Bethesda: Games Can Always Be Easier

Keane Ng

New member
Sep 11, 2008
5,892
0
0
Bethesda: Games Can Always Be Easier



Bethesda's Brett Douville has outlined a few key goals to keep in mind when it comes to managing difficulty in mainstream games. The bottom line? Games can always be easier.

The unfortunate truth these days is that unless you're making Ninja Gaiden or something, if you want your game to hit it big, you're more than likely going to have to make it relatively easy to beat. Nevermind the "back in my day shields never regenerated!" hollering of the crotchety hardcore bunch, games need to be playable in order to be consumed and enjoyed by the mass market.

Which brings in the matter of the balancing act between making a game easy enough to be beatable but challenging enough to be fun. Bethesda's Brett Douville, inspired by a playthrough of the atrociously balanced Buffy game on Xbox, has offered his set of solutions [http://www.gamasutra.com/php-bin/news_index.php?story=22313], and he seems to be suggesting that games - at least, the ones that aren't Ninja Gaiden - should usually be easier before anything else.

"Your easiest setting should basically be 'push button, win game,'" Douville offered. "You will think that it can't be made easier, that there are no wall missions. You will be wrong. Make it easier. Give them an out."

Douville's main point seems to be that a game should always give its players as many options as possible to beat it, and to be generous with its help. No hiding potions in dark corners, don't be afraid to offer hints (he even says he admired Perfect Dark Zero's gigantic arrows pointing players where to go), make it easy to change difficulty settings, and adjust to the player.

"Push button, win game?" I'm sure a lot of people are going to say that this is exactly what's wrong with the games being made today. But really, Douville seems to be more than aware of this reaction and wants to be clear that he's speaking primarily about mainstream single-player action games. The hardcore can keep their atrociously difficult [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Nb5Ohbt1Sg] bullet hell shooters, everyone else should be getting a break.

"Difficulty often breeds frustration, particularly in the narrative-plus-action games that licenses lend themselves to," Douville said. "Give your players a break... and they'll come back."


Permalink
 

kawligia

New member
Feb 24, 2009
779
0
0
My God, Bethesda's games are already too easy. Maybe you can use the sliders to make the combat slightly more difficult, but solving their puzzles requires little more than consciousness.
 

Abedeus

New member
Sep 14, 2008
7,412
0
0
kawligia said:
My God, Bethesda's games are already too easy. Maybe you can use the sliders to make the combat slightly more difficult, but solving their puzzles requires little more than consciousness.
True.

Although I do hate games where I have no challenge. Just as Ninja Gaiden 2 frustrated me and challenged me well beyond what I expected, Prince of Persia gave me NO challenge. I don't find PRESS X NOT TO DIE fun.
 

Keane Ng

New member
Sep 11, 2008
5,892
0
0
kawligia said:
My God, Bethesda's games are already too easy. Maybe you can use the sliders to make the combat slightly more difficult, but solving their puzzles requires little more than consciousness.
Remember the freaking puzzle to get the "Good" solution to the Leave it to Beaver part of Fallout 3? Ughhhhhh.
 

thenumberthirteen

Unlucky for some
Dec 19, 2007
4,794
0
0
I think his point is that games should have a variable difficulty, starting with "push button, win game", and working upwards. That way everyone is satisfied.
 

ThaBenMan

Mandalorian Buddha
Mar 6, 2008
3,682
0
0
MaxTheReaper said:
HOLY SHIT I THINK HE'S ON TO SOMETHING
But let's take this further, guys.
What about a game that plays the game for you!
Brilliance, no?!
I think this could be big.
They already have them. They're called movies.

I don't see any problem as long as there are options - let them set it to be extremely easy or retardedly hard, and at least a couple places in between. And on-the-fly adjustments are always a good thing.
 

karmapolizei

New member
Sep 26, 2008
244
0
0
Design your game properly, and people will beat it. Do I need to utter the two magical words "Valve games"?
speaking of which, Portal was ridiculously easy and still a lot of fun. And you could solve many puzzles in different ways. I only found out today that after you first encountered the rocket turret, you don't have to stack chair on top of each other to reach an airduct - you can just blow up something else to get a cube. Judging by the dev commentary that clued me to this, that's probably the way they intended it - and I did it completely different with hardly any problem at all. THAT'S the way a game should be designed.
 

BoredKellon

New member
Jan 11, 2008
47
0
0
Yes, games need to be easier, but they also need to be harder. Every game should have a difficulty level that anyone and their hamster can beat, and a difficulty level that only the absolute best gamers could beat, you know something as hard as or harder then SLASO in Halo 3. Basically give us more choice as to the difficulty of the game we are playing, I don't want a game that my friend can't come over and play because he isn't an amazing gamer, but I also don't want a game where I can beat the hardest difficulty on my first run through without much trouble.

Also, side note, having to unlock harder difficulties sucks, it's one of the most annoying crutches of the video game industry and is far worse then quick time events will ever be imo.
 

Anton P. Nym

New member
Sep 18, 2007
2,611
0
0
BoredKellon said:
Yes, games need to be easier, but they also need to be harder. Every game should have a difficulty level that anyone and their hamster can beat, and a difficulty level that only the absolute best gamers could beat, you know something as hard as or harder then SLASO in Halo 3.
Just to clarify for those who don't play, "SLASO" is shorthand for "Solo, Legendary, All Skulls On". Halo 3 has "Legendary" as its highest level of difficulty, and the game has skull tokens hidden in the maps that, once found, can be used to change game properties... most skulls make the game harder. (For instance, the "Black Eye" skull turns off the regenerating health... you can only recover small portions of health by punching an opponent.)

-- Steve
 

LifeSarcastic

New member
Feb 25, 2009
72
0
0
MaxTheReaper said:
HOLY SHIT I THINK HE'S ON TO SOMETHING
But let's take this further, guys.
What about a game that plays the game for you!
Brilliance, no?!
I think this could be big.
I'm sorry but Nintendo already is planning that (I'm not kidding.) This is what makes me mad about new games. I don't want to play a game that is on a constant sadistic difficulty level but if all I have to do is be conscious to beat a game...I might as well watch a movie.
 

Ionami

New member
Aug 21, 2008
705
0
0
What's wrong with making different levels of difficulty? If a player picks the "Very Easy" setting... it should be JUST EXACTLY THAT. If a player picks the "HOLY EFF MY BALLS HARD" setting, well... then holy eff my balls hard it should be.

People usually like options, give people the option to change things, and you can appeal to lots of different folks, without losing much or anything from the game. Those who like it the way it is can keep it that way, but by providing the choice, those who DON'T like it, can always change it to their liking.
 

Sixties Spidey

Elite Member
Jan 24, 2008
3,299
0
41
MaxTheReaper said:
HOLY SHIT I THINK HE'S ON TO SOMETHING
But let's take this further, guys.
What about a game that plays the game for you!
Brilliance, no?!
I think this could be big.
Yes! It could be as brilliant as Sonic the Hedgehog 2006! Oh wait. No it won't. That game was a pile of shit, on a pile of crap, on a pile of vomit, on a pile Sonic Team's wank.
 

not4prophet

New member
Feb 24, 2009
22
0
0
The problem here is that many developers will make variable difficulties pertaining to combat only. Puzzles and platforming aspects of an adventure game rarely get actually changed for difficulty purposes, as it would require restructuring of the level. It's a shame because you end up with a game that has hard combat but ridiculously easy dialogue/physics puzzles. Never mind what I said about platforming though, hard platforming in 3d games is so frustrating.
 

level250geek

New member
Jan 8, 2009
184
0
0
I think it would do everybody good to not take what this guy said literally. I don't think he actually meant giving the players an "I Win" button. I think he meant NOT giving the AI an "I Win" button.

My thoughts on game difficulty are this: I paid for the game. I deserve to see the end. I should have the option to see the end. End of discussion. Yes, games should be challenging and rewarding. Yes, there are a good number of people that expect to be given victory on a silver platter. No, I should not be lose my sanity over adapting to somebody else's definition of "average skill."

Give me options, give me balance, and don't call yourself hardcore if you are going to complain about how cheesy Seth is.