Poll: Easy Mode
- Thread starter Wackymon
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Mega Man 10, Hexen, Warcraft 3, Starcraft 2, Star Ocean 3, Donkey Kong Country Returns, Lemmings, Onimusha 4, No More Heroes, Street Fighter 4. All of these include easy modes for first-time players who could be driven mad by these games' normal modes. At least I assume that's the case when a game's normal mode is seriously challenging to me, a veteran gamer.ETERNAL-chaplain said:
However related to your second question, I agree that more than the standard 3 difficulty levels makes it more likely that producers will make very little alterations between them. There should be a noticeable difference between each level, more than mere stat reduction but possibly omitting the hardest parts discovered in playtesting. I remember a Tiny Toons game on the SNES actually omitted the entire fifth level on easy mode and yes, it was probably the toughest one in the game.
Oh, you mean Pansy mode?
When I first played Halo, I would always do easy so I could have fun, but the enemies weren't much of a threat. It was alright, because I sucked at FPS games. At one point in Halo 3, I decided I actually wanted to be good at this game, so I made a point to always at least play on normal. And then I got used to that.
The first thing I did for Halo: Reach was solo it on Legendary. I have also done the same for Halo 4. The matchmade Firefights in Reach are also automatically Heroic, so I got used to that difficulty as being one of the norms. Now the de-facto Normal isn't much of a challenge at all.
Instead of Easy → Normal → Heroic → Legendary, the difficulty scale has become Pansy → Relaxed → Normal → Hard.
But not everyone is me, so I don't criticize the difficulty level they play.
Unless we happen to be playing co-op, in which case you better step up to at least Normal. Even if we're just running through to do an Easter egg, I refuse to play Pansy with assistance. We should be able to breeze through Normal just fine. If we're looking to fight side-by-side to overcome an actual threat, then it should be Heroic. If you want balls-to-the-wall tense action and uncertain outcomes for high rewards and Teh Achievements, then the situation should ask Legendary of us.
The same seems to hold true for (most) other games, I can adapt to and play Normal with little difficulty right off the bat. There are some supposedly tougher games I haven't tried though, but normal seems to be the rule of thumb for my casual play.
When I first played Halo, I would always do easy so I could have fun, but the enemies weren't much of a threat. It was alright, because I sucked at FPS games. At one point in Halo 3, I decided I actually wanted to be good at this game, so I made a point to always at least play on normal. And then I got used to that.
The first thing I did for Halo: Reach was solo it on Legendary. I have also done the same for Halo 4. The matchmade Firefights in Reach are also automatically Heroic, so I got used to that difficulty as being one of the norms. Now the de-facto Normal isn't much of a challenge at all.
Instead of Easy → Normal → Heroic → Legendary, the difficulty scale has become Pansy → Relaxed → Normal → Hard.
But not everyone is me, so I don't criticize the difficulty level they play.
Unless we happen to be playing co-op, in which case you better step up to at least Normal. Even if we're just running through to do an Easter egg, I refuse to play Pansy with assistance. We should be able to breeze through Normal just fine. If we're looking to fight side-by-side to overcome an actual threat, then it should be Heroic. If you want balls-to-the-wall tense action and uncertain outcomes for high rewards and Teh Achievements, then the situation should ask Legendary of us.
The same seems to hold true for (most) other games, I can adapt to and play Normal with little difficulty right off the bat. There are some supposedly tougher games I haven't tried though, but normal seems to be the rule of thumb for my casual play.
like a few of the people here i play a game for good story, intersting characters etc.
and i dont like gameplay to become a hindrance in my quest to enjoy and absorb the story.
so i play most games on easy if they have that option.
however thers one game i play on highest difficulty that is wwe games coz they are so damn easy even on harder difficulty.
and i dont like gameplay to become a hindrance in my quest to enjoy and absorb the story.
so i play most games on easy if they have that option.
however thers one game i play on highest difficulty that is wwe games coz they are so damn easy even on harder difficulty.
I don't play on easy mode. Generally there are around four difficulties. Easy, Normal, Hard and So hard that it's broken and unbalanced but you'll play it anyway to see if you can beat it. I usually play on hard because I've been playing so long that normal and easy are just boring. I will then try the next difficulty if I like the game a lot.
As far as what other people play on, I don't really care. Well, scratch that, I am glad that these easy and normal difficulties exist. It allows more people to get in on this great hobby of mine and it makes me look like a god when I go to their houses and blow through a game they've been stuck on for weeks.
As far as what other people play on, I don't really care. Well, scratch that, I am glad that these easy and normal difficulties exist. It allows more people to get in on this great hobby of mine and it makes me look like a god when I go to their houses and blow through a game they've been stuck on for weeks.
I find it ironic you call the casuals filthy when hardcore gamers are neckbeards.T_ConX said:
Easy mode is great for non-gamers or people who don't want to take it seriously. I don't know why people would feel like they need to dictate how others play. If you don't like it don't play on it. It's only an option, it's not mandatory. I play on all the difficulties depending on my mood, I like having that choice.
Though I do like Devil May Cry's easy mode which is only unlocked if you die repeatedly in the first few missions.
Can we get through this discussion with out bringing up Dark Souls?
So In Dark Souls "people" want an easy mode. And by "people" I mean stupid fuckers.
Games are an art form and difficulty is an artistic choice the same as lens choice is an artistic choice.
If the difficulty is supposed to enhance the experience then the difficulty level should not be left to the player just as much as the lighting of a shot should not be left up to the viewer of a movie, or the key shouldn't be left up to the listener of the music.
But if you're making a game where the challenge is not made to enhance the experience, like you want the player to enjoy the narrative and challenge separately at their leisure, or use lower difficulties as training then Easy mode is almost necessary.
So In Dark Souls "people" want an easy mode. And by "people" I mean stupid fuckers.
Games are an art form and difficulty is an artistic choice the same as lens choice is an artistic choice.
If the difficulty is supposed to enhance the experience then the difficulty level should not be left to the player just as much as the lighting of a shot should not be left up to the viewer of a movie, or the key shouldn't be left up to the listener of the music.
But if you're making a game where the challenge is not made to enhance the experience, like you want the player to enjoy the narrative and challenge separately at their leisure, or use lower difficulties as training then Easy mode is almost necessary.
That's funny. It's even funnier if you truly believe it. It's because so many games can be totally owned despite the difficulty through system mastery alone. Once you realise that, you'd realise that the difficulty is always at the hands of the player. It's because very often the higher difficulties are just fake layer of paint over the same thing. I played ME/ME2 on Insane. I actually got bored because the "difficulty" boiled down to "now fights take longer". And since I wasn't interested in padding out my playtime artificially, I bumped it down to Hard or Very hard.Mikeyfell said:
The difficulties aren't quite an art for yet, at least not everyone is capable of expressing them properly.
Mass Effect is one of those games with adjustable difficulties.DoPo said:
It also has an easy mode.
Did you read the second paragraph in my comment?
Dark Souls and other games of it's Ilk aren't supposed to be easy so they don't have an easy mode.
In games like Mass Effect, Halo, Rock Band, Fallout, the difficulty doesn't influence the core of the experience, so the developers let the players decide how hard it should be. If a composer wrote a song where the key wasn't a core part of the experience I'm sure they'd include an option to change it.
Games are unique in that way where accessibility is a large concern and it's easier from a development stand point not to integrate difficulty into the narrative, so usually they just leave it open. So when From Software decides to take the next step and people claimer for an Easy mode, they're not promoting stagnation at that point they want the medium to move backwards.
I don't think adjustable difficulty makes a game bad but the next step in game design is to let the mechanics enhance storytelling and difficulty is a core mechanic in (Almost) every game.
Same here, I find easy mode's good for learning the game and playing through the storyline the first time, after that it's all about completing the higher difficultiesLjs1121 said:
I honestly have no problem with easy mode on almost all games, the exceptions being the Souls series but that debate has been done a thousand times so I'll say no more.
The only thing I don't understand is when people who are perfectly capable of completing the game on higher difficulties without trouble play on lower difficulties to feel all powerful. I just don't see the appeal in that. Everyone plays games differently though, so they can do as they please.
The only thing I don't understand is when people who are perfectly capable of completing the game on higher difficulties without trouble play on lower difficulties to feel all powerful. I just don't see the appeal in that. Everyone plays games differently though, so they can do as they please.
I play on normal first with most of the games I play. The only games I've played on casual were the Mass Effect games, because I wasn't playing for the game, I was playing for the story. But that doesn't mean I didn't go back and play on the harder modes.
off-topic:
I do agree that the thing with that school district is downright stupid.
I remember about 18 years ago at the tail end of when I still played youth sports, my basketball team got to the final game and won, we all got personal neck medals and a trophy in an award celebration right after the game, then something I thought was really weird happen. After my team got their stuff, the ceremony continued with the losing team and all the other teams in the league lining up to get their own trophies, smaller, but still they all got trophies.
Little did I know that I was witnessing one of the very first institutions of the idiotic "Everyone gets a trophy" policy, so that the other kids don't feel bad or envious that the better players got a trophy.
On a relatively recent note, a couple years ago, I remember hearing from another student in one of my college classes, that her mom wasn't allowed to come to the little sister's high school(as several parents did on occasion) to bring fast food as a special once every week or two treat for lunch. It wasn't because parents were showing up unannounced during a school day, it was because they didn't want the other kids to get jealous because they had to have school lunch and not fast food that they liked better.
There are other schools where I've found out that kids can't bring lunch from home anymore, because such a thing is seen as "flaunting having money", and such a thing might make the poor kids that have to eat the gross government funded lunch feel bad or jealous. Basically, they've made the students that normally brought their lunch, bring money to pay for the crappy lunch.
Lastly, my little nephew likes peanut butter and jelly sandwiches and also peanut butter cracker snacks, but he can't bring them to school anymore for lunch because one kid in the entire school has a peanut allergy. That is so stupid because the only way the kid could be effected is if someone shoved those things into his mouth. So, a 0.0000000001% chance of happening, if there even is a chance.
I can't stand how PC and soft the world is getting. "You can't do that, it might hurt someone's fragile little ego, or God forbid they might get the tiniest of injuries."
I'm okay with people playing on easy getting achievements and such, but I think it should be like those silly achievements that are worth zero points. Those I see as like a pat on the back, you did your best, but it isn't like they are getting a truly meaningful reward like a proper achievement with points.T_ConX said:
off-topic:
I do agree that the thing with that school district is downright stupid.
I remember about 18 years ago at the tail end of when I still played youth sports, my basketball team got to the final game and won, we all got personal neck medals and a trophy in an award celebration right after the game, then something I thought was really weird happen. After my team got their stuff, the ceremony continued with the losing team and all the other teams in the league lining up to get their own trophies, smaller, but still they all got trophies.
Little did I know that I was witnessing one of the very first institutions of the idiotic "Everyone gets a trophy" policy, so that the other kids don't feel bad or envious that the better players got a trophy.
On a relatively recent note, a couple years ago, I remember hearing from another student in one of my college classes, that her mom wasn't allowed to come to the little sister's high school(as several parents did on occasion) to bring fast food as a special once every week or two treat for lunch. It wasn't because parents were showing up unannounced during a school day, it was because they didn't want the other kids to get jealous because they had to have school lunch and not fast food that they liked better.
There are other schools where I've found out that kids can't bring lunch from home anymore, because such a thing is seen as "flaunting having money", and such a thing might make the poor kids that have to eat the gross government funded lunch feel bad or jealous. Basically, they've made the students that normally brought their lunch, bring money to pay for the crappy lunch.
Lastly, my little nephew likes peanut butter and jelly sandwiches and also peanut butter cracker snacks, but he can't bring them to school anymore for lunch because one kid in the entire school has a peanut allergy. That is so stupid because the only way the kid could be effected is if someone shoved those things into his mouth. So, a 0.0000000001% chance of happening, if there even is a chance.
I can't stand how PC and soft the world is getting. "You can't do that, it might hurt someone's fragile little ego, or God forbid they might get the tiniest of injuries."
I'm all for easy mode, it gives players a chance to learn the game mechanics well enough to where they'll eventually want more of a challenge, without ruining the experience. Left for dead is a perfect example of this. Back when it was new I played a few rounds on easy, and it was fun but it left me craving something more. It didn't force me to master it overnight, it was patient and waited for me to grow in skill, presenting me with ever increasing difficulty, once I was ready for it. After many play throughs I reached a point where I was good enough to survive even the hardest difficulty setting.
The same argument could be made for Dark Souls really. An easy mode could be as simple as buffing the player a bit. I'll be honest though, I think Dark Souls is a bad example for this thread. Alot of the initial difficulty is due to an insufficient tutorial and bad level design (namely the fire link shrine and undead burg) I'll bring this up later though in another thread or article since I'm going off topic here.
The same argument could be made for Dark Souls really. An easy mode could be as simple as buffing the player a bit. I'll be honest though, I think Dark Souls is a bad example for this thread. Alot of the initial difficulty is due to an insufficient tutorial and bad level design (namely the fire link shrine and undead burg) I'll bring this up later though in another thread or article since I'm going off topic here.
It's a great thing to have, so harder difficulties don't have to suffer. I like being able to play a game on easy mode now and then if I find the game-play to not suit my tastes or if it's buggy as shit.
I'll usually play games on normal/hard but if I'm primarily interested in the story and don't really care much for the game-play (like Spec Ops: The Line, played it purely for the story as cover-based shooters aren't usually my thing, and this particular title even had added bugs and poorly executed cover-based shooting to boot) it's great I can enjoy the story while being able to blast through the game with ease.
I'll usually play games on normal/hard but if I'm primarily interested in the story and don't really care much for the game-play (like Spec Ops: The Line, played it purely for the story as cover-based shooters aren't usually my thing, and this particular title even had added bugs and poorly executed cover-based shooting to boot) it's great I can enjoy the story while being able to blast through the game with ease.
I'm fine easy mode. I, for instance, suck at fighting games and need easy mode. I might not use it for the next pig shooter or action game, but I understand why it's there and why it's need. I'm not gonna be like the Assassin's Creed III's Developer and say it's ruining the industry.