Sadly, it's a lot easier to make a skinner box than it is to make a challenge.Patathatapon said:
Why are games so easy these days?
- Thread starter mad_mick
- Start date
I believe it's a mixture of just being dam good at games and allowing a broader audince play games.
^^^ This.getoffmycloud said:
Only an idiot would say that MW2 or MW3 get more difficult as the difficulty is ramped up, all that changes is the enemy's accuracy and how much damage they do to you. In Halo or Gears of War, this actually equates to difficulty (enemies get tougher too), but in CoD games, the "difficulty" goes up so much so fast that the only way you can play the game is by slowly peeking around corners to kill enemies slowly, burning through grenades, or spamming your gun enough to get through the masses. That is very poor difficulty design.
Stacraft 2 gets legitimately difficult in Hard and damn near impossible in Brutal. Halo Reach was a pain to get through on Legendary, but it was so satisfying. Maybe OP plays games differently from I do, but most of the games that I own that I find difficult, are legitimately difficult. Also, I've beaten all of those "very hard games" you listed in a day (or two depending on availability). Conker's Bad Fur Day is not a hard game by any stretch of the imagination. Maybe on Einstein difficulty and you have 1v8, but thats about it.
The only problem I have with games these days, is that too many of them try to appeal to the greatest majority. That is why MW3 fucking blows.
Guy...I had over 1,000 ladder games on SC1 and played Diamond on SC2 (a poor diamond, albeit). There's no need to defend it. I have a ton of respect for that game. Naturally it's more than just "twitch", but the fact is I just DON'T have the finger speed to be a really special player. I can think the game as well as anyone, but my micro was nowhere near the best players.Stilt said:
I hear that.xSKULLY said:
Nazi soldier: We heard you like grenades, so here, we made you a little circle of them.
Oh god the grenades...
OT: Yeah, I don't find current games all that easy. I'm currently on a play through of PROTOTYPE on hard and...
...
*Looks out the window.*
...It's far from easy.
I personally don't like incredibly hard games. I want a challenge, not a rage induced coma, which some games have brought me to almost.
Starcraft 2 is a good example of the right way to make a game difficult, both in single and multiplayer. It allows players to be good at it, by having effective controls and enough variation to make it hard for players to think of everything.
Of course Blizzard is one of the few old fashioned developers that likes to design games in a way that went out of style a few years ago.
The problem with difficulty levels in many games is that often the player doesn't get the means to become good at it. If controls are inaccurate the player will not be able to make split second decisions. If the game lacks depth or tactical variation, the player can't improvise.
A game needs to have sufficient space for player actions and make use of that space with traditional difficulty.
Good difficulty is a 2 tiered approach.
1. A difficult environment.
2. Player tools to handle it.
Without both of those the game will either be easy, or hard in a frustrating or random way.
Of course Blizzard is one of the few old fashioned developers that likes to design games in a way that went out of style a few years ago.
The problem with difficulty levels in many games is that often the player doesn't get the means to become good at it. If controls are inaccurate the player will not be able to make split second decisions. If the game lacks depth or tactical variation, the player can't improvise.
A game needs to have sufficient space for player actions and make use of that space with traditional difficulty.
Good difficulty is a 2 tiered approach.
1. A difficult environment.
2. Player tools to handle it.
Without both of those the game will either be easy, or hard in a frustrating or random way.
To be as successful as possible games need to maximize their consumer base. Making the game a little easier and putting in harder difficulties allows them to do appeal to people who don't play/ haven't played as much. That in addition to you probably having logged well over a couple hundred hours in various games throughout your life (its a skill practice and you'll get better) makes modern games easier.
I'm right there with you on Mass Effect 3 (I also haven't finished yet so you'll see no spoilers from me). The series has gone from interesting-but-kinda-clunky RPG with shooting elements, (and all the more charming for it), in part 1. To slick RPG/shooter in part 2. To a half-arsed cover shooter with RPG elements removed - that isn't half as good as every other cover shooter out there - in part 3. I haven't finished it because I'm not really enjoying it all that much. There feels like there's nothing new to discover (unlike the Mako expeditions in part 1). It's more like UNCOVER - that which has been laid out before you, and countless other gamers have already found before you. The possibility of discovering a secret is absolutely zero because it's so damn linear and obvious in it's layout and prompting.mad_mick said:
I can't believe they took out the planet scanning (and Mako expeditions) in favour of finding a single set point on a single planet. Searching planets (in 1 or 2) was never essential, yet it's been removed just in case any non-gamers come across it and panic.
If you want to get back to the good old days of challenging and unpredictable gaming I suggest retro gaming. I've recently rediscovered a bunch of old classics on my first ever console (the SEGA SG-1000), and that's led me to find more on the ZX SPECTRUM and Commodore 64. There are a tonne of great games if do some research and sift through the 'best of' lists and pick what looks interesting to you. They require a bit more patience and the difficulty curves are often a little steep, but overall it makes for an interesting, challenging and ultimately rewarding experience. You'll be a better gamer for it if you can appreciate them.
EDIT: It's not that you've gotten better at games as some have suggested - Play 'Druid' on C64, Firelord on ZX Spectrum, Rygar on MAME, you'll find that games back then really were just more difficult.
It doesn't have to do with us getting "better" at games, 90% of today's mainstream games are really that easy. The thing is that the people making the games are tied down by the people trying to sell the games and so they strive to make the games "accesible" for almost all crowds, thus dumbing down the games massively.
Even the difficulty levels are a joke. A higher difficulty doesn't mean a smarter AI for example or certain routes(ex:that contain powerful weapons) being blocked off, it usually means that the enemies get double health(as do the bosses) and your weapons deal less damage. It is a artificial way of boosting the difficulty, sometimes making it impossible, so of course few people are gonna play it on those settings.
As stated by previous users, Witcher 2 did difficulty really well. It is tough on normal(but not that tough once you learn when to block, when to get out of the way, how to use signs to trap certain opponents etc.), a bit tougher on hard and nigh impossible at times on the biggest difficulty setting. The satisfaction of getting out a fight alive is terrific in the Witcher 2 and that's what it should feel like. I also like that the game doesn't give a HUGE F**KING ARROW to point you towards your next objective as if you were some lost puppy looking for your bone.
I'll give another example, of a game series I love but which has become way too damn easy, AssCreed. I gave the mouse and keyboard to my 11 year old cousin and even he found it nigh impossible to kill Ezio in an encounter with guards.
Games need to present us with challenges and by that I don't mean stupid achievements such as "hit this guy with 3 punches while the sun and the moon are in conjencture".
Even the difficulty levels are a joke. A higher difficulty doesn't mean a smarter AI for example or certain routes(ex:that contain powerful weapons) being blocked off, it usually means that the enemies get double health(as do the bosses) and your weapons deal less damage. It is a artificial way of boosting the difficulty, sometimes making it impossible, so of course few people are gonna play it on those settings.
As stated by previous users, Witcher 2 did difficulty really well. It is tough on normal(but not that tough once you learn when to block, when to get out of the way, how to use signs to trap certain opponents etc.), a bit tougher on hard and nigh impossible at times on the biggest difficulty setting. The satisfaction of getting out a fight alive is terrific in the Witcher 2 and that's what it should feel like. I also like that the game doesn't give a HUGE F**KING ARROW to point you towards your next objective as if you were some lost puppy looking for your bone.
I'll give another example, of a game series I love but which has become way too damn easy, AssCreed. I gave the mouse and keyboard to my 11 year old cousin and even he found it nigh impossible to kill Ezio in an encounter with guards.
Games need to present us with challenges and by that I don't mean stupid achievements such as "hit this guy with 3 punches while the sun and the moon are in conjencture".
No problem. And thank you for reminding me I still have a season of Extra Credits to watch.mad_mick said:This was excellent. cheers for the linkZen Toombs said:
I don't think games are too easy these days. As a gamer I'm more focused on story than on gameplay, so I generally prefer to go through games on easy while still experiencing the full story. Though I do tend to put strategy games and stealth games on higher difficulties, because I like the strategy involved there.
Anyway, I don't really understand why people want games to be "hard". When I think hard, I think frustrating and annoying.
So I'm not really in a position to comment on whether recent games are "hard" or not, since I don't even like that kind of thing.
Anyway, I don't really understand why people want games to be "hard". When I think hard, I think frustrating and annoying.
So I'm not really in a position to comment on whether recent games are "hard" or not, since I don't even like that kind of thing.
Challenge is funorangeban said:
I am of the opinion that frustrating and annoying difficulty is more a product of the game design than an inherent property of difficulty. Stuff like Dwarf Fortress, Tetris, and the last level of Halo: Reach isn't even winnable, and yet people have fun playing them.
I suppose you're right, frustration doens't have to to be connected to difficulty. It just usually is. When you bump, say, COD up to it's highest difficulty, the enemies aren't clever or strategic, they're bullshit. You use as much skill as you do luck. I find it all very aggravating.Kahunaburger said:Challenge is funorangeban said:
I am of the opinion that frustrating and annoying difficulty is more a product of the game design than an inherent property of difficulty. Stuff like Dwarf Fortress, Tetris, and the last level of Halo: Reach isn't even winnable, and yet people have fun playing them.
But I do see where you're coming from.