RPG Difficulty Levels

[B.Ultimus]

Hello everyone,

RPG Difficulty: Some players feel that RPGs have become easy over the years, while others believe this decrease in difficulty is because of evolved game design (which in some cases is very true).

Various games handle difficulties differently.  Back in the day, games would simply have an Easy/Normal/Hard difficulty that would effect number of enemies, how much damage they do, lives you have, etc.  The Diablo franchise has sort of this New Game + with increased stats/abilities through a Nightmare/Hell/Inferno mode.  World of Warcraft and other similar MMOs have "Heroic" Raids with increased stats and abilities for the similar level.

Trying to add a feature, I feel adding difficulty options with different game play features depending on the type of player you are could open the door for more interesting options.  A lot of my co-designers disagree with this option, and for very good reasons.

I'd like to open up the floor on your thoughts of difficulty, and how you would tackle the approach.  Would you even have difficulty options, or  would you just design your game to attract only a certain audience?

I would like to know your thoughts/ideas from both a designer view and a player view.

 

[Eschaton]

With RPGs, I'd up the difficulty by adjusting stats.  To that end, I'd add a variable to the attack formulas.  This variable increases or decreases with difficulty.  Set the variable high for high difficulty, and low for low difficulty.

For example:

Player's damage formula:  (attackers_attack + attackers_level) - (defenders_defense + difficulty_variable) + (random_number + (attackers_luck))

I didn't get the semantics right, but with a formula like this an increased difficulty variable would make enemies take less damage from the player.

Enemy's damage formula:  (attackers_attack + difficulty_variable) - (defenders_defense + defenders_level) + (random_number + (attacker_luck))

With a formula like this, enemies will be inflicting higher amounts of damage upon the player when set to higher difficulties.

The end result is that enemies do more damage and take less on higher difficulties.

If you wanna get real nasty, you could make the variable a MULTIPLIER, rather than simply adding it.

 

[Matseb2611]

For the most part I like the idea of difficulty levels, though it does depend on the game. If the main premise of your game is to challenge the player as much as possible (e.g. Dark Souls), then having an easy mode would defeat the whole purpose. However, if you are making a story-driven RPG, I don't see anything wrong with having multiple difficulty levels. In fact I think it can attract a larger audience this way, because then the game will be able to appeal to both casual players and pro players, and not only that, it can also create replay value, because some people who'll complete the game on easy might wish to then try it on a harder difficulty. Then comes the question of how many difficulty levels to have. Once again it depends on the game, I think, and also the features that get changed with difficulty. For most games I think 2-3 difficulty levels suffice. There really is not much point to have 5+ difficulty levels unless a colossal number of game features are affected by that and that there is any reason to replay the game on all or most of them. 

Edit: Just to expand on what I meant by features is basically to have something new in each difficulty. In my current game project for example I decided to have 2 difficulty modes, one of which gives most enemies and bosses some additional (deadlier) attacks. This is just one example and I bet a lot more ideas can be thought up for this. You could create an entirely new type of enemy that only appears on harder difficulties, or maybe the dungeons will have some additional, harder puzzles on a higher difficulty, etc etc. All these things can create replay value because they're something new for the player to experience. 

 

[Revache]

I'm just going to assume that by difficulty we're talking a fun challenge and I'm not even going to open the can of worms that is artificial difficulty.

For me I love challenging gameplay because it ties into most stories so well. A lot of stories in rpgs are about surmounting something, whether it be emotionally or physically and a solid challenge in the game play mirror's that theme. Take ME3 for example: I found even the hardest difficulty to be a bit of a cakewalk, it made me feel like I hadn't succeeded because Shepard's a bad ass but because the enemy was incompetent and by extension so too were my allies. Because of that I couldn't get into the legend of Shepard as much as I could in the other games. For me, challenging game play can be par for the course depending on the story you're trying to tell. If you want me to believe that the protagonist is a hero/strong/capable you need to give me a bit of challenge game play to affirm that story element.

On the other hand I know a lot of people who are just as happy to watch a fancy light show and that's more than enough to establish the character for them. Then there's also the fact that challenge is subjective and there's no way to balance difficulty so it's at the perfect level for everyone. And in such a case it's no wonder developers opt for an easier game because a difficult game may bar people who are just interested in the story from completing it while as easy game may disappoint those looking for a challenge but it's still playable by everyone.

So, as far as I'm concerned difficulty is a valuable feature and I love to see games with it. Of course, some games use underhanded methods to increase difficulty (bosses have x^y more health, encounter rate increases etc...) but if we're talking a good and fun challenge then I'm all for it.

 

[Mouser]

Balancing a game is hard enough on one difficulty level, let alone three or more.

That said, I'm not against difficulty levels at all: just don't go overboard trying to 'balance' each one perfectly.  Make one "Normal" - and spend your time balancing that and getting it to run and play well. Then work on "Easy" and "Hard".  Bosses having more health and dealing more damage may seem like a simple way out (and it is), but it works. You can do other things as well, but unless you're scripting some AI for your mobs there's not much you can do to make the fights harder or easier. You could change the frequency they use their skills, and maybe give the mobs on hard more powerful skills and take some away on easy...

Another way to go (and I like this option) is to have a difficulty level (you can still have the first three) unlocked after you beat the game on Normal (or Hard). This way the first time around players get to see the story and flow with the pace of the game as you designed it. Then they can go back and focus on powerlevelling and min/maxing stats and all the things you have to do to beat the game on "Insane".

 

[Probotector 200X]

I like various difficulties.

Many RPGs have different approaches to this. Some only let you choose when you start a New Game, and you are stuck. Some let you switch from the menu, so if Hard mode is too hard, you can set it down a notch. Some require you to beat the game first, then you can adjust the difficulty in a New Game+. I don't know which method I prefer as a designer or player, but it's something to think about.

I personally love when different difficulties unlock more stuff. Some people hate that though. Or to get the "true ending" you must beat the game on hard. Or a variation on that, easy mode leaves out the end of the game, but that's more for Arcade or Fighting games...(that would be annoying in an RPG)

One more thing: Instead of the different difficulties just ranging from easier to harder, what about making them different?? That is, maybe one mode doubles EXP but halves Gold, while another mode doubles Gold by halves EXP. Or go the Castlevania route and have some NPC get their own "mode" that's mostly easier but has some segments that are drastically harder. Symphony of the Night has a mode where Alucard has drastically lower stats, except Luck, which is drastically higher...Which means you are weaker overall but get more critical hits and have an increased item drop rate.

 

[Milennin]

I don't like different difficulties, but only because:

Easy: Faceroll everything with auto-attack.

Normal: This is what you want to play.

Hard: Embrace the grind for levels.

 

[Kes]

One more thing: Instead of the different difficulties just ranging from easier to harder, what about making them different?? That is, maybe one mode doubles EXP but halves Gold, while another mode doubles Gold by halves EXP.

Todd's Difficulty Select script allows you to do this.  You can set different percentages of gold, exp and drops for each of the difficulty levels.  By adjusting the percentage that enemy parameters are multiplied, you could in effect leave them unchanged from the database settings and just go with these variations.

Normal: This is what you want to play.

This is true for you, but some other players do want to play at other than Normal.  As long as the choice for Normal remains an option, why reduce the size of the demographic group who might play your game?

 

[kerbonklin]

As a hardcore tryhard gamer, I always go for the hardest difficulty available unless it clearly is too much to handle, like setting Mania mode for the first playthrough of any "Tales of" game. (which is usually meant to handle on 2nd+ playthroughs only)

Definitely the best thing to do with difficulties is to change the abilities and AI of enemies/bosses. Some stat-raising is fine too, but yeah as previously mentioned, artificial difficulty is lame and tedious for the player.

I honestly dislike the idea of "Easy Mode" when it is not the default mode.

 

[Kes]

I honestly dislike the idea of "Easy Mode" when it is not the default mode.

So do I, but a number of potential players do like 'Easy' for their first playthrough and I'm all for making a game as accessible as possible to as wide a range of people as possible, as long as that doesn't jeopardize the enjoyment of those who want something else.  Giving a choice is just that - no one is obliged to pick a difficulty level they don't like. 

 

[arekpowalan]

I used to pick Easy mode a lot as a child, but after years of playing JRPG i keep things around "normal". Easy mode these days tend to come in a form of a mockery toward the player. That, I don't like.

 

[OwenQ]

The OP's original idea - difficulty options rather than a simple Easy/Normal/Hard progression - is an idea I like somewhat. For example, Mass Effect 3 has playstyle options something along the lines of 'Standard Mass Effect', 'Shut Up and Let Me Shoot Dudes' (dialogue choices made for you), and 'Let Me Talk a Lot Without So Much Shooting Dudes, Please' (easier combat? I don't remember). I'm pretty sure I've seen some games offer difficulty for both puzzles and combat that are independent of each other (Silent HIll maybe?). And some games have an option to enforce restrictions not unlike what someone might do as a challenge run. (I like the idea of what Probotector and others have suggested with limiting EXP - sort of like a 'lowest level' run, only you don't have to run from everything).

If you've got the time to develop it, I think difficulty levels where puzzles are different, enemies have different patterns, etc. are worthwhile. I'm rather lukewarm on making things harder by simply increasing stats and nothing else because that just seems like moving the goalposts a bit. I also feel that how worthwhile this is is strongly a function of replayability - if you've already got whatever reasons to play the game over again, some difficulty options make for a good change of pace.

 

[Kyutaru]

Easy = Tell me a story, I'm here for the cinematic drama and heart-wrenching tale of love and loss, not your sissy battle system or XP points

Normal = I'm here for the game.  Please don't murder me... I like a challenge, but for the love of god, I haven't bought the strategy guide yet!

Hard = Blood for the Blood God!  Skulls for the Skull Throne!  RAWWWR!!!  Epic Loot is MINE, chump!  Screw your 9999 damage attack!

 

[Harmill]

Personally, I don't like selecting "Hard" mode if all it does is give monsters/enemies increased stats. That is artificial difficulty in many cases that makes the game more frustrating than challenging. Only if the game gives you the proper tools to counter enemies and avoid or mitigate damage is increased stats a proper way to increase difficulty.

Now this isn't an RPG, but I think The Last of Us did a really good job with how it handled increased difficulties. In harder modes, the game gave you less resources (ammo, supplies). As far as I could tell, the enemies did NOT have more HP or deal more damage. By making ammo more scarce, and making you only capable of crafting 2 Molotovs instead of 5, it made you much more careful and strategic in how you approached each section of the game.

RPGs can do this too: as someone already suggested, half the amount of Gold that you receive from monsters. I'm not sure that will be enough - especially if that gold is necessary to keep your equipment up to date and if that necessary equipment gives you important stat gains. If equipment provide a large benefit in STATS (not beneficial properties like Poison immunity or 50% Fire resistance), halving the gold gain is almost just increasing the stats of the enemies. You can't afford to keep everyone's equipment up to date, and therefore you have less stats than the game progression might expect.

RPGs ARE capable of providing enemies with highly unique behaviours and attack patterns. The complexity of these attack patterns, and how easy it is to figure them out and how to deal with them, is what makes enemies hard or easy. I've often wondered how worthwhile it would be to try and make enemies learn new abilities depending on the difficulty level. Bosses wouldn't be STRONGER per say, but they would be more complex and require more strategy to defeat. In lower difficulties, the boss' behaviours and attack patterns are easier to figure out or easier to counter. I can't think of an RPG that's already done this (maybe one has in which case, feel free to point it out), but I think it's a worthwhile idea to explore.

 

[Kyutaru]

The ideal Hard mode is actually one where the boss is tuned in such a way that following the strategy for beating him is the only way to survive.  Normal mode bosses may have a special gimmick to them, but you can usually afford to "fail" at the fight repeatedly until you figure out the gimmick, merely because you have enough health to tank the boss's attacks.  But in Hard mode, failing to interrupt the boss super when you're supposed to should result in an automatic team wipe.  Not properly shielding yourself from Omega Weapon's assaults should result in instant KOs.  Hard mode is about overcoming challenges through FAILURE and learning from your mistakes, or being clever enough to see through the encounter from the start based on subtle context clues or hidden RPG lore you found on someone's bookshelf.

In that sense, increased stats DOES make a Hard mode ideal.  So long as the stats are perfectly balanced so that you do or die according to the perfectly executed plan of attack.  Braska's Final Aeon from Final Fantasy X makes an excellent Hard boss example because if you have no idea what you're doing when you start the fight, you're as good as dead already.  Following the plan of attack is paramount to success.

 

[Harmill]

I agree with your statements on how increased stats on Hard mode can affect "super attacks". In normal mode, a boss' Super Attack could deal maybe 70-80% of your party's life. High enough to be extremely dangerous, but not necessarily game over if you just let him get the attack off. Then on Hard mode, you're punished more for not preparing for the Super Attack, so it could potentially OHKO the party. The key is that the player needs to have the tools to weaken or prevent the super attack so it doesn't feel like a cheap OHKO out of nowhere attack (I'm looking at you, Lavos!). In this context, I agree that increased stats can work. Final Fantasy X is also my favourite example for RPG boss design and all around battle mechanics. You can complete the entire game without leveling up your characters at all.

However, it may not feel good on normal enemies that may not have much more going on than a normal attack and maybe one stronger attack. Just increasing the stats and calling it a day is a cheap artificial difficulty modifier on these types of encounters. But there are no "rules", just guidelines. You fell that you should only increase stats if you have a specific reason for doing so (pushing a boss' super attack from doing major damage to fatal damage) rather than, "I just want the enemies "harder". If you don't plan on taking the time to develop interesting enemies and bosses with attack patterns and super attacks, I'd refrain from just increasing stats. Or I'm just going to play the game on Normal mode.

 

[wallacethepig]

If games took place in the real world, "difficulty" would be replaced almost solely by "luck." Examples:

"Oh, look – free spellbooks!" - Easy

"A monster guarding the 'Fire II' spellbook? Fair enough." - Normal

"Lol, Fire I is good! No need to invade a country and take their most prized possession!" - Hard

"I have mage level stats, but the world has been drained of magic, which means my biggest advantage is gone. Bring it." - Mania/Hard+/Any "harder than hard mode"

"Look at all the dead guys with ammo just lying around! Free stuff!" - Easy

"Gotta struggle to survive – there are only a few people here smart enough to carry guns and ammo..." - Normal

"Apparently, all of the people I meet can survive in a zombie infested town with, like, three shots of ammo on their own. Why do I need their help again?" - Hard

"So, zombie rot turns metal to dust. Cool! Wait – it only turns BULLET metal to dust? Why?" - Mania

See what I mean? And another thing: things become less difficult the more they are repeated. I would venture to say that no one has beaten Cave Story without dying or getting help on their first try. Does that mean the game is bad? No – it just takes time to get used to.

I think it would be interesting if a game with varying difficulty had a varying story to it – why are the monsters so much weaker and less frequent on easy mode? How come the all-powerful wizard trying to take over the world can be beaten by a guy with a sword? (Actually, this applies to MOST games...) Why isn't magic as strong when playing hard mode? Little things like that would not only add replay value, it'd encourage players to start on easy mode but work their way up.

One final thing: No matter what, your enemies (and bosses, but this mostly applies to enemies) should be scary – at first. Don't make your enemies more powerful than your bosses – that's ridiculous. If that was the case, why is the boss, you know, the boss? (Of course, if you can explain this, it would be a huge relief for players prepping for an epic boss battle and then getting it postponed until later.)

A good rule of thumb that I use to prevent this is the "5 levels an hour" rule. Basically, how long will it take to play through a dungeon? A half hour? Then the player should be able to easily grind two to three levels higher. The problem with this rule is it becomes skewed by two things:

• The level cap to # of dungeons ratio
• The power increase from levels

Also, it pretty much only applies to traditional JRPGs like Chrono Trigger, etc. It could be anything, really – as long as the player has a sense of growth going on. Why 5 levels an hour? Well, 5 levels is a lot – about a 20th of the total, if you can go to level 99. This can help you design your game if you utilize it properly. It can also change based on difficulty – A 3 levels an hour might be for a normal mode, and a 1 level and hour might be for a hard mode. Of course, this tends to make the harder modes more grindfestive, but there's a reason for that.

Damage is calculated via math. For example, it's basically impossible to beat a final boss if you're at level 1 and you're supposed to take him on at level 45. However, some players might only feel comfortable taking on the final boss at level 50, while others might want to try it at level 40. Leave a bit of "leeway" for your battles – the amount will depend on your game, of course.

Whatever you do, good luck and have fun!

-Wallace