Demon's Souls poorly designed? It was designed to punish recklessness it killed you when you legitimately fuck up. Few games do this, normally you die because the AI spamed explosives or kept spawning trapping you in an area. Demon's Souls concept was based in reality where if you slip and fell into a hole you'll die, you get crushed you die, you run into a fight with multiple enemies ill prepared you'll die. that's not bad game design it basically allows you to choose how to approach any problem your own way and not have a cookie cutter tactics that makes one way to play work while others don't. If you really wanted you could out run most enemies.Rabidkitten said:
Jimquisition: A Different Kind of Difficulty
- Thread starter Jimothy Sterling
- Start date
No matter how correct this video is (and it totally is), still, look at it from the perspective of some people like myself,
"I just outmaneuvered several nimble, tiny hunchback creatures and skeletons, swung around flying Medusa heads without touching them, sleighed a small army of highly-trained, heavily-armored knights, jumped over bottomless pits and killed the Grim Reaper all with the mighty power... of a fucking whip. I. Am. Awesome."
"Oh wow, I could have just jumped through this level all the way to the end extremely easy, and will already have the satisfaction of seeing the next part of the game, but instead I took my time and did it in one, perfect run that awards me with some imaginary medal that has no value whatsoever."
Some people--like myself--just aren't big on bonuses for the majority of games. We just want to get to the end, and want the challenge to be in getting there.
It's why you can call me a 'retro gamer', who adores old classic NES style games. But guess what? I was born in the mid nineties. I never had an NES, or an SNES, or any of the old school gaming systems. I don't like sidescrollers because of nostalgia, or 'conditioning', I like them because I like them.
"I just outmaneuvered several nimble, tiny hunchback creatures and skeletons, swung around flying Medusa heads without touching them, sleighed a small army of highly-trained, heavily-armored knights, jumped over bottomless pits and killed the Grim Reaper all with the mighty power... of a fucking whip. I. Am. Awesome."
"Oh wow, I could have just jumped through this level all the way to the end extremely easy, and will already have the satisfaction of seeing the next part of the game, but instead I took my time and did it in one, perfect run that awards me with some imaginary medal that has no value whatsoever."
Some people--like myself--just aren't big on bonuses for the majority of games. We just want to get to the end, and want the challenge to be in getting there.
It's why you can call me a 'retro gamer', who adores old classic NES style games. But guess what? I was born in the mid nineties. I never had an NES, or an SNES, or any of the old school gaming systems. I don't like sidescrollers because of nostalgia, or 'conditioning', I like them because I like them.
My exact thoughts too. I just platinum'd Lego Harry Potter 1-4 (easy compared to previous Lego games) and was thinking about this exact thing.iron skirt said:
Why is difficulty tied to death? Or why is difficulty tied to some binary setting, I like to be able to set my own difficulty. Similarly I'm replaying FF9 and FF12 together (as part of a thing to look at generational gaming and also for fun).
In both those FF's the difficulty is set, one can happily cruise through the game and though in parts it can be difficult (more so in 9 if you lack preparation) the story play is easy. In 12 I just toppled Pylraster, a nasty beast whose attacks hit for half my tanks health and would regularly chain attacks, the fight is entirely optional and I could have levelled up more to be on even footing with it but I don't like grinding.
Anyway, point is I went out of my way to look for the more difficult parts. I search all around in FF9, which means I get greater reward (loot) but have to face more enemies in a game where being worn down is the biggest risk, since instant healing is rare (though I've found a slight way around it with a means of restoring party MP bit by bit, that itself is risky against tough opponents who can cause me more damage than the restored MP would be worth since 1 warrior is busy stealing MP instead of attacking).
Anyway. tl;dr I like games where the difficulty is pretty set but can be altered by you by looking around for challenged, games with optional bosses/superbosses/challenges (like FF12's marks/rare game) or where searching areas can be costly (FF9 or similar games where searching costs resources) or just where getting 100% completion is a much bigger stretch than simply finishing. A child can obviously complete the Lego games but to get 100% completion takes some time and normally a bit of a think through what's going on.
This series is getting better. Yes games used to be harder back in the day. People tend to forget the fact that most of them sucked, and the only reason you stuck with it's bullshit deaths was becuase you had nothing else to play until your next birthday/Christmas.
Wow, Jim is actually calmly discussing a topic with tack and depth instead of just flinging insults around?
Best episode yet.
Best episode yet.
Minor problem with this arguement. The people that don't care about that difference are generally not the people who would whine it's too easy. Unless they just like complaining for the sake of trying to sound old school.BloodSquirrel said:
I can't count how many times I will play a game normally, sometimes thinking "well that was too easy, but fun," so what is my next thought do you think? "Well, let's make it harder!" FO3 was too easy, but I love the game. Since then I never use VATS, and mod the game up to put restrictions in areas I believe were to lax, like carry weight. Now I will admit, this is a moddable game, so added difficulty isn't terribly hard. So let's instead look at another game I play the pants off of, Final Fantasy 12.
For FF12 it's easier to add difficulty, play Zodiac style. If you can't get an actual copy of it (there are english patches and instructions on how to do it, if you own both copies like me), just play like you were anyway. Follow strict job classes, and don't use any of the lame auto leveling or early item tricks.
Which brings me to another point, a lot of complaints about how easy a game is come from the same group that will use every cheap trick in the book. Games on the whole haven't gotten much easier in reality, we've just become more savy, and we aren't dying to broken game mechanics. (Ninja Gaiden's respawning enemies, I'm looking at you.)
Hey guys, games aren't easy nowadays! Just complete these arbitrary extra challenges, it's a lot harder then!
Nothing said in this episode isn't true. At the same time, it also completely does not address the issue. Most games *are* easier nowadays, with the harder setting becoming somewhat akin to what most "old" gamers grew up with.
Super Mario Galaxy was an easy game. Getting all the stars was a bit trickier, but still easily managed. Getting all the green stars after that was ridiculous.
It's one thing to point out that you can still get challenged by modern day games. It's another thing to acknowledge that there's gamers around who wish this higher difficulty seamlessly integrated in their game. I don't want to have to blindfold myself and tie one hand behind my back to have to enjoy a game. And for some titles, that's exactly what you have to do to be able to sink your teeth into them.
But hey, I don't watch this show for its nuanced opinions.
Nothing said in this episode isn't true. At the same time, it also completely does not address the issue. Most games *are* easier nowadays, with the harder setting becoming somewhat akin to what most "old" gamers grew up with.
Super Mario Galaxy was an easy game. Getting all the stars was a bit trickier, but still easily managed. Getting all the green stars after that was ridiculous.
It's one thing to point out that you can still get challenged by modern day games. It's another thing to acknowledge that there's gamers around who wish this higher difficulty seamlessly integrated in their game. I don't want to have to blindfold myself and tie one hand behind my back to have to enjoy a game. And for some titles, that's exactly what you have to do to be able to sink your teeth into them.
But hey, I don't watch this show for its nuanced opinions.
I shudder at the sound of its name - screw Demon's Soul's, this game series is mean!Giest118 said:
OT - I do agree with some of Jim's opinions. I got irate when people grumbled about how easy the Prince of Persia reboot in 2008 was. How many of those complainers got this achievement: Be gentle with her 100G - Elika saves you fewer than 100 times in the whole game. If Elika saves you, you effectively 'died'. Some people were a bit too stupid to realise that the developers simply cut out a load screen.
It seems odd to me that a very similar story was posted to the Escapist just a few weeks ago in the column section by some writer known as Nathaniel Edwards. He too brings up Kirby's Epic Yarn as an example of video games becoming easier and less punishing. http://www.escapistmagazine.com/articles/view/features/8998-Too-Much-Success.3
Getting all the gold medals in Epic Yarn was pretty easy, unless I'm a hardcore video game master. Still a great game and a fun time. The medals made it feel like you were accomplishing something outside of just playing the game. I have beat Ninja Gaiden on the NES and Xbox and I can assure you that they are much, much more difficult. My thought is how Epic Yarn is like the 2D Sonic games. They're tough, but as long as you have at least one ring, you can't die. I remember collecting that last one or two rings over and over again as a child to keep a boss fight going.
Well he called out to all his homos (Not a terrible Joke), and he blatantly admitted to needing yo take a dump...hats off to jim sterling...a breath of fresh air (Albeit amongst others)in the serious business of game journalism.
almighty God who brought us Jim, dammit! He's right about difficulty in games. I haven't seen this guy actually make a valid and intelligent point since (I am guessing here) like his talk about Call of Duty and online gaming. This was a well deserved slap in the face. I will let him ***** slap my to think correctly anytime as long as he keeps up the good work like this...and the Call of Duty one I mentioned.
Good argument Jim.
This is one of the reasons I like mount and blade warband. So its a sand-box war game, you can make your character whatever you want, and push yourself to beef your trade or your horse archery say, till you can hit a general in the face, behind his army, while at full gallop.
Or you can try and be a successful lord, or go for kingship/queenship.
Now the game itself is not that hard, although some fights will be very challenging. You can put it on an easier difficulty, but the great achievements still take quite a lot of effort, planning, timing, luck.
And then after all that in the single player, there is multiplayer battles and dueling, where you then have to learn how to actually fight against humans and all that you can do with the simple dueling system, which has a lot of possible complexity behind it. E.g. mastering footwork so hits to you do so little damage, getting feinting down, hacking and throwing axes switching, how polearms are far different to sword and shield, what the counters to each weapon load-out are (short sword or sword and board counters spear, greataxe counters shields, throwing can counter greataxe, some don't do much damage but stagger your opponent, polearms and great weapons need a lot of room).
This is one of the reasons I like mount and blade warband. So its a sand-box war game, you can make your character whatever you want, and push yourself to beef your trade or your horse archery say, till you can hit a general in the face, behind his army, while at full gallop.
Or you can try and be a successful lord, or go for kingship/queenship.
Now the game itself is not that hard, although some fights will be very challenging. You can put it on an easier difficulty, but the great achievements still take quite a lot of effort, planning, timing, luck.
And then after all that in the single player, there is multiplayer battles and dueling, where you then have to learn how to actually fight against humans and all that you can do with the simple dueling system, which has a lot of possible complexity behind it. E.g. mastering footwork so hits to you do so little damage, getting feinting down, hacking and throwing axes switching, how polearms are far different to sword and shield, what the counters to each weapon load-out are (short sword or sword and board counters spear, greataxe counters shields, throwing can counter greataxe, some don't do much damage but stagger your opponent, polearms and great weapons need a lot of room).
This is nicely coupled with the following episode:
I can't help but agree with the episode. Bioshock is an easy game, even on Survivor, thanks to the Vita-Chambers. But say you're going for trophies and you turn Vita-Chambers off, Bioshock offers a very old school experience and if you don't save often, you can regret it when accidentally setting off a Big Daddy.
But isn't the point of difficulty levels to allow the player to choose their own challenge. It's no different to having optional collectibles in a level. Equate playing the game through as standard to easy or normal, but collecting everything would be roughly equal to hard mode.
I can't help but agree with the episode. Bioshock is an easy game, even on Survivor, thanks to the Vita-Chambers. But say you're going for trophies and you turn Vita-Chambers off, Bioshock offers a very old school experience and if you don't save often, you can regret it when accidentally setting off a Big Daddy.
But isn't the point of difficulty levels to allow the player to choose their own challenge. It's no different to having optional collectibles in a level. Equate playing the game through as standard to easy or normal, but collecting everything would be roughly equal to hard mode.
Kinda just like the ability do do say a Mega Man/Super Mario Bros. speed run without dying? Or to be able to complete a particularly difficult game without dying? When you think about it almost anything you do in a game is simply for bragging points and is really only worth something to the individual.Crono1973 said:
Wow! I didn't think that you were a total prick this time! I actually prefer to not die in video games. I am more of a casual hardcore gamer. I enjoy these "hardcore" games but I enjoy them casually. I play SWAT with my friends on Halo: Reach because I enjoy the company and the challenge, but I find games that involve story and great gameplay to be much more fun than any collectible or multiplayer experience.
I don't do any of those things. I don't care about bragging. For example, this weekend I beat 3 games, God of War, God of War II and finally New Super Mario Bros. DS. I wouldn't tell anyone (outside of this thread) because it doesn't really matter.Azure-Supernova said:
There was a time before Youtube speedruns, achievements and online multiplayer that most people didn't really care to show off. I am one of those types of people.
I find it laughable too.Kahunaburger said:
"The game is too hard!"
"Turn down the difficulty."
"I'm not a wimp. I'm too good for that."
Ugh. I plan to play Catherine on Easy the first time through (I heard that even Easy gets hard halfway through the game) and work my way up to harder difficulties on my subsequent playthroughs. There is no shame in playing on easier settings. Some gamers need to realize this. I do, however, refuse to play on Super Easy because I feel like Atlus would be laughing at me.
I like the idea of having the ability to choose what challenges you want to take. It makes the game open to a larger audience which is, despite those who claim the contrary, a GOOD THING. Besides, games being too hard can be a bad thing. It's almost treated as a badge of honor, which is annoying at times.
The beginning was brilliant, the water sip was funny, the ending.... eh, B+ for effort. As for the content, I have to say I agree. Yes too many games who's objective is just to get to the end are too easy, but even a game like Ikaruga that's KNOWN for it's difficulty is very easy with just the right options in the menu (and that's not changing the "difficulty" from normal either). Just getting through and "winning" isn't that hard. But going through all the levels getting an "A" rank, or (heaven help you) "dot eater" rank is just plain brutal.