Mario Kart?
But of course this doesn't necessarily have anything to do with whether or not a game is enjoyable or not. For the most part, we are speaking about two, maybe three genres (action, RPG, shooting). What about sports games? Was WiEl/PES better than FIFA because you couldn't score a million goals per half? Hot Shots vs Tiger Woods? Gran Turismo vs Mario Kart?
I think it's just a sign of the times and culture now, versus the retro days. Now we have the ability to save every game at almost any point. Back in the day, it was play through it in a sitting, or save infrequently/use codes for level select. Gave you more drive to get through the game. Also, we've now lost the concept of "Lives". I think this is due to the face that the gamers today just want to have a short game, or fun and if a game is too challenging or difficult, they will just move on to another game. Which leads to the availability issue. Back in the retro days, we bought a game for a single platform for a ton of money and played it through. Now you have a huge selection, some that still cost a lot, but tons that are cheap or free. Available on many different platforms.
I think that "kids" now a days have shorter attention spans, feel more entitled to things like achievements and if the games are too hard, they give up and move on. Speaking generally that is... not everyone Anymore it's about accomplishing the short goals, than winning the game.
I also think games with "Lunatic" modes are just trying to be toss backs to a harder time, but go overboard... but at least they name the mode properly.
The game companies want to pander to the masses, have people play short or easy games where you have to buy bonuses to get higher achievements to rake in money. The more games you play and the more achievements you get/are challenged with get them more money. If it's too hard, people move on and they don't get the money. If you spend all your time playing one game with no purchase options, then they get a big upfront sum, but no continuing income.
I think that "kids" now a days have shorter attention spans, feel more entitled to things like achievements and if the games are too hard, they give up and move on. Speaking generally that is... not everyone
Anymore it's about accomplishing the short goals, than winning the game.I also think games with "Lunatic" modes are just trying to be toss backs to a harder time, but go overboard... but at least they name the mode properly.
The game companies want to pander to the masses, have people play short or easy games where you have to buy bonuses to get higher achievements to rake in money. The more games you play and the more achievements you get/are challenged with get them more money. If it's too hard, people move on and they don't get the money. If you spend all your time playing one game with no purchase options, then they get a big upfront sum, but no continuing income.
To be fair, a lot of games from the NES/SNES era were difficult to pad out the length. Kids might only get one or two games a year if they were lucky, so you had to make sure your game would last. Some developers did this well (Castlevania, Mega Man, etc.), and many... didn't (most titles that make their way to the AVGN).
Games have certainly gotten easier, but that's not necessarily a bad thing. I only have so much time to spare for gaming, so I want games that respect my time. I'm all for a challenge, but make it something that tests my skills, not just my patience.
Some recent games have managed this well. Rayman: Origins has an absolutely perfect difficulty curve, and there's extra challenges for players who want to push themselves even further. In Bastion, instead of a difficulty slider, has idols that you can choose to select- each one modifies the gameplay in various ways, forcing the player to adapt their playstyle accordingly. Hotline Miami is hard as balls, but since death has basically no consequences (you respawn instantly, there's no lives to speak of, and the rooms are usually small enough), you're encouraged to experiment and go wild. Dark Souls... well, it's Dark Souls. 'Nuff said.
I'd like to see more developers look to these examples for inspiration. Sure beats the standard "Bullet sponge enemies with improbable aim=challenging" standard that most developers seem to shoot for.
Games have certainly gotten easier, but that's not necessarily a bad thing. I only have so much time to spare for gaming, so I want games that respect my time. I'm all for a challenge, but make it something that tests my skills, not just my patience.
Some recent games have managed this well. Rayman: Origins has an absolutely perfect difficulty curve, and there's extra challenges for players who want to push themselves even further. In Bastion, instead of a difficulty slider, has idols that you can choose to select- each one modifies the gameplay in various ways, forcing the player to adapt their playstyle accordingly. Hotline Miami is hard as balls, but since death has basically no consequences (you respawn instantly, there's no lives to speak of, and the rooms are usually small enough), you're encouraged to experiment and go wild. Dark Souls... well, it's Dark Souls. 'Nuff said.
I'd like to see more developers look to these examples for inspiration. Sure beats the standard "Bullet sponge enemies with improbable aim=challenging" standard that most developers seem to shoot for.
Similar threads
- Poll
