Easy wins

Recommended Videos

fedpayne

New member
Sep 4, 2008
904
0
0
Bionic_Fhtagn post=9.74539.838540 said:
fedpayne post=9.74539.838512 said:
Bionic_Fhtagn post=9.74539.838478 said:
I wonder if the games are getting easier or if I'm just getting better? Maybe it was a flaw due to the live system? I'd be interested to see how Half-Life 2 would play if you had a live system. And if you lost all of those lives you have to restart back at the beginning of the game. I need to talk to a modder now.
Surely a bad idea, because if you took away the save system, you'd have to play through it in one go, which is a no, and if people lost lives they could just reload.
Which, of course, was my point exactly. :)
...

Sorry, what is your point? That the thing that you suggested, that nobody else mentioned, while not neccesarily making the game itself harder, just meaning you would have to play it all in one go, which if anything would make it shorter, is a bad idea?

Valid man, valid.
 

Amnestic

High Priest of Haruhi
Aug 22, 2008
8,946
0
0
fedpayne post=9.74539.838576 said:
Bionic_Fhtagn post=9.74539.838540 said:
fedpayne post=9.74539.838512 said:
Bionic_Fhtagn post=9.74539.838478 said:
I wonder if the games are getting easier or if I'm just getting better? Maybe it was a flaw due to the live system? I'd be interested to see how Half-Life 2 would play if you had a live system. And if you lost all of those lives you have to restart back at the beginning of the game. I need to talk to a modder now.
Surely a bad idea, because if you took away the save system, you'd have to play through it in one go, which is a no, and if people lost lives they could just reload.
Which, of course, was my point exactly. :)
...

Sorry, what is your point? That the thing that you suggested, that nobody else mentioned, while not neccesarily making the game itself harder, just meaning you would have to play it all in one go, which if anything would make it shorter, is a bad idea?

Valid man, valid.
Have youngsters already forgotten that you can leave your consoles on when you're not playing them and come back to them later?

How times have changed.
 

fedpayne

New member
Sep 4, 2008
904
0
0
Amnestic post=9.74539.838589 said:
fedpayne post=9.74539.838576 said:
Bionic_Fhtagn post=9.74539.838540 said:
fedpayne post=9.74539.838512 said:
Bionic_Fhtagn post=9.74539.838478 said:
I wonder if the games are getting easier or if I'm just getting better? Maybe it was a flaw due to the live system? I'd be interested to see how Half-Life 2 would play if you had a live system. And if you lost all of those lives you have to restart back at the beginning of the game. I need to talk to a modder now.
Surely a bad idea, because if you took away the save system, you'd have to play through it in one go, which is a no, and if people lost lives they could just reload.
Which, of course, was my point exactly. :)
...

Sorry, what is your point? That the thing that you suggested, that nobody else mentioned, while not neccesarily making the game itself harder, just meaning you would have to play it all in one go, which if anything would make it shorter, is a bad idea?

Valid man, valid.
Have youngsters already forgotten that you can leave your consoles on when you're not playing them and come back to them later?

How times have changed.
I'm old enough to pay my own electricity bill...
 

Amnestic

High Priest of Haruhi
Aug 22, 2008
8,946
0
0
fedpayne post=9.74539.838614 said:
Amnestic post=9.74539.838589 said:
fedpayne post=9.74539.838576 said:
Bionic_Fhtagn post=9.74539.838540 said:
fedpayne post=9.74539.838512 said:
Bionic_Fhtagn post=9.74539.838478 said:
I wonder if the games are getting easier or if I'm just getting better? Maybe it was a flaw due to the live system? I'd be interested to see how Half-Life 2 would play if you had a live system. And if you lost all of those lives you have to restart back at the beginning of the game. I need to talk to a modder now.
Surely a bad idea, because if you took away the save system, you'd have to play through it in one go, which is a no, and if people lost lives they could just reload.
Which, of course, was my point exactly. :)
...

Sorry, what is your point? That the thing that you suggested, that nobody else mentioned, while not neccesarily making the game itself harder, just meaning you would have to play it all in one go, which if anything would make it shorter, is a bad idea?

Valid man, valid.
Have youngsters already forgotten that you can leave your consoles on when you're not playing them and come back to them later?

How times have changed.
I'm old enough to pay my own electricity bill...
As am I. Considering that there's already two computers in my house running pretty much 24/7 except for restarts or giving them a rest every month or so, a console doesn't seem like much more to add on to that.
 

fedpayne

New member
Sep 4, 2008
904
0
0
Bionic_Fhtagn post=9.74539.838673 said:
fedpayne post=9.74539.838576 said:
Bionic_Fhtagn post=9.74539.838540 said:
fedpayne post=9.74539.838512 said:
Bionic_Fhtagn post=9.74539.838478 said:
I wonder if the games are getting easier or if I'm just getting better? Maybe it was a flaw due to the live system? I'd be interested to see how Half-Life 2 would play if you had a live system. And if you lost all of those lives you have to restart back at the beginning of the game. I need to talk to a modder now.
Surely a bad idea, because if you took away the save system, you'd have to play through it in one go, which is a no, and if people lost lives they could just reload.
Which, of course, was my point exactly. :)
...

Sorry, what is your point? That the thing that you suggested, that nobody else mentioned, while not neccesarily making the game itself harder, just meaning you would have to play it all in one go, which if anything would make it shorter, is a bad idea?

Valid man, valid.
*sigh*

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logic

It wouldn't shorten the amount of time it would lengthen it, assuming you die often or are playing on the hardest difficulty; otherwise, assuming you never die in either system, the amount of time spent in game using either system would remain the same. My point, rather, is that if older games employed a save system rather than a live system than the games would not be looked at as being so difficult. Imagine how high a score someone could get if they simply could save in the middle of a game of Donkey Kong and come back later.
Aaah, sorry. I see that logic. I mean though, that people would be eager to get through the game, rather than take it slowly. I wouldn't go exploring the houses along the highway, I would try and get to the next story set piece before I died. I suppose it's because you mentioned HL2, which I think alotta people on here could complete in their sleep now.
 

Amnestic

High Priest of Haruhi
Aug 22, 2008
8,946
0
0
Imitation Saccharin post=9.74539.838696 said:
Easy games? EASY GAMES?

Eh. It's a scale, and I'd rather have easy then nintendo hard.
Are we talking NES hard or Wii hard here? I'm assuming NES hard because Wii hard is...well, for the most part nonexistant.
 

742

New member
Sep 8, 2008
631
0
0
well the industry overall has begun to cater to a more noobliesh(new word) target, the same way newspapers are dumbed down for idiots with a 5th grade education, we complain about a game being too easy we beat it fast... and then we get another. they complain about a game being too hard they throw tantrums (which is fine, up until about age 10, and at age 20 its just fucking pathetic) and curse the company, or their computer, or the system. ive seen it happen.

but time and difficulty have nothing to do with each other, a game can be easy and grindtastic, or just require you walk a REALLY long way. or it can be hard as shit and very short.

but how HARD a game is doesnt matter, i prefer something being fun to being hard(not that i dont like a challenge, just that i would take something easy-but-fun over MS access adventures 5: the database), and everyone has a different skill level. you might also be complaining about games that are just plain short in into a genres taht dont go much for the single player, and just add it as an afterthought. try playing warcraft 3 in three hours without using cheats. even on easy difficulty.
 
Dec 1, 2007
782
0
0
Amnestic post=9.74539.838710 said:
Are we talking NES hard or Wii hard here? I'm assuming NES hard because Wii hard is...well, for the most part nonexistant.
LINKS A-HOY!

http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/NintendoHard
 

SimuLord

Whom Gods Annoy
Aug 20, 2008
10,075
0
0
I thought I was a pretty damned skilled gamer. I've beaten Contra without dying (Konami Code? No thanks, don't need one), won a world conquest in Hearts of Iron 2 (admittedly with the extended time limit in Doomsday, but still), pounded Mike Tyson like cheap veal in Punch-Out. I've turned Haiti into a colonial superpower in Victoria, made mincemeat of the Roman Empire as the Parthians in Rome: Total War, been a trillionaire monopolist in Capitalism II. Rise of Nations is so easy my wife wonders why I even still play it and I've held a team scoreless for an entire half in College Hoops 2K5.

But for all that glory and all that gaming street cred, Disgaea still kicks me in the teeth and does a sack dance over me when I fall down. So does Advance Wars. Games may in general be too easy these days, but those two games (series, really) are viciously difficult.
 

PureChaos

New member
Aug 16, 2008
4,987
0
0
Twilight Princess wasn't exactly difficult but it took ages, every time i thought I'd got to the end something else would happen and the game would carry on. not that i minded, i enjoyed every minute of it.
 

DGenius

New member
May 28, 2008
166
0
0
Gestapo Hunter post=9.74539.837941 said:
Is it just me or does game these days seem very easy to beat cause i swear im finishing games in 2 or 3 hours. What happen to those game that even gave god a challenge like Battle Toad for the NES or Super Ghouls and Ghost? And lets not forget the first Ninja Gaiden the current ones couldnt hold a candle to the old NES ones
I'm glad I'm not the only one who feels that way.
 

Wolvaroo

New member
Jan 1, 2008
397
0
0
There are a few absolutely brutal games out there. I like to think of it as a niche market created just for me =D
 

Smeggs

New member
Oct 21, 2008
1,251
0
0
Since almost every enemy in every game nowadays can be finished off with a simple button sequence, there's really not much challenge. I'm beating games in a good solid 10-12 hours of play time (Maybe a few more). What happened to the games that used to take about a week or more to get through? My first playthrough on HL2 took me about 5 days, that's what I want.

Anyway, NES hard is a level of difficulty that no longer exists in today's games.
 

Ultrajoe

Omnichairman
Apr 24, 2008
4,719
0
0
Halo 3 Legendary with all skulls on.

Thats Handicapping.

I have done it. Until you have you are not allowed to consider yourself a man.
 

Smeggs

New member
Oct 21, 2008
1,251
0
0
Halo 3 Legendary is wimpy :\ Not as tough as the other Legendaries, and I'm not talking about Co-op either.

All you need to do is kill the Arbiter, jack his plasmas, and then BOOM instant De-armor or kill on any brute.

And since they have such heavy guns everywhere its so easy. And the flood were disappointing in Legendary, I could still kill them with the same amount of damage.
 

Gestapo Hunter

New member
Oct 20, 2008
726
0
0
im gonna try handicapping myself in Ninja Gaiden see how that works out. And the handicap? No flying swallow attack
 

Ultrajoe

Omnichairman
Apr 24, 2008
4,719
0
0
Smeggs post=9.74539.839118 said:
Halo 3 Legendary is wimpy :\ Not as tough as the other Legendaries, and I'm not talking about Co-op either.

All you need to do is kill the Arbiter, jack his plasmas, and then BOOM instant De-armor or kill on any brute.

And since they have such heavy guns everywhere its so easy. And the flood were disappointing in Legendary, I could still kill them with the same amount of damage.
Tried it with all skulls? It's rather more intense.