Difficulty in games

[FleshToDust]

What do you think about games that are challenging? When I was a kid it was an accomplishment to complete a game. You would brag and say "I wrapped 4 games" or " I wrapped that game". Now it's not an accomplishment. It's like watching a movie. You'll reach the end eventually. You won't feel like you accomplished anything but you'll of been entertained.

I like the idea of a game not everyone can beat (everyone can though if they take the time to learn it).
In Dark Souls you feel accomplished when you beat a boss and in Gran Turismo you feel like you know the ins and outs of a course because you can execute all the turns quickly and get a good lap time. That doesn't exist in arcade racing games.

In a lot of games that appeal to the non gamer, the turns don't require skill and precision and the bosses are forgettable.
You're entertained but don't ever feel like you earned anything in the game.

What are your thoughts on challenging games?

Also this is in no means meant to belittle non gamers or fans of easier games. Everything has an audience and I can find enjoyment in playing need for speed and jumping a ramp and going 30 feet in the air. That's cool too but I find enjoyment in challenging games that I can't get in games that are only there to entertain you.

Share your thoughts even if you don't like these kinds of games.

 

[Poryg]

The thing is, nowadays playability is sacrificed for eye candy. And actually not challenge. Everything is sacrificed for the eye candy. Good music, originality, innovation,... And much more. Even challenge.
I am an old school gamer. I like challenges. Not like masochistic challenges xD I like it when the game is not too difficult (or "difficult"), but not too easy. While I don't want to be wasting threev weeks in one boss room, I like being challenged and pushed to tactics and innovation.

 

[bgillisp]

Part of the problem though is honestly, some of the old games that were challenging were also flat out terrible. Battletoads has a level that no sane developer should EVER put in a game, as only those who have 100+ hours to dedicate to the game will get through it, or those who just get flat out lucky.

As I stated in another thread, there's an old NES games I beat...by button smashing. I never honestly learned the trick to beating that boss,, I just bum rushed it until I got through it as I was stubborn enough to keep trying it, and I had nothing else to play. Nowadays, players will just give up if you put that kind of difficulty in a game, as there are 10000+ other games to play, giving you no reason to play a game that raises your blood pressure to 156/125 because the game is just plain unfair.

That being said, I think there is a market for the hard but fair games. I loved Gothic 2. That game didn't hesitate to let you explore the lair of the Shadowbeast at Level 1. Sure, if the beast found you, it would one hit KO you at that point in time, but you knew quickly that this is a dangerous world and you have to really think through your decisions.

The trick is to make sure your game is hard, but is hard in a fair way that the player has a fair chance to win, if they have bene paying attention and learning from the game to this point. But unfair difficulty spikes or just plain mean or cheap levels? Those need to go the way of the dodo in game making.

 

[FleshToDust]

Yeah I've heard of some extremes. I consider that just because gaming was at it's youth. Things haven't been refined and there were even games that developers purposely made impossible because they didn't have time to finish the game or make a proper ending.

Games have also had easy modes from the beginning. I've jokingly thought about mocking the player for clicking easy mode and then putting them on the hardest mode because they picked easy mode but no I'm not that mean and my games will be more serious and without 4th wall breaking. I'd end up just putting Normal mode in.

I don't think it's a problem playing a game halfway through and moving to another game if it gets hard. I don't think I beat a quarter of the games I bought.

I think the best way to do hard but fair is to give players options. In RM games you learn moves by leveling up and in the city you buy the best gear so if you lose against a boss the only think you can think of is that you're under leveled and you'll say "crazy difficulty spikes, this game sucks" but if you gave the player choices along the way, moves they learn and gear that you cant tell which one is the best then when you lose it may not be a difficulty spike but your own poor choices. The player will then experiment and see your game has depth.

I like these kinds of things and it's fun to talk about.

 

[Rukiri]

I miss nes difficulty..

If anyone brings up Dark Souls, it's not even hard... "you just suck"

 

[FleshToDust]

The cool thing about dark souls is the traps and attack patterns. I wish more games had those. You learn as you play. It's almost like a puzzle game.

 

[bgillisp]

@FleshToDust : Are you thinking of the old rougelikes, where one of the devs admitted that every time someone beat his game he edited it so their method of winning won't work anymore? I can't remember which game it was, but it's mentioned on the RPGAddict site.

As for the difficulty spikes, honestly those are going to be opinion sometimes too. I remember when I played Diablo I breezed through levels 1 - 15 with my Mage character, then level 16 ripped me to shreds as all my spells the monsters were immune to. The only thing is, I couldn't go back and level up and get new spells, as enemies didn't respawn. Now, in that case, I might have had bad RNG due to the random nature of the enemies, but it is due to reasons like this I think we should still allow players who want to grind the ability to grind and get past a boss or level. That way, we still allow for other ways to get past things.

PS: If you want to play an unfair game, try Wizardry 4. It is considered the most unfair RPG in history by most.

PPS: I personally hated Dark Souls as I felt like it was death by control scheme. The time I got stuck on an invisible pixel which caused me to die as the game couldn't bother to put the jump button in an intuitive place (so I couldn't even jump over that pixel) was when I quit on the game and never looked back.

 

[FleshToDust]

I remember playing Fire Emblem on DS where you couldn't grind. It made the game a lot harder but I didn't like not being able to grind. Also every time one of my soldiers died I had to restart the level because they die permanently.

 

[Lornsteyn]

I prefer normal difficulty in most games, its often balanced and fair and if done right challenging, too.
The hardest game I played was dark souls, never completed it, but it was fun.
Fire Emblem is more like chess for me.^^

 

[Matseb2611]

For the most part nowadays I don't have the patience for overly hard games, particularly those that set you back a lot if you lose. But if designed well, a challenging game can be loads of fun, particularly if it's the kind of challenge you can learn to tackle and see yourself improve. I remember I enjoyed Dark Souls 1 a few years back. Not sure if I'd still have the patience for it now, but it felt rewarding to me to finally topple a big boss. I also really enjoy Darkest Dungeon. It's hard and even dependent on RNG to a degree, but I find it addicting, because it feels rewarding when a well-crafted strategy and preparation pays off. XCOM is kind of the same. I guess I prefer challenging games when they offer a number of strategic ways of overcoming the challenge and not just requiring you to have superb reactions and button-mashing skills.

 

[Dodokajet]

i like hard games but the difficulty need to increase progressively

 

[Failivrin]

Games have also had easy modes from the beginning. I've jokingly thought about mocking the player for clicking easy mode and then putting them on the hardest mode because they picked easy mode but no I'm not that mean and my games will be more serious and without 4th wall breaking.

I think most games should have no more than two difficulties: Normal and Hard. One problem with "Easy" mode is it's kind of insulting to casual gamers, who react by thinking, What? Just because I don't play for ten hours a day the developer thinks I can't handle this? ...at least that's what casual gamers have told me.
On the other hand you can definitely joke about difficulty if the game's overall tone is comic. When you choose the hardest difficulty in Press X to Not Die, the game dubs you a "button pressing god"--which makes it feel better for players who can't handle that difficulty. Instead of thinking, I'm not good at this game, the casual gamer thinks, I like this game but I don't need to be a button pressing god.

 

[Gallia]

If anyone brings up Dark Souls, it's not even hard... "you just suck"

DS is hard if you play the game blind with no guide or looking things up a wiki XD, A friend of mine streamed the whole game, he died plenty of times, and took him like forever, he started NG+ and he managed to beat half the game in a 2 hour streaming session (he does have limited time), the reason why he had a hard time, is because i didn't spoil anything, like you find "this item" there or you need to level up that stat to have a easier time, or there is an shortcut, now he has beaten the game he's having a much easier time.
One of his comments are:"I know why people say DS isn't hard, it isn't hard if you know all the ins and outs in the game".

About the Difficulty in games i do prefer normal difficulty, challenge is ok, but breaking a controller isn't a good idea, i know that some fighting games are hard because you're supposed to spend a lot time into it before doing higher difficulties or online.

Challenging games should be fun to start with, and its not for everyone.
A game that did challenge right is the "Devil May Cry" series, you start with 3 difficulties, beating the game on hard unlocks a harder mode and so on and on, if you beat the game on normal and had enough you had the right challenge without any mental damage.

I know that the masochistic difficulty in games is a thing nowadays, it should exist for those who enjoy it, but a difficulty select is much more appreciated for those who like to play the game, who don't like those challenges.

 

[FleshToDust]

Two difficulty settings are good. One for the games intended difficulty and one for testing your skills further.

 

[cabfe]

I prefer to play games for fun rather than for a challenge.
That being said, there still needs to be some kind of challenge, as a game that'd be "press any key to win in auto-play" has no interest.
But, as I grow older, I favor a good story over a challenging game so I stay away from those Dark Souls games and clones.
Die&Retry games are making me want to quit rather than keep on going.
I won't say they're bad games, just that I'm not their target audience anymore.
"I'm too old for this", you might say

 

[Amenti]

When I play games, I tend to go Normal difficulty first, or easy if I know nothing about the game. Hard is my final try just for the challenge, though I really grind my teeth when hard or other harder modes are just too hard. Take for instance a Street Fighter game I played where the final boss was some dude named Seth. That guy was difficult to beat, at least for me. It took me many tries, but I pulled it off and felt so achieved.

 

[bhindi1224]

Die&Retry games are making me want to quit rather than keep on going.
I won't say they're bad games, just that I'm not their target audience anymore.
"I'm too old for this", you might say

I completely agree, in no shape form or fashion would I ever want to play Dragon's Lair again.

When I play games, I tend to go Normal difficulty first, or easy if I know nothing about the game.

I play games on normal figuring they won't be overly challenging and you still get to see the good endings, etc.

 

[Amenti]

I completely agree, in no shape form or fashion would I ever want to play Dragon's Lair again.


I play games on normal figuring they won't be overly challenging and you still get to see the good endings, etc.

Indeed. And if that turns out to be like difficult, you can always go lower in difficulty anyway.

 

[Astel]

One problem with "Easy" mode is it's kind of insulting to casual gamers, who react by thinking, What? Just because I don't play for ten hours a day the developer thinks I can't handle this? ...at least that's what casual gamers have told me.

I usually try Normal first, but if I start having trouble I don't doubt going to Easy mode, I don't have the time or pacience anymore.
I recently bought Cuphead, and while it's a great game, I'm pretty sure i'll never finish it.

 

[bgillisp]

I usually try Normal first, but if I start having trouble I don't doubt going to Easy mode, I don't have the time or pacience anymore.

Same here. I recently finished Persona 5...in Easy mode. I just got tired of the fact that Atlas has no idea how to balance bosses anymore, and I really didn't want to grind another 3 - 5 levels just because their ultimate attack one hit KO my party even when they guarded!