In recent years, an odd consensus has arisen where many believe that games are easier than they used to be. In many cases it?s true, and it isn?t surprising, as extreme competition between titles has created the need for games to be immediately entertaining as soon as you press the start button. As a consequence, many older ? and potentially newer ? players consider these games of yesteryear much more difficult. The immense challenge Wii U owners have experienced with virtual console games is evidence of that.
Are these newer adventures really easier? Or has the design philosophy for video games improved instead?
The challenge in 8 and 16 bit titles regularly transcended normal difficulty whereas modern games simply require quick reactions to overcome a boss or room full of foes. In these games, beating a boss was tough, sure, but actually understanding how to progress was regularly far harder, demanding bizarre experimentation, not to mention the possibility of a game over forcing you to restart.
In years past, we were conditioned to expect the unexpected, and a combination of absurdly disposable free time and a lack of gaming competition meant that our preadolescent selves poured countless hours into a single game in a desperate struggle to witness the ending.
Oh, how things have changed. Today, an amalgamation of tutorials and loading-screen hints have made approaching new games a far simpler and enjoyable task. While older generations molded us into sharp gaming machines wielding an insatiable appetite for completion, players today have potentially grown used to the simplicity of modern games. The difficulty that pushed our minds to breaking point, forcing us into magazines or conversations at school for any shred of guidance, has been replaced by friendly non-player characters and Internet FAQs, each giving us answers before we?ve even considered the questions.
I personally think there are two types of ?hard? in games. The normal hard, where you are defeated by an enemy or stare at a puzzle and think, ?I know I can do this, I just need to keep trying.? Then there is the other, rarer, and arguably worse type of hard, where you stare at the screen in disbelief and quietly think, ?I?ve broken the game somehow. It?s bugged and it?s impossible to progress. I need to restart.?
That second, horrifying form of hard was something I experienced roughly every hour in Super Metroid when I first played it.
Considering this annoyance, I must admit I genuinely appreciate any effort made to teach me in a game, and ideally, every game should take the time to make sure you understand as much as necessary before thrusting you into the main experience, such as the approach in the Legend of Zelda franchise. The exquisite balance of training and trials works well to never overwhelm the player while continually feeding them more information and powers.
The issue, however, is when games skew the balance too heavily toward assuring progress, smothering the wheels in numerous lubricants until you can slide through the whole experience before you?ve even had time to think ? the most intellectually stimulating section being the credits. This attitude has been born from necessity, as aging players have far less time to dedicate to games, but risks sacrificing the sense of achievement so many of us look forward to when overcoming severe obstacles.
While I can appreciate this trend toward more amicable games, I commend any title where the focus is to challenge the player, such as Dark Souls.
So to return to the question: Are modern games easier now or simply designed better? Or is there just more variety now?
Are these newer adventures really easier? Or has the design philosophy for video games improved instead?
The challenge in 8 and 16 bit titles regularly transcended normal difficulty whereas modern games simply require quick reactions to overcome a boss or room full of foes. In these games, beating a boss was tough, sure, but actually understanding how to progress was regularly far harder, demanding bizarre experimentation, not to mention the possibility of a game over forcing you to restart.
In years past, we were conditioned to expect the unexpected, and a combination of absurdly disposable free time and a lack of gaming competition meant that our preadolescent selves poured countless hours into a single game in a desperate struggle to witness the ending.
Oh, how things have changed. Today, an amalgamation of tutorials and loading-screen hints have made approaching new games a far simpler and enjoyable task. While older generations molded us into sharp gaming machines wielding an insatiable appetite for completion, players today have potentially grown used to the simplicity of modern games. The difficulty that pushed our minds to breaking point, forcing us into magazines or conversations at school for any shred of guidance, has been replaced by friendly non-player characters and Internet FAQs, each giving us answers before we?ve even considered the questions.
I personally think there are two types of ?hard? in games. The normal hard, where you are defeated by an enemy or stare at a puzzle and think, ?I know I can do this, I just need to keep trying.? Then there is the other, rarer, and arguably worse type of hard, where you stare at the screen in disbelief and quietly think, ?I?ve broken the game somehow. It?s bugged and it?s impossible to progress. I need to restart.?
That second, horrifying form of hard was something I experienced roughly every hour in Super Metroid when I first played it.
Considering this annoyance, I must admit I genuinely appreciate any effort made to teach me in a game, and ideally, every game should take the time to make sure you understand as much as necessary before thrusting you into the main experience, such as the approach in the Legend of Zelda franchise. The exquisite balance of training and trials works well to never overwhelm the player while continually feeding them more information and powers.
The issue, however, is when games skew the balance too heavily toward assuring progress, smothering the wheels in numerous lubricants until you can slide through the whole experience before you?ve even had time to think ? the most intellectually stimulating section being the credits. This attitude has been born from necessity, as aging players have far less time to dedicate to games, but risks sacrificing the sense of achievement so many of us look forward to when overcoming severe obstacles.
While I can appreciate this trend toward more amicable games, I commend any title where the focus is to challenge the player, such as Dark Souls.
So to return to the question: Are modern games easier now or simply designed better? Or is there just more variety now?
