Question of the Day, Feb. 24, 2010
- Thread starter Susan Arendt
- Start date
C: None of the above - Normal as the default difficulty.
IMO Normal should always be "how the game is meant to be played". If normal is too easy or too hard, it's bad game design.
Easy should be for people with severe difficulties, and Hard for masochists. Normal should be challenging but not frustrating.
I might put it on easy if the game is frustratingly punishing on normal, but usually I don't even pick it up to begin with.
IMO Normal should always be "how the game is meant to be played". If normal is too easy or too hard, it's bad game design.
Easy should be for people with severe difficulties, and Hard for masochists. Normal should be challenging but not frustrating.
I might put it on easy if the game is frustratingly punishing on normal, but usually I don't even pick it up to begin with.
Normally I start on the default difficulty (normal, medium etc.). However when I played the Dante's Inferno demo I was playing it on normal difficulty and found it far too easy. So when I bought the game I immediately started playing on Hellish.
I can tell you the challenge is there now that's for sure. Still, I like a challenge, and I refuse to switch to an easier setting when I get a little stuck at a certain part ("little" being trying the same section for 30-40 minutes). Somehow it feels like cheating, and since I do want to finish the game, I don't want my journey through Hell to feel like a cake walk. It's Hell, damn it, it's supposed to be hard!
So I take a little longer to finish the game. It's still damned satisfying when I finally do beat a difficult section.
Next stop: Whatever difficulty gets unlocked when I beat the game on Hellish!
I can tell you the challenge is there now that's for sure. Still, I like a challenge, and I refuse to switch to an easier setting when I get a little stuck at a certain part ("little" being trying the same section for 30-40 minutes). Somehow it feels like cheating, and since I do want to finish the game, I don't want my journey through Hell to feel like a cake walk. It's Hell, damn it, it's supposed to be hard!
So I take a little longer to finish the game. It's still damned satisfying when I finally do beat a difficult section.
Next stop: Whatever difficulty gets unlocked when I beat the game on Hellish!
I do a difficulty run, going from Easy, all the way to Legendary/Expert/Insanity/YOUDIEALOTINTHISMODE mode.
I usually start off on what the game intended to be played on. Most games tend to say that like Mass Effect 2. Then I'd go through again on a harder difficulty. Rarely do I ever pick lower than normal/medium though.
Even though I never play on Easy mode on the first run, I will eventuelly play it after completing the game once (if the game is fun enough to be played at least twice), along with the other modes available.
Usually, it's the hardest mode that I usually can't finish, with the exception of God of War 1 and 2.
Usually, it's the hardest mode that I usually can't finish, with the exception of God of War 1 and 2.
so what your saying is that easy should be for mental people or retards and the hard is for nerds and or psychos? ... iam a great gamer and i play most of my rpgs on easy for the story and experience not to head bash my mouse because i ran out of potions versus an ogre or a massive army like in dragon age or something...Caliostro said:
Same here, It helps me enjoy the game more, plus I know what to expect, which makes the harder modes a little bit easier but only a little bit.Insert Comedy Here said:
Where is "I play on Normal, not Hard or Easy"?
I play on Normal. That's the way developers intended, that the way I play.
I play on Normal. That's the way developers intended, that the way I play.
No, I usually play on normal first; the default difficulty. Then head up into the more advanced levels.
In short, yes.phoenix352 said:
To elaborate: Easy should pose little to no challenge for even the most mentally defective, because it should be for either people who can't face a challenge, or simply don't want to (i.e: if you're only playing for the story). Hard should be for people who are either so good that simply can't be compared in any way to your average human being, or REALLY want to "turn it up to 11".
Ultimately the game's difficulty should be judged on normal, the default setting, which should provide good gamers with a challenge while never becoming frustrating for average gamers.
Which isn't to say all games do this correctly... I don't mean to brag, but I have a tendency to master most shooters absurdly fast. It's my thing. Shooters and beat'em ups. And even so STALKER Shadows of Chernobyl KICKED. MY. ASS. and handed it back to me in a platter for the first hour or two of game. This is to someone who breezes through most shooters/action games only hindered by his own obsessive compulsive tendency to complete and find EVERYTHING.
I can only imagine the "average" gamer will find Shadows of Chernobyl akin to nailing your balls to a moving speedboat, and see themselves forced onto the Easy difficulty... Which implies bad game design in my book.
I always do my first playthrough on easy, then work my way up the difficulties, unless it's something like a horror game in which I'd go straight to normal and play on the harder settings once I've unlocked them.
I play on normal in the hopes of playing the game in the difficulty the developers intended it to be...and because, unfortunatly, the Harder Difficulties are too often archived by just changing some numbers to make your character die faster and fight weaker. (One of the worst things was the hard difficulty on Splinter Cell. Given the harder, more challenging conditions, "Hard" was generally desireable, but for some reason your non-deadly weapons where weakened to the point where things like the gas on sticky cams was useless, wich felt pretty much broken)
That said, once in a while (especially when Reviews recommend it), i turn up the difficulty and find some pleasent surprises. Games like Mass Effect 2 and Dead Space are much more effective on higher difficulties (although, unfortunately, Dead Space is a game that, for me, is either too easy or too hard)
That said, once in a while (especially when Reviews recommend it), i turn up the difficulty and find some pleasent surprises. Games like Mass Effect 2 and Dead Space are much more effective on higher difficulties (although, unfortunately, Dead Space is a game that, for me, is either too easy or too hard)
Generally I do my first run through of a new game on easy or one step above. Particularly if it is a different genre to my usual games.
It really depends on the game. For most FPS games, I've played so many of them that most of the time I just play the game on Hard mode right away because I know the formula of the game.
However, for games with a unique combat system that the manual does a terrible job of explaining, I may try it on Easy at first in order to get a feel for it.
However, for games with a unique combat system that the manual does a terrible job of explaining, I may try it on Easy at first in order to get a feel for it.
I usually play on Easy the very first time. Then the second playthrough I'll move onto the next difficulty level, and carry on like that. I actually did that on Gears of War just to get all the Achievements, but after I completed it for the second time (bloody hell, RAAM is tough to beat...), my Xbox 360 and Gears both got stolen and I still haven't replaced them, or the other games that were taken...