I usually play on easy unless there is incentive to play on higher difficulties. Challenge for the sake of challenge is not good enough for me, I need phat lewtz.
I ALWAYS play games on the 'easy' setting.....
- Thread starter Beach_Sided
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Most games I play on normal or easy (usually normal). However when I first got Fallout 3 I didn't even think twice, on a dare from a friend I played through the entire thing on Very Hard. My friend thought my numerous deaths were hilarious, my other friends thought I was masochistic. After a while you get used to the difficulty, and you learn that Super Mutant Behemoths are just like walking towers of death (another condition was that I couldn't use rare weapons, or the Fat Man, that made my first encounter with a behemoth... interesting). Now that I think about it I probably should have recorded that so I could relive all of the fun moments I had dying.
Easy-man here myself. I see games as an interactive story, rather then a time-consuming challenge. The better the story, the easier my gamemode. Logically enough games lacking a detailed story are usually ones i do play on hard like Unreal, Quake or Doom; arcade games like Time Crisis(with guns) and old skool console platformers/fighting games like Revenge of Shinobi or Soul Calibur.
I used to play at easy all the time...
... until the day I turned awesome.
Nowadays I play on normal, easy became too easy for me. Although sometimes it's annoying when the game gets too hard to proceed and you wish you can change the difficulty setting. Although completing it afterwards makes me feel much more satisfied.
For games like COD I play on the hardest difficulty setting, the regenerating health just makes the game piss easy.
For games like Thief on the other hand now, it has tremendous replay value, since the higher the difficulty the more areas are unlocked, in some levels anyways. And the objectives get harder (Instead of 'Get the Diamond' it's now 'Get the diamond, escape, and do not kill anyone while you are at it. Get 500 Gems as well, and all the while grab the trophy from the king's quarters which you unlock after defeating the hard difficulty only 'shadow-warrior' and using it's soul to light the unlit torch.) For games like Thief I play on 'easy' and then rise up each time I play.
... until the day I turned awesome.
Nowadays I play on normal, easy became too easy for me. Although sometimes it's annoying when the game gets too hard to proceed and you wish you can change the difficulty setting. Although completing it afterwards makes me feel much more satisfied.
For games like COD I play on the hardest difficulty setting, the regenerating health just makes the game piss easy.
For games like Thief on the other hand now, it has tremendous replay value, since the higher the difficulty the more areas are unlocked, in some levels anyways. And the objectives get harder (Instead of 'Get the Diamond' it's now 'Get the diamond, escape, and do not kill anyone while you are at it. Get 500 Gems as well, and all the while grab the trophy from the king's quarters which you unlock after defeating the hard difficulty only 'shadow-warrior' and using it's soul to light the unlit torch.) For games like Thief I play on 'easy' and then rise up each time I play.
It depends on what the setting actual does to the game. Some easy modes actually cut content or change level design, drastically altering the gameplay experience.
On the other end of the spectrum, some hard difficulty settings are just essentially lazy ways of lengthening gameplay. For example, all most hard settings do in most FPS' is increase the enemy health, decrease the damage you deal, and increase the damage they deal. That's not making the game more challenging, just more annoying. Now instead of my headshots killing somebody I have to sit there repeatedly emptying clips into their head, and the game takes forever.
I like the RES EVIL 4 approach, where you actually find less ammo and health - that is a way of making the game actually more challenging and forces you to become a better player by not wasting as much ammo, and really learning how to evade enemies.
Most games though I just play on Normal as that is what the game was intended to be played on. If the Hard setting is actually worth playing and isn't just annoying, then I will give it a go.
On the other end of the spectrum, some hard difficulty settings are just essentially lazy ways of lengthening gameplay. For example, all most hard settings do in most FPS' is increase the enemy health, decrease the damage you deal, and increase the damage they deal. That's not making the game more challenging, just more annoying. Now instead of my headshots killing somebody I have to sit there repeatedly emptying clips into their head, and the game takes forever.
I like the RES EVIL 4 approach, where you actually find less ammo and health - that is a way of making the game actually more challenging and forces you to become a better player by not wasting as much ammo, and really learning how to evade enemies.
Most games though I just play on Normal as that is what the game was intended to be played on. If the Hard setting is actually worth playing and isn't just annoying, then I will give it a go.
I've made it a point to play all of my games at max difficulty from now on. The more you challenge yourself, the better of a gamer you become, and the easier of a time you have quickly adapting to whatever the games throw at you (and kicking everyone's ass online).
Course, there is the small problem that games are getting to be too easy so hard = normal now
.
Course, there is the small problem that games are getting to be too easy so hard = normal now
.
I kinda randomly decide over easy/normal
If I like the game A LOT I will go up the ladder. Like beating Crysis warhead on Delta. Which was oddly... FUN!
Although standard crysis on Hard was just a PITA.
I also play SW battlefront 2 on elite sometimes, If I want a serious fire-storm and a lot of sneaking.
If I like the game A LOT I will go up the ladder. Like beating Crysis warhead on Delta. Which was oddly... FUN!
Although standard crysis on Hard was just a PITA.
I also play SW battlefront 2 on elite sometimes, If I want a serious fire-storm and a lot of sneaking.
Why waste time fighting the inexplicably mortality-challenged enemies if you can experience the exact same story AND actually have fun? If there's no game-changing penalty for choosing the easy difficulty, easy it is.
Higher difficulties do not add challenge, unless they change actual game mechanics (such as friendly fire). Higher difficulties add enemies that are sponges, but you have to fight them with water and you are allergic to both sponges AND water. Higher "combat" difficulty only adds reloading time, reloading time adds frustration, frustration adds anger... Where's the fun in that? Especially if there are cutscenes before big fights. Let's just skip the middleman and enjoy the game in its purest form, undiluted by fake difficulty.
On the other hand, if the game has a separate "puzzle" difficulty slider (e.g. System Shock, the Silent Hill series), I prefer it maxed out. Silent Hill 3 has some delightful puzzles on max difficulty, such as the Shakespeare's Tragedies in the book store. Also, with the notable exception in the Towers of Hanoi, you can't really pointlessly bloat a puzzle with redundant faffing about.
Higher difficulties do not add challenge, unless they change actual game mechanics (such as friendly fire). Higher difficulties add enemies that are sponges, but you have to fight them with water and you are allergic to both sponges AND water. Higher "combat" difficulty only adds reloading time, reloading time adds frustration, frustration adds anger... Where's the fun in that? Especially if there are cutscenes before big fights. Let's just skip the middleman and enjoy the game in its purest form, undiluted by fake difficulty.
On the other hand, if the game has a separate "puzzle" difficulty slider (e.g. System Shock, the Silent Hill series), I prefer it maxed out. Silent Hill 3 has some delightful puzzles on max difficulty, such as the Shakespeare's Tragedies in the book store. Also, with the notable exception in the Towers of Hanoi, you can't really pointlessly bloat a puzzle with redundant faffing about.
I always go with Medium/Normal/Average first, but if I find it too difficult I'm not adverse to pulling it down a notch because often the WAY in which the game is difficult can be a dealbreaker for me, like enemies who take a million bullets to the unguarded face and shrug it off.
I maintain to anyone who cares to listen that games should have two difficulty sliders, one scaling damage done to enemies by your weapons, and one damage done to you by theirs.
I maintain to anyone who cares to listen that games should have two difficulty sliders, one scaling damage done to enemies by your weapons, and one damage done to you by theirs.
I always play games on the default setting which is usually normal though some games classify it as easy.
I'm not ashamed, I would rather play through a game and enjoy it for its characters, story, environments then to struggle straight away.
I'm quite into replaying my games and that's when I crank the settings up.
I'm not ashamed, I would rather play through a game and enjoy it for its characters, story, environments then to struggle straight away.
I'm quite into replaying my games and that's when I crank the settings up.
i usually play on normal because i dont like the cheap A.I that you get when you change to a hard difficulty rather than one that is smarter, however i do love a challenging game because of the sense of achievement you get when you get past a particularity difficult bit
What do you do in online multiplayer games then?Beach_Sided said:
Games need some challenge otherwise they get boring, I normally set the game as high as I can without constantly dying, though 2nd play-throughs I will often max out difficulty even if I suck and die all the time... I like the sense of achievement completing on high difficulty
I don't know any game that increases reloading time with difficulty. Maybe it just seems to take longer because the enemies are putting on so much more pressure.Coldie said:
Most games follow COD's template there enemies are:
-More aggressive
-fire more often
-are more accurate
-move or stay in cover more so they are harder to hit
-increased number or concentrations of enemies
But they don't become bullet sponges. Same number of bullets to kill.
But you become LESS of a bullet sponge, you can take less bullets before you keel over and health regeneration (by health packs or time) take longer.
This is much LESS fake, it is the easier settings that are more unlikely with AI made DELIBERATELY slower and less responsive so the player can survive at all. On highest difficulty settings, one or two rifle bullets in the chest and you are dead.
Playing through Killzone 2 on easiest settings DOES affect my experience of the story, which goes beyond the cutscenes and into the character of every moment you are on Helghan. And on easiest setting the Helghast are just too wimpy and dopey, far too easy to just run up to them while they are cowering in cover and stab em in the neck. I am supposed to be the underdog, fighting against odds against the terrifying Helghast... not easily wiping the floor with them.