Poll: Too easy..

[Katana314]

New games seem pretty easy to me, but I think that's not too much of a problem.
Nevertheless, I would like to, more often, see some sort of challenge mode that either lets you play through the main game, or fight stacks of enemies or something, with a special twist. (IE, you can only take one hit) That way you'd have Resident Evil 4 be still fairly easy for everyone, but The Mercenaries as a great challenge for those looking for something more.

As long as among the easy games, there are still some dedicated challenge games (Crysis comes up; play on Realistic and DIE) then I don't see a big problem with it.

 

[xbeaker]

That is the point though. Take away the #1 thing that makes things so easy, and all the sudden the easy-modern-game becomes just as hard, if not harder then the old-school games. I'm not sure if the skull brings you to the save point or the beginning of the level actually. I just assumed it was the last checkpoint because that is how Halo 2 (Legendary) did it. That was actually how I came upon this idea. My friends were all complaining that they dumbed down Halo 3 based on the fact tat they could blaze through it on Legendary co-op. Then I pointed out the fact that a single death did not reset you and they all seemed to agree that was the cause of the ease of play. So we started this permanent death variant.

It really adds new dimension to the game. Every encounter is a tense fight with people calling out for ammo, taking cover, and calling out enemy locations. You don?t get that tension the first few games. It is only after the 2nd or 3rd death that the tragedy of death really hits home. Especially when you are a few chapters in. It isn't about finishing it, but about how far you can get before you die. It adds a lot of replay beyond the standard speed runs and such that always felt like work to me.

 

[xbeaker]

New games seem pretty easy to me, but I think that's not too much of a problem.
Nevertheless, I would like to, more often, see some sort of challenge mode that either lets you play through the main game, or fight stacks of enemies or something, with a special twist. (IE, you can only take one hit) That way you'd have Resident Evil 4 be still fairly easy for everyone, but The Mercenaries as a great challenge for those looking for something more.

As long as among the easy games, there are still some dedicated challenge games (Crysis comes up; play on Realistic and DIE) then I don't see a big problem with it.

Reminds me of Steel Battalion. When you were about to die, you had about 5 seconds to eject. If you did and you have enough money for a new mech, you could re-enter the battle. If you failed to eject, or were out of credits, it erased your save game.

 

[AK-00]

Honestly, I find it quite refreshing to stand some chance of seeing the end titles of a game without having to cheat my balls off. I know a lot of you derive some perverse pleasure from adroitly jumping through arbitrary hoops in order to make it to the next cut-scene, but, frankly, if I'm made to play through the same part of a game more than five times, I'll generally give up and look for something more entertaining to do, like punching myself in the face or pulling my hair 'til my scalp bleeds.

 

[xbeaker]

You miss the point of these hoops though. I am not going to make a game unnecessarily difficult for myself under normal circumstances. First I play through a game. If I make it to the end of the game and find I still want to play it then it sometimes makes it more fun on a second play though to set some personal (albeit arbitrary) condition to keep it interesting. Some games it could mean moving up to the next difficulty setting. Some games it means playing through start to finish with a friend in co-op. Some times it is to pick up a few achievements I missed the first time. But on occasion the harder difficulties are not really harder, there is no co-op (or I have already done standard co-op a few times). Sometimes you have start making a few house rules just to mix it up a bit.

But everyone?s mileage varies. I have a friend who always starts games on the hardest difficulty available (and bitches when hard, nightmare, or whatever is locked at first) because he likes his first play through to be as intense as possible. Then he goes through on subsequent plays on easy levels and just enjoys reliving the game by blazing through it, or attempts the ?break? it by doing the most insane things he can thing of. On the flip side one of the guys I work with immediately breaks out the Gameshark and starts by giving himself every weapon and turning on god-mode.

I think one of the great things about modern games is most of them allow for a wide range of play styles. The only down side is it takes away some of the accomplishment when you do beat the game if there are cheats, or it is too easy. Being the first to save the princess mean more when you really had to work for it.

 

[some random guy]

I'd say that games have generally become slightly easier but still at a decent difficulty level. I played super Mario bros 3 (GBA version) recently and there were sections where I was getting really frustrated with it. Compare this to your average FPS and you can see that games have become generally easier. I think it's because of the fact that video games have become more mainstream. Games nowadays are aimed at more casual gamers who want to have a good time, not necessarily challenge themselves. Because of this fact, games have been dumbed down slightly to fit with the skill level of your average gamer.

 

[Ranzel]

I'd say that games have generally become slightly easier but still at a decent difficulty level. I played super Mario bros 3 (GBA version) recently and there were sections where I was getting really frustrated with it. Compare this to your average FPS and you can see that games have become generally easier. I think it's because of the fact that video games have become more mainstream. Games nowadays are aimed at more casual gamers who want to have a good time, not necessarily challenge themselves. Because of this fact, games have been dumbed down slightly to fit with the skill level of your average gamer.

If thats the case, what was the logic in making the frustrating bits of Mario Bros 3, or any old game(anything before PS2) so frustrating, considering games weren't mainstream and for the most part people had LESS skill? Why would developers make games hard when no one played them? The games being hard just equals less people playing them.

If anything, things should be in reverse. Games should have started off mind-numbingly easy, and today the games should be mind-shatteringly hard.

 

[dnv2]

Ok, so it seems we have a lot of mixed opinions here.

I'm guessing that's something to do with the fact we seem to have a mix of 'Casual','Normal' and 'Elite' gamers, and I use all those terms loosely.

I myself like a bit of a challenge, as said by xbeaker I like to play a game through again usually on a harder difficulty to challenge myself a little more.
Everyone can say that games have got longer and that compensates for them being easier but IMO it really doesn't.

If a game is a easier, and lets say your a pretty good gamer who gets through most games without breaking much of a sweat then would'nt you just end up completing these longer games faster? So then you've basically spent money on a game that's damn easy but longer and finished it in a couple of weeks/days whatever. The amount of games that I've played this year that I finished within a couple of days/a week or so has been staggering, and when I'm paying £40 for some of these games I would'nt mind an option to play them again on a harder setting that at least gives me a challenge.

Gears of War was terrible for this, I paid £35 for it and the difference between difficulty was a cheap damage multiplier and then you could just duck out of the way after taking a shotgun blast to the head and be fine after a few seconds.

Ok so lets take it in a different direction, for anyone who likes the challenge element in their gaming post five games you think challenged you. They can be anything from old SNES games to newer stuff.

I'll start with.
1. DMC 3 (Had a few nice higher difficulty modes for you to play thorugh)
2. Stranglehold (Hard boiled mode is still pretty easy, but the one after is pretty intense)
3. Streets of Rage (Series in General on Harder modes)
4. Castlevania
5. Metal slug series (Using only the standard amount of continues, usually about 3 I think?)

 

[Sanguinans Sabulum]

My problem is that we haven't come any further with difficulties. Normal is the base line, easy is enemies do less damage/have less resources in RTS's, hard they do more or have more. There's nothing inventive about that and drives me incredibly mad when I see a game do it. How about a hard mode that makes the AI better, so that you actually have to think more and plan better? I mean, if we're using an FPS as an example, easy would mean enemies are prone to stand out in the open, and are not coordinated. Hard would be enemies constantly seek cover and support each other (they move to engage you, fire at different intervals, and support each other during advances). I'm sick and tired of games where the developers stick a couple more guys in a level and make them twice as strong and say, "lol my game requires so much strategery and is so hard"

 

[blockcity]

Ok so lets take it in a different direction, for anyone who likes the challenge element in their gaming post five games you think challenged you. They can be anything from old SNES games to newer stuff.
I'll start with.
1. DMC 3 (Had a few nice higher difficulty modes for you to play thorugh)
2. Stranglehold (Hard boiled mode is still pretty easy, but the one after is pretty intense)
3. Streets of Rage (Series in General on Harder modes)
4. Castlevania
5. Metal slug series (Using only the standard amount of continues, usually about 3 I think?)

1. Ninja Gaiden
2. Nethack
3. Ikaruga
4. Perfect Dark 64
5. Metroid (nes)

6. Pretty much all multiplayer games I've played competitively. Humans are still the best challenge.

 

[dnv2]

My problem is that we haven't come any further with difficulties. Normal is the base line, easy is enemies do less damage/have less resources in RTS's, hard they do more or have more. There's nothing inventive about that and drives me incredibly mad when I see a game do it. How about a hard mode that makes the AI better, so that you actually have to think more and plan better? I mean, if we're using an FPS as an example, easy would mean enemies are prone to stand out in the open, and are not coordinated. Hard would be enemies constantly seek cover and support each other (they move to engage you, fire at different intervals, and support each other during advances). I'm sick and tired of games where the developers stick a couple more guys in a level and make them twice as strong and say, "lol my game requires so much strategery and is so hard"

There are good examples of AI, though I do entirely agree with you that difficulty should be more about the thinking process rather than just giving enemies more of what they need to be 'Harder' so to speak.

 

[Kronopticon]

as long as its fun, i like a game, but from time to time, they present me with such a difficulty curve that i cant be arsed going over it again and again to get it perfect, to get to the next level, because that isnt fun, i do things that are fun to me, but when it becomes too difficult, i quit, because im not having fun, for games like devil may cry, extremely fun, but when you get to an extremely tedious section where your being timed while trying to kill so many monsters while trying to balance on a moving platform which you have to keep jumping off to stay fighting monsters, at that point, i get bored, and move on, i like finishing games, but if i cant have fun, the games have no point.

Although, i have been playing older and older games now, i even dug out my sega, thats right, i still got one, and, overall, the older games give you a greater challenge, but are more fun, to me at least, because you have less options, and you dont HAVE to think things through, its more of, get the timing right, and if you go this way, you cant do that any more, and if you collect this, you have a new function, but these days, with the modern games, there are so many functions that the possibilities are truly endless, which is a downside for me, cos i want dumb games, games that numb the brain and let you do stuff that you shouldnt be able to do, games that have real substance, and have real gameplay, which, i have to admit, halo 1 had these qualities, and i liked it, but since xbox live emerged, online play is so full of exploitational /b/tards, who want to "pwn n00bs" that no-one can have fun.

the fun in games, is lost to people who dont stop playing

 

[Katana314]

Crysis had some inventive forms of difficulty. On harder modes, your crosshair is taken away, and the foreign-soldier enemies stop speaking English.

 

[dnv2]

Crysis had some inventive forms of difficulty. On harder modes, your crosshair is taken away, and the foreign-soldier enemies stop speaking English.

That's pretty cool and other developers should take note of these kind of ways to make the games more challenging. It's not A.I but it's something different at least.

 

[xbeaker]

Ok so lets take it in a different direction, for anyone who likes the challenge element in their gaming post five games you think challenged you. They can be anything from old SNES games to newer stuff.

I'll start with.
1. DMC 3 (Had a few nice higher difficulty modes for you to play thorugh)
2. Stranglehold (Hard boiled mode is still pretty easy, but the one after is pretty intense)
3. Streets of Rage (Series in General on Harder modes)
4. Castlevania
5. Metal slug series (Using only the standard amount of continues, usually about 3 I think?)

1. Ghosts ?n Goblins? may be the hardest game ever. Made all the more frustrating because it rarely feels cheap
2. Castlevania (I?m with you on that one dnv2)
3. Ninja Gaiden (the first one)
4. Halo 2 ? Legendary ? Co-op
5. Gran Turismo ? license challenges.

But as I mentioned in a previous post (I think) what I really want to see is less of the difficulty be ramped up by making enemies harder to kill and more of it being more challenging due to changes in the level. Smarter AI would be great (though it is rare that even the best AIs are all that smart to begin with) Close off the obvious easy path and make the player take an alternate route through the level. Put items, weapons, and enemies in different locations. This goes for all games, not just FPSs. Racing games already do it with the better AI drivers (though some cheat and just add rubber band physics and challenger cars that far outclass yours) The Legend of Zelda series has been doing it since the first game with the alternate dungeons. With modern design tools it should be a simple matter to reconfigure levels slightly to change the challenge a bit.

 

[Force Feedback Codpiece]

Maybe a lot of them are relatively easy, but I don't see that as a bad thing. Many of us have lives and work to deal with, so we have less spare time. I don't know about you guys, but in this case, I like my games short. Some games take up so much time that it's almost impossible to continue, and thus ever finish the game (if you have a job). Take for example Company Of Heroes... that second Hill mission, where you have to defend the Hill and counter attack the Germans. That mission is ridiculously difficult especially because you're heavily outnumbered ~ 20 to 1, but it's also just not fun to play for points in that one mission. This results in my losing interest because I haven't advanced into that game for weeks, and every time I do try, I fail. And there's not even a "skip level" cheat (if there is, let me know).

Don't get me wrong, I prefer challenge in my games. But if anything prevents me from advancing into the game, be it bad gameplay design or bugs or whatever, I just want to uninstall that shit.

 

[xbeaker]

Don?t start the ?some of us have lives? crap. I have a more-then-full-time job. A life outside of work, and lots of other things that take up time. There is no reason to make games simple just so people who feel they don?t have a lot of time to play them can beat them fast. If your schedule limits your playtime, it is up to you to manage your gaming in a way that fits your life. Sorry, but that line of defense always irritates the hell out of me.

/rant off

If you are having a hard time with a game, or are not having fun with it: move on to something else. I have dropped plenty of games mid way through because something else has come along that I would rather play. I was maybe 1/3 of the way through Overlord when a few other things came out and I just never went back to it. That doesn?t mean it was too hard, or too long. It just means I wanted to play something else.

I think the main theme of this thread is the idea that games as a whole have gotten simplified, and there are people out there looking for more serious challenges. There are plenty of easier games. I am not referring to the ?causal? market either. I am going to assume anyone who is in this forum is more then just a causal player. There is no shame in playing a game on the easier settings. Most of the time when I talk to a friend who is stuck on some level because it is too hard, they are missing something that will get them by it. ?I can?t kill the snake boss at the end of the water level. He is just too damn strong.? ?You are using the crystal sword right? You know it takes him down in like 3 hits.? ?Oh.. no, I never picked it up.? Also, I find that when I am having a really hard time with a give level/boss/puzzle if I walk away for a while, like a day to a week, it is a lot easier when I come back. I spent 3 hours fighting Ares at the end of God of War and couldn?t get past the fight for my family. I went to bed frustrated, but the next day when I played I beat it all on the first try.

 

[Force Feedback Codpiece]

Don?t start the ?some of us have lives? crap. I have a more-then-full-time job. A life outside of work, and lots of other things that take up time. There is no reason to make games simple just so people who feel they don?t have a lot of time to play them can beat them fast. If your schedule limits your playtime, it is up to you to manage your gaming in a way that fits your life. Sorry, but that line of defense always irritates the hell out of me.

/rant off

If you are having a hard time with a game, or are not having fun with it: move on to something else. I have dropped plenty of games mid way through because something else has come along that I would rather play. I was maybe 1/3 of the way through Overlord when a few other things came out and I just never went back to it. That doesn?t mean it was too hard, or too long. It just means I wanted to play something else.

I think the main theme of this thread is the idea that games as a whole have gotten simplified, and there are people out there looking for more serious challenges. There are plenty of easier games. I am not referring to the ?causal? market either. I am going to assume anyone who is in this forum is more then just a causal player. There is no shame in playing a game on the easier settings. Most of the time when I talk to a friend who is stuck on some level because it is too hard, they are missing something that will get them by it. ?I can?t kill the snake boss at the end of the water level. He is just too damn strong.? ?You are using the crystal sword right? You know it takes him down in like 3 hits.? ?Oh.. no, I never picked it up.? Also, I find that when I am having a really hard time with a give level/boss/puzzle if I walk away for a while, like a day to a week, it is a lot easier when I come back. I spent 3 hours fighting Ares at the end of God of War and couldn?t get past the fight for my family. I went to bed frustrated, but the next day when I played I beat it all on the first try.

What's your problem dude? You're saying that you're really busy all the time, but apparantly you still find time to really sit down for a game. Because some games simply are like that; you really have to sit down and spend time with them. Company Of Heroes is one of those games. You can't just play a quick game of CoH, not the singleplayer campaign at least. Right now I'm playing through Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas, and even though that game is LONG and has tons of replay value, you can still complete a few missions in just an hour. You get that feeling of accomplishment and you didn't even have to sit down for hours planning out your strats or something.

Please don't look down on people who prefer those kinds of games. I could buy Silent Hunter IV now, undoubtedly a great game, but I'd need to put in a lot of time to get that feeling of accomplishment. I like challenge, but challenge can be found in games that require less time as well.

 

[xbeaker]

I?m not looking down on you. As I said in my above post. I really hate when people pull out the ?Well I have a life? line. It come across as very holier then thou. Which is to say, you looking down on the rest of us, because anyone who likes difficult games must be some loser with no life who sits in his mom?s basement and plays teh hardcorz gamez all day. Whether you intended that way of not, that is how it reads.

I have no problem with easier games, or the people who play them. I don?t exclusively play difficult, long term commitment games. In fact most of my posts in this thread have been about ways to add challenge to games if people are finding them too easy, and defending the modern games. I just wish they would change up how they are made more difficult some times. And I have no problem with you, in fact I find most of your posts to be very intelligent.

 

[dnv2]

Just out of curiosity which version of Castlevania are you playing xbeaker? I've only just recently tried it really through Xbox Live.