Do we need "easy mode" any more?

[Talvrae]

I play lot of video games... but i'm not into it as much as other, easy mode is usually the mode i play that's just the way i play it is required

 

[auron200004]

I would be quite upset if there was no such thing as easy mode any more. Certain games that I'm not used to require me to start on easy mode, to get used to controls, enemies, etc.

To give an example, I recently played my first Metal Gear game ever, Metal Gear Solid 2 (I watched a let's play of the first one, so I wasn't entirely lost plot-wise). I started on Normal because I was trying to act tough. Unfortunately, the Metal Gear Solid games' controls are so different from any other games that I had to stop that playthrough and switch to easy because I was getting my ass handed to me due to my lack of knowledge of just about everything.

So no, I don't think the easy difficulty should be removed. Because you can never know when somebody new will start up the game and get destroyed due to lack of knowledge.

That being said, I have no problem with games that lack difficulty levels at all. Usually those games are designed in such a way as to be easy to pick up but difficult to master. That's fine.

 

[kasperbbs]

"I suppose it's good for first-time gamers who are new to the medium and need things to go at a more manageable pace to help people get used to things and feel like they're achieving something which will push them to maybe try out the harder modes later on when they feel comfortable."

You answered your own question. First time i tried a PC game i sucked at it, i tried playing CS 1.5 with arrow keys, so basically this mode is for newbies or people who just want to breeze through the game with minimum effort without sitting behind cover for 5 minutes or searching every corner of the map for health potions.

 

[applesandoranges]

edit

 

[newdarkcloud]

Yes. It's worth noting that not all gamers are as skilled as you or I. To newcomers, even normal can be intimidating.

 

[sunsetspawn]

I don't see any good reason to remove the easy difficulty setting.

I play on the highest difficulty setting and turn it down if needed, in case anyones wondering.

This, but I'm not quite this cool. I tend to play games on the second hardest difficulty, unless there are only three, in which case I play on hard. The "nightmare" settings are always just a hair into frustrating territory, though I do play them if I go for a second playthrough.

As for easy, yes, there needs to be easy and there also needs to be a level below easy titled "for retards," because there are people out there that genuinely stink at games.

 

[Something Amyss]

Surely if you're new to gaming then a fair difficulty curve alongside a decent demonstration of core mechanics (see: EgoRaptor's "Megaman X VS Classic Megaman Sequalitis" for how this can be accomplished) would mean that we don't need the "easy" mode even for people new to gaming.

I think even EgoRaptor would agree that such games are not exactly a normal occurrence. As such, it's kind of ridiculous to say that this negates the need for easy mode for newbs.

But mostly, I'm just wondering what's so bad about a completely optional mode aimed at groups who are not you?

 

[Barry93]

You need an easy mode for people that have fun by feeling like a god and plowing through enemies without a challenge and to see the story. It's also needed for people that are new to games that still look down at their controller to see where the buttons are.

I think there needs to be a new difficulty beyond hard or very hard. I haven't bought any console games in a while besides KoA because even on the hardest difficulty, I usually beat them in less than 12 hours.

I have no problem with people playing on the easiest difficulty. But I remember back when I used to play on easy and use cheat codes, it pretty much ruined the experience for me.

 

[everythingbeeps]

Of course easy mode serves a purpose. Plenty of gamers aren't interested in the challenge. Try not thinking only of yourself for once.

 

[gmaverick019_v1legacy]

The more options the better. It gives more player control and customisation.
Unless the game is one designed around its difficulty (i.e. Dark/Demon's Souls, etc) I don't see a reason not to have one.

basically this, not to mention sometimes depending on your flavor of game, there can be ONE mechanic that annoys the piss out of you/breaks the gameplay for you if you are playing at a higher level. So if they take it out/nerf it on "easy mode", thus, making the game enjoyable and a solid purchase for you.

i tend to play nearly every game i own on normal and/or easy mode. why? when i'm playing the computer, i could care less about the challenge, i'm just having fun playing the game, if i'm looking to frustrate myself and cause a hernia, i'll go play multiplayer or crank that shit up to the high heavens of difficulty, which that option is USUALLY there.

 

[THeFraz]

When I have children, I am not going to let them play on easy. I will choose the most difficult options for them so they grow up to be Super Gamers. If we have enough people do this, we can have a master race of video game players.

 

[StBishop]

Yes we need it. You might not, but as a community, yes, we need it.

Plenty of people I know don't have time to play games for 50+ hours. My brother only plays games in 4-5 hour bursts once a month or so when all of his family are busy with other stuff. He spends all of the time he's not at work or studying being a family man and I can fully understand why sometimes he doesn't want a game to ***** slap him for not grinding for the last week.

I also like to be able to make the game harder. I wish the assassin's creed series had a difficulty setting so I could turn it up, without easy, there can be no hard.

I also like that when I'm bad at a game, I can still finish it. I'll know I'm not as good as other people who played it one hard, but I still get the full experience of the game I paid for.

 

[OldDirtyCrusty]

There are enough reasons for an easy mode.
the game is a rental - you want to see/play most of it since you have no interest in buying.
the genre is new to you - Youre just starting to learn the controls and game mechanics.
you`re new to gaming or just switched platform - see above
you just want to give`em a hard time or have fun - you just barely made it on the hardest difficulty playthrough.
Those are pretty much my reasons for a easy mode.

 

[k-ossuburb]

PIGEONS!

I get what you are saying but I do not agree that it is a worthwhile way to do it.

There will be gamers who will resent the handholding at the beginning of the game and others who will not not be able to crest the difficulty curve at the top and resent not being able to finish the game. In other words the current system works just fine. Why break it by trying to fix it? Why are having options to set difficulty apparently a bad thing? You say you do not have a problem with them but you are arguing against the need for them. They may not be needed but they make the playing experience better for those both t the upper and lower end of the skill spectrum.

Discuss.

That's the thing, we've got the technology now to deal with that sort of thing. If someone is having trouble with a certain part then the game could stealthily dumb down the AI for a moment or make any attack from an enemy hurt less, the moment they start doing well again, the challenge ramps itself up (again, without letting the player know in any way) to keep things interesting.

Certain games lower the difficulty when a player dies a certain number of times, why not just implement a system like that that has a more active role in gameplay like The Binding Of Isaac changing which floor you go to depending on how well you did on the previous floor.


I honestly don't have a problem with difficulty settings, I think they're fine and they've done well as a standard for a very long time, I'm just saying that now there are ways to think outside of the box and try to tackle this problem of challenge and difficulty in relation to player skill in more creative and innovative ways.

Surely re-invention of some of the old systems is a step in the right direction?

Some people seem to have gotten the wrong idea about this, I'm not some elitist twat who only plays on hard mode and thinks anyone else who plays easy games are pussies. I'm just questioning a standard mechanic in gaming which a lot of people don't even think about and if there's any way we can improve upon it by implementing it in a more subtle fashion instead of literally choosing it directly from a menu.

Maybe a hybrid of systems that allows you to change difficulty in-game while maintaining that "invisible" difficulty changer AI I mentioned above alongside it to keep things interesting. If you'd prefer things stay at a single level throughout then there could easily be an option to turn it off as well.

 

[Chemical Alia]

I agree. If you don't use easy mode, we should probably just get rid of it altogether. There's a pretty good chance everyone else is exactly like you.

 

[DoPo]

Some people seem to have gotten the wrong idea about this, I'm not some elitist twat who only plays on hard mode and thinks anyone else who plays easy games are pussies.

Maybe you are not but you pretty much sounded like this when you said that easy setting doesn't give people a challenge, hence they wouldn't completely enjoy easy mode.

Maybe it's also good if you just want a quick, un-frustrating game to pass the time and just want to relax while you're waiting for something, but the challenge is part of the fun and a lot of gamers would have a lot more fun when the game isn't too easy, so why not just go for what you're used to and play on "normal" or "hard" instead?

Oh and then you followed that with a completely wild guess about the gamers (most play on normal) which, let's assume it's true, completely ignored the ones that do choose easy at first.

Why didn't you say that "hard" was undesirable? After all, the majority of gamers most likely play on "normal" first, so why do we need hard setting? Furthermore, with a flexible system which you suggested, it further means that "hard" etc, are unneeded. Why focus on "easy" alone?

 

[targren]

For me challenge isn't part of the fun, it's a replacement for the fun. Playing the same content over and over again, not getting to see cutscenes or new areas, or getting new abilities.. It spoils the flow and I don't care for it. There are games that offer challenge without falling into this trap though, Bayonetta and The Binding of Isaac being the best examples recently. Also if a game is singlemindedly focussed on challenge (ala Super Meat Boy) I can enjoy a lot more of this kind of thing. But in most games I want that easy mode there.

This. Too many people equate "challenge" with "enjoyment murdering difficulty" [footnote]That's not a dig at you, Rack! The industry's made that equation for decades.[/footnote]. If you have to play the same "pinhead-to-pinhead jumping" sequence 47 times because the controls are wobbly and the camera is positioned by a drunken hamster on meth, that's not "challenge." That's "your developers are bad and you should feel bad."

 

[jklinders]

PIGEONS!

I get what you are saying but I do not agree that it is a worthwhile way to do it.

There will be gamers who will resent the handholding at the beginning of the game and others who will not not be able to crest the difficulty curve at the top and resent not being able to finish the game. In other words the current system works just fine. Why break it by trying to fix it? Why are having options to set difficulty apparently a bad thing? You say you do not have a problem with them but you are arguing against the need for them. They may not be needed but they make the playing experience better for those both t the upper and lower end of the skill spectrum.

Discuss.

That's the thing, we've got the technology now to deal with that sort of thing. If someone is having trouble with a certain part then the game could stealthily dumb down the AI for a moment or make any attack from an enemy hurt less, the moment they start doing well again, the challenge ramps itself up (again, without letting the player know in any way) to keep things interesting.

Certain games lower the difficulty when a player dies a certain number of times, why not just implement a system like that that has a more active role in gameplay like The Binding Of Isaac changing which floor you go to depending on how well you did on the previous floor.


I honestly don't have a problem with difficulty settings, I think they're fine and they've done well as a standard for a very long time, I'm just saying that now there are ways to think outside of the box and try to tackle this problem of challenge and difficulty in relation to player skill in more creative and innovative ways.

Surely re-invention of some of the old systems is a step in the right direction?

Some people seem to have gotten the wrong idea about this, I'm not some elitist twat who only plays on hard mode and thinks anyone else who plays easy games are pussies. I'm just questioning a standard mechanic in gaming which a lot of people don't even think about and if there's any way we can improve upon it by implementing it in a more subtle fashion instead of literally choosing it directly from a menu.

Maybe a hybrid of systems that allows you to change difficulty in-game while maintaining that "invisible" difficulty changer AI I mentioned above alongside it to keep things interesting. If you'd prefer things stay at a single level throughout then there could easily be an option to turn it off as well.

That's an awful lot of additional coding and scripting you are asking the devs to do when there is a simpler and accessible system already available. It's simpler for little indie games to do what you say but when we are talking top shelf RPGs and action games it gets progressively or even exponentially more difficult.

I really don't see the need to add another 10.00 to the price of a game to fix something that is not broken. Chaos loves complicated things. This no more true than it is in computer programming. I can't even imagine the potential for bugs and dev time slow downs, budget overruns et al here. Let's not give them yet another excuse to move the price point please.

Edit:

You might be trying to say you are not being elitist (whatever the bugger all that means) and while I certainly never directly accused you of this, you set the tone in your first post by essentially asking those of us who have no aspirations to be professional gamers to justify using lower difficulties in the OP. My real problem is with making any system more complicated than it needs to be. Your system is very simple from an end user standpoint and if that was the only consideration then bravo good sir you are brilliant. But from an execution standpoint it is a potential nightmare. Let's look at all sides shall we?

 

[Snotnarok]

Besides Resident Evil the remake I can't recall the last game I played on easy. But even then others seem to consider that normal and hard not easy and normal. I feel more games need more difficulty variety, not just player takes more damage and gets less ammo. How about player fights more enemies and gets the same items, or a remix mode where enemies are in different spots in varying numbers.

I don't know I never understood easy mode, it's not been used around here

 

[In Search of Username]

I am not new to gaming, not even slightly. I have played games for years and years now, on a regular basis. Hasn't changed the fact I'm fucking terrible at them. It's only recently I've even had the confidence to start playing Normal mode at all, in anything. And I still went down to easy for Max Payne (because unless you're good you basically have to hide in cover constantly in that game outside of easy mode, and that's not how the game's meant to be played). So yeah, easy mode should stay, practice doesn't always make perfect and I would have given up on games a long time ago without it.