Are Video Games getting easier?
- Thread starter fluffy chicken 2
- Start date
Recommended Videos
It's a really difficult thing to generalize about. I think that what we need to take into account are three things:
1.) Many mainstream titles offer multiple difficulties to allow newcomers to feel welcome but allow Veterans (see what I did there?) to get a challenge.
2.) Even on higher difficulties, games are seen in a different light as they were when Pacman was released. For something like Gears of War, beating the campaign isn't impossible: sure, it's difficult, but it has a clear end, and a clear set of goals. Meanwhile, Pacman, with no goals and no end, seems like an insurmountable challenge. (Unless you break the game.)
3.) Many developers are much less focused on keeping the game challenging in favor of other elements: powerful storytelling, engaging gameplay, et cetera. And personally, I'm okay with that.
/WallOfText
1.) Many mainstream titles offer multiple difficulties to allow newcomers to feel welcome but allow Veterans (see what I did there?) to get a challenge.
2.) Even on higher difficulties, games are seen in a different light as they were when Pacman was released. For something like Gears of War, beating the campaign isn't impossible: sure, it's difficult, but it has a clear end, and a clear set of goals. Meanwhile, Pacman, with no goals and no end, seems like an insurmountable challenge. (Unless you break the game.)
3.) Many developers are much less focused on keeping the game challenging in favor of other elements: powerful storytelling, engaging gameplay, et cetera. And personally, I'm okay with that.
/WallOfText
And they're being made to be easier so more people buy them. It's fair enough when games are costing more and more to make, but games like Demon's Souls have demonstrated that making a truly hardcore game can be successful and have some kind of mainstream appeal.Eliam_Dar said:
Some games don't need to be hard, as that can detract from the fun. For instance, Just Cause 2 would suck if it was too hard, you don't want to be worrying about your health while trying to pull off some crazy stunt.
In short, the difficulty should be tailored to the type of game. If it's going for a realistic and atmospheric feel, then making it hard can add to the atmosphere (hence I'm looking forward to realism mode in Fallout: New Vegas). If it's a light-hearted sandbox, the difficulty should be eased off.
I have to say that it does seem to be the case. I'm not able to game often so my skills aren't what they once were, and of late, every game I bought I seemed to be able to finish in virtually no time. Regardless of the setting I used, they don't seem terribly challenging.
Definately this.Eliam_Dar said:
I find myself cranking the difficulty up to the highest or second highest right off the bat. Heck, I'm starting to feel ME2 is getting a bit easy on Hardcore mode.
I was actually just discussing that the other day with a friend. And they also contained some sweet background info. Sigh. Where are the good ol' days gone?DarkDain said:
Yep. The hardest new games I've played are released by the indie developers because, I suppose they don't need to mass market their games to the public like the huge super-conglomerates do.
Play Mount & Blade without cheating and see how good it feels just to be able to beat some Sea Raiders after 3 days of playing
Play Mount & Blade without cheating and see how good it feels just to be able to beat some Sea Raiders after 3 days of playing
Modern games can seem easier mainly becasue they are less keen on cheating to kill you in genres where you can easilly notice it.
They used to get away with it as it was less noticiable.
The regen health issue isnt as cut and dried as many claim. Most games used to have health packs, what they mainly do if done right is cut out the anyoing searching for health packs. I favour a a hybred where small amounts of damage can be re-gened but larger amounts require healthpacks.
The main difference is games no longer feel the need to make everyone play at a certain base difficulty or higher to cover the lack of content.
They used to get away with it as it was less noticiable.
The regen health issue isnt as cut and dried as many claim. Most games used to have health packs, what they mainly do if done right is cut out the anyoing searching for health packs. I favour a a hybred where small amounts of damage can be re-gened but larger amounts require healthpacks.
The main difference is games no longer feel the need to make everyone play at a certain base difficulty or higher to cover the lack of content.
Man...I really..really...like your avatar (whycantibelinus). Just wanted to say that.whycantibelinus said:
As for the topic: depends on the game and on the difficulty setting. Play Ninja Gaiden on maximum setting and then come back. But the general trend is indeed one of more "accessability". I mean if Nintendo is planning to introduce a "tutorial system" in their games..which essentially makes the game play itself...then we've come a long way since, say, the first Castlevania on the Nes.
I Wanna Be The Guy was released in 2007. Gamings difficulty curve peaked there. The game's a free download. Then again you'll probably yell and break your computer before getting to the second boss.
I beg to differ,games have gotten much more complex,and ergo harder.
Instead of having to master timing,2 dimensions and solely scripted enemies, we now have to be able to deal with an extra dimension,almost unpredictable human behavior when playing on the internet,AI on enemies and having them running back and forth shooting every x seconds,and loads of other things.
I mean,when playing Space Invaders,did you really ask yourself:"Is the cover I'm hiding behind solid enough,or will bullets go right through and hurt me?"
No.Now you do.
Instead of having to master timing,2 dimensions and solely scripted enemies, we now have to be able to deal with an extra dimension,almost unpredictable human behavior when playing on the internet,AI on enemies and having them running back and forth shooting every x seconds,and loads of other things.
I mean,when playing Space Invaders,did you really ask yourself:"Is the cover I'm hiding behind solid enough,or will bullets go right through and hurt me?"
No.Now you do.
I dare you to find someone who's completed "Tetris".
In answer to the original poster though: yes, games are getting easier, and this is a GOOD THING. I'm playing GTA3 on my PC. This game came out years ago, and the most irritating thing about it is the lack of quicksave key. Why force repetition on us? Why do I have to go back to my safe-house after every single damn mission to save my game, instead of getting on with something I actually enjoy doing, like the NEXT damn mission? Why, when it's so easy to flip a car by accident and doing so loses you the entire mission, do I have to perform all the multiple car-theft missions in one go? What's the damn point?
Compare that to a game I recently finished, "Fallout 3", also for the PC. You can save and quick-save as much as you damn well please. I don't have to keep going back to my house every time I want to save. If I did have to do that, I would have given up. Now structurally those two games are not that different - sure, they look and feel very different, but they're both huge sandbox games with structured missions.
Games are getting easier because technical advances means that a lot of the old "artificial difficulties" are being phased out - and those are some of the things I most hated about games years ago. So yeah, let's keep the games industry, at least in this respect, doing exactly what it's doing!
In answer to the original poster though: yes, games are getting easier, and this is a GOOD THING. I'm playing GTA3 on my PC. This game came out years ago, and the most irritating thing about it is the lack of quicksave key. Why force repetition on us? Why do I have to go back to my safe-house after every single damn mission to save my game, instead of getting on with something I actually enjoy doing, like the NEXT damn mission? Why, when it's so easy to flip a car by accident and doing so loses you the entire mission, do I have to perform all the multiple car-theft missions in one go? What's the damn point?
Compare that to a game I recently finished, "Fallout 3", also for the PC. You can save and quick-save as much as you damn well please. I don't have to keep going back to my house every time I want to save. If I did have to do that, I would have given up. Now structurally those two games are not that different - sure, they look and feel very different, but they're both huge sandbox games with structured missions.
Games are getting easier because technical advances means that a lot of the old "artificial difficulties" are being phased out - and those are some of the things I most hated about games years ago. So yeah, let's keep the games industry, at least in this respect, doing exactly what it's doing!
EXACTLY! I agree with this guy. (Chicago Ted). He knows what he's talking about. So do I, except I can't put it half as succinctly as he can.Chicago Ted said: