# What do you do with games that are too hard for you?



## Shippou-Sensei (Oct 29, 2011)

i got prototype a while back on a steam sale  and  after playing it for a while i got to a stage i simple  can't seem to get passed.  it's the bit where the hunters turn up.

i'm playing on fucking easy  and they  keep  killing me.  it has rendered the game unplayable.

is it too much to ask  for the easy setting to be...  EASY!

yeah sure   people may want challenges  but isn't that  what  hard mode is for?

i've raised this point before but it's really  annoyed me here  because  so far  i didn't hate the  game. i would  like to play more of this game  but i can't

and  the fucker  even taunt  me  by having  a  cheats  option  that  doesn't  fucking have any  proper cheats in it

the whole situation is made  worse by arsehole gamers  who comment that   it's   the persons fault for not being good enough   rather  than the developers fault  for not  realising the true spectrum of abilities


----------



## tommers (Oct 29, 2011)

Ahem.... n00b.



(joking)


Prototype is a bit frustrating sometimes.  You just get spammed.  I think I kept retrying till I did it.


----------



## Shippou-Sensei (Oct 29, 2011)

it fucking kills all the fun

and this is easy?     why is  this supposed to be easy?
and why isn't the cheats actual cheats?


----------



## Jon-of-arc (Oct 29, 2011)

I never figured out how to kill the final boss in the first GoW.  Fucking annoying.  Saw a rant on this on gameswipe about how, if you've paid for content, you should be able to access it.


----------



## Greebo (Oct 29, 2011)

I'd put that game to one side for a couple of months and then give it another go.


----------



## Voley (Oct 29, 2011)

I gave up on Prototype when I got to that level where you lose all your weapons. I fucking hate games that do that.


----------



## Citizen66 (Oct 29, 2011)

I bought hearts of iron 3 as it's the sort of game I'd love. Unfortunately each time I launch it I just sit there wondering what I ought to be doing.


----------



## Shippou-Sensei (Oct 29, 2011)

Greebo said:


> I'd put that game to one side for a couple of months and then give it another go.



i did

this is me comming back to it  and  being even worse as  i can't remeber how to do the moves


----------



## Citizen66 (Oct 29, 2011)

I stopped playing Oblivion when I got turned into a vampire. It switched from being fun into a chore that I soon tired of.


----------



## Shippou-Sensei (Oct 29, 2011)

GTA IV  i quit  after  going on my first date....    it just wasn't fun anymore

but that is slightly diffrent

mirrors edge i rage quit after falling the nth time    oh and  getting lost a couple of times


----------



## Greebo (Oct 29, 2011)

Shippou-Sensei said:


> i did
> 
> this is me comming back to it and being even worse as i can't remeber how to do the moves


Fair enough.  If you really can't get any further and it's no longer fun, sell it?


----------



## Shippou-Sensei (Oct 29, 2011)

steam copy


----------



## Citizen66 (Oct 29, 2011)

I never ever seem to quit returning to Jetset Willy and that's the most infuriating unwinnable game ever.


----------



## Shippou-Sensei (Oct 29, 2011)

i just fucking wish it had cheats or i could get a working trainer


----------



## tommers (Oct 29, 2011)

Is there a walkthrough you can look at?

If I remember that game right though it's just luck and persistence.


----------



## Shippou-Sensei (Oct 29, 2011)

it's not a matter of puzzels or anything it's beating up 4 giant monster type things

i think you have to use combos or some such shit but i'm cack handed at that.

but the issue is if this is the easy mode why aren't fight easy?


----------



## tommers (Oct 29, 2011)

Easier probably.


----------



## Shippou-Sensei (Oct 29, 2011)

yes but that's not exactly helpfull is it


----------



## tarannau (Oct 29, 2011)

Buy games designed for children. Problem solved


----------



## golightly (Oct 29, 2011)

I gave up on Prototype at the bit where you have to fly a helicopter. I hate fps's and the like where you suddenly have to drive a vehicle.  I know it's supposed to provide some variety with game play but I just find it jarring and makes me want to give up on a game.  I hated the bit in Crysis where you have to drive a tank as well but managed to grit my teeth and get through it.


----------



## Greebo (Oct 29, 2011)

Get somebody else to do that bit.  In the button mashing bits in Pandemonium, the only way to get through was to keep passing the controller across before hands & concentration wore out.


----------



## Random (Oct 29, 2011)

I gave up on GTA on the mission where you have to plant a bomb in the car and then get it back without a scratch. The truth is I liked the game but I'm shit at driving; so it really wasn't the one for me, I suppose.


----------



## Monkeygrinder's Organ (Oct 29, 2011)

I gave up on Prototype too. I got to some ridiculous boss battle with the previous save point meaning I was low on energy and kept dying all the time, and I couldn't be bothered to go way back and replay a big chunk of the game just to start the fight with more energy. It's not a good enough game to be worth the bother.

It definitely is poor design if you get completely stuck IMO.


----------



## Shippou-Sensei (Oct 29, 2011)

tarannau said:


> Buy games designed for children. Problem solved



welcome to the international league of dickheads


----------



## tarannau (Oct 29, 2011)

Not really. There are naturally games that aren't suited for everyone. One man's easy level is another man's piss taking walk-through absolutely no challenge mode. Make it too easy and there's no sense of achievement, longevity or value.

To extend the Brooker analogy a little, you're paying for content that may just not be fitted for you. It's like picking the small print book of literary theory and finding out that you're myopic and prefer lighter reading material. It doesn't follow that the original tome/game is badly designed or needs changing.


----------



## Shippou-Sensei (Oct 29, 2011)

if you have a game that has (as this one does) an easy medium hard and unlock-able super hard mode why do you not make the easy mode actually easy?

and why not include cheats?

if there was only one play mode then your argument might have some validity but this one is built to have levels it's just badly built

and  "buy games designed for children" is a dickhead comment no matter what


----------



## Cid (Oct 29, 2011)

Citizen66 said:


> I stopped playing Oblivion when I got turned into a vampire. It switched from being fun into a chore that I soon tired of.



You can cure it though, or just reload a save before you got bitten - it's not like there's a point in the game that is just near impossible to get past.


----------



## Citizen66 (Oct 29, 2011)

Cid said:


> You can cure it though, or just reload a save before you got bitten - it's not like there's a point in the game that is just near impossible to get past.



Yes I know you can cure it. I started to collect the ingredients to do so. It's not like I had some hissy fit about it. I jus t found it tiring that I could only move around at night, by which point the people I needed to see were asleep. And obviously hanging around indoors all day doing nothing waiting for night time isn't my idea of a fun game either. So I started playing something else and the thought of returning to that chore kept me away from completing it.

Surely if you're forking out your hard earned on these things it should be entertaining rather than a pain in the bum?


----------



## Ax^ (Oct 29, 2011)

practise and beat it on normal..


Personally class using the easy setting as cheating...


But that's just me


----------



## Shippou-Sensei (Oct 29, 2011)

if people want to accept games  are art  and games as pieces of interactive storytelling they also have to broaden  the game  to allow for the veriaty of people who play games

hard easy modes are bad game design

and why  do games have to be difficult?   why should they be?   why not   have a mode  where the player can experiance without worry?  surly thats up  to the player?

if it's a single player experiance  there is no such thing as cheating   simply diffrent game modes


----------



## bi0boy (Oct 29, 2011)

I often wonder why there are usually only 3 difficulty levels.

Serious Sam has it right with Tourist, Easy, Normal, Hard, Serious and Mental


----------



## Shippou-Sensei (Oct 29, 2011)

i really  think  god mode should  be a playable option

iddqd idkfa  every time baby


----------



## Shippou-Sensei (Oct 29, 2011)

http://penny-arcade.com/patv/episode/easy-games


----------



## Ax^ (Oct 29, 2011)

Games should retain a certain amount of challenge in order to complete then,

Normal mode should as the maker intended the game to be played

Screw easy mode tutorial mode for people to adapt but If I had my way you never be able to clock a game on easy...


----------



## Random (Oct 29, 2011)

Shippou-Sensei said:


> if people want to accept games are art and games as pieces of interactive storytelling they also have to broaden the game to allow for the veriaty of people who play games


No they don't, who says everyone has to enjoy a piece of art for it to be valid? There are books that people give up on because they're 'too hard', and they're games that people give up on. Big deal. Far worse to dumb all games down to some average, or bring in god mode as available to all. Enjoy the games you like and leave the other ones. I like the idea of GTA and Hearts of Iron but I've simply not got the skills or the concentration to enjoy them. So what? There's thousands of other games out there for me.


----------



## Epona (Oct 29, 2011)

Dara O'Briain does a hilarious bit in one of his recorded live shows that I saw on DVD about video game difficulty and ineptitude, it had me in stitches because I'm fairly shite at games.  I play most stuff on easy and cheat my way through difficult bits.  I play for entertainment and I don't find a difficult challenge of pressing buttons quickly very entertaining.  I prefer stuff that engages my brain and imagination rather than my fingers!


----------



## Monkeygrinder's Organ (Oct 29, 2011)

Random said:


> No they don't, who says everyone has to enjoy a piece of art for it to be valid? There are books that people give up on because they're 'too hard', and they're games that people give up on. Big deal. Far worse to dumb all games down to some average, or bring in god mode as available to all. Enjoy the games you like and leave the other ones. I like the idea of GTA and Hearts of Iron but I've simply not got the skills or the concentration to enjoy them. So what? There's thousands of other games out there for me.



I don't view games as pieces of art really. Or at least I don't think the 'art' element of any of the ones I've played is particularly important. The potential is there maybe.


----------



## Shippou-Sensei (Oct 30, 2011)

Random said:


> No they don't, who says everyone has to enjoy a piece of art for it to be valid? There are books that people give up on because they're 'too hard', and they're games that people give up on. Big deal. Far worse to dumb all games down to some average, or bring in god mode as available to all. Enjoy the games you like and leave the other ones. I like the idea of GTA and Hearts of Iron but I've simply not got the skills or the concentration to enjoy them. So what? There's thousands of other games out there for me.



games include difficulty levels    they are built  to have multiple modes of difficulty.

it is not the  same  as  a book

it is not "dumbing down"


----------



## Random (Oct 30, 2011)

Shippou-Sensei said:


> games include difficulty levels they are built to have multiple modes of difficulty. it is not the same as a book it is not "dumbing down"


Your one-line paragraphs shoow that you know I'm right.


----------



## Random (Oct 30, 2011)

Epona said:


> I play most stuff on easy and cheat my way through difficult bits. I play for entertainment and I don't find a difficult challenge of pressing buttons quickly very entertaining. I prefer stuff that engages my brain and imagination rather than my fingers!


 Myself I find that once I've started cheating my suspension of disbelief also suffers and so it stops engaging my imagination. I can't invest emotionally, to care about sucess or failure, if I know I can just turn clipping off and sail through all the walls or something.


----------



## Random (Oct 30, 2011)

Just remembered that I also gave up on Freelancer as I couldn't make the race where you've got to go through all those hoops. I searched for a cheating patch for ages to take me through that one bit, then when I installed it it wiped my saved games. I just wanted to cheat my way past that one bastard unfair bit.


----------



## Shippou-Sensei (Oct 30, 2011)

Random said:


> Your one-line paragraphs shoow that you know I'm right.



your single line response shows that in your heart you secretly agree with me. you merely keep up this argument  for the pleasure of holding conversation with me.


----------



## Greebo (Oct 30, 2011)

Shippou-Sensei said:


> your single line response shows that in your heart you secretly agree with me. you merely keep up this argument for the pleasure of holding conversation with me.


Get a room, you two.


----------



## ATOMIC SUPLEX (Oct 30, 2011)

All games are too hard for me, I can never get into anything because the learning curve is always too high. I want games where I am mostly indestructible and can do cool moves without much effort.

Playing games shouldn't have to be hard, you can have fun 'playing'.


----------



## tarannau (Oct 30, 2011)

Games that are too easy suck. You get tempted to play at the lower difficulty setting, waltz through the game and reveal too much, rendering the whole thing a bit too much of a waste of money. A good game is about the challenge for me, not some glorified Dragon Quest style walkthrough.

Surely it's up to the creators of the game how they want the game to play out, not some disgruntled player who wants everything on a plate. Insisting on some sort of 'daftly easy' mode could be deeply unsatisfactory and unnecessarily prescriptive, a bit toys out of the pram really - there's so much choice in games that you should be able to vote with your wallet.


----------



## Random (Oct 30, 2011)

ATOMIC SUPLEX said:


> Playing games shouldn't have to be hard, you can have fun 'playing'.


Dontt you enjoy those moments when you're down to your last few soldiers/health points, your heart's pumping, your fingers are shaking and then you bring off a success and are well chuffed? Playing a game on easy or god mode sounds like you're just clicking your way to the next cut scene. Might as well watch a film.


----------



## Monkeygrinder's Organ (Oct 30, 2011)

ATOMIC SUPLEX said:


> All games are too hard for me, I can never get into anything because the learning curve is always too high.



It's quite common in games to spend the early parts hiding in corners because you're armed with a peashooter and die as soon as an enemy looks at you, then later in the game you're virtually indestructible and armed with 8 different varieties of portable cannon. Maybe some games might work better if they reversed that difficulty curve a bit.


----------



## Random (Oct 30, 2011)

tarannau said:


> Games that are too easy suck. You get tempted to play at the lower difficulty setting, waltz through the game and reveal too much, rendering the whole thing a bit too much of a waste of money. A good game is about the challenge for me, not some glorified Dragon Quest style walkthrough.


I quit Knights of the Old Republic 2 as it was too easy. Seemed like as long as I was sensible with a choice of skills and equipment I could just waltz through all combats.


----------



## Shippou-Sensei (Oct 30, 2011)

ATOMIC SUPLEX said:


> All games are too hard for me, I can never get into anything because the learning curve is always too high. I want games where I am mostly indestructible and can do cool moves without much effort.
> 
> Playing games shouldn't have to be hard, you can have fun 'playing'.



games are excellent at fantasy wish fulfilment devices  having  the player take control  of  the abilities of the character.
but  for it to work well you don't want to feel  useless.   each time you die you are reminded of your own faliability and not  enwraped in the awesomeness of the fiction.

some of  the most fun i have had with games  is   with  cheat modes.


----------



## Shippou-Sensei (Oct 30, 2011)

games already   have   multiple   difficulty settings

if you find a game too easy  put it on hard
make the hard setting hard  and the easy setting easy  is all  we ask


----------



## Random (Oct 30, 2011)

Shippou-Sensei said:


> but for it to work well you don't want to feel useless. each time you die you are reminded of your own faliability and not enwraped in the awesomeness of the fiction.


Maybe that's what you want from a game, but that's not what all games should aspire to deliver.


----------



## Shippou-Sensei (Oct 30, 2011)

tarannau said:


> Surely it's up to the creators of the game how they want the game to play out, not some disgruntled player who wants everything on a plate. Insisting on some sort of 'daftly easy' mode could be deeply unsatisfactory and unnecessarily prescriptive, a bit toys out of the pram really - there's so much choice in games that you should be able to vote with your wallet.



so if you pay £40 for a game that kills you repeatedly 30 seconds into the game because that's what the developer wanted thats right?

fuck that

especially as you can't return games because they are too hard.

you don't get to vote with your wallet  you  get shafted


----------



## Shippou-Sensei (Oct 30, 2011)

Random said:


> Maybe that's what you want from a game, but that's not what all games should aspire to deliver.



you do you speak as if  one choice is all you get?

as i pointed out    the games already  have multiple difficulty modes   it's  just  those modes aren't  actually  appropriately  difficult or easy!


----------



## Random (Oct 30, 2011)

Shippou-Sensei said:


> so if you pay £40 for a game that kills you repeatedly 30 seconds into the game because that's what the developer wanted thats right?


Sounds like an extreme example, but sometimes it is justified. I'm no good at driving games and maybe I'd get killed all the time if I tried to play one.


----------



## Random (Oct 30, 2011)

Shippou-Sensei said:


> you do you speak as if one choice is all you get?
> 
> as i pointed out the games already have multiple difficulty modes it's just those modes aren't actually appropriately difficult or easy!


You're asking for your personal choice to be available in all games and that's just not reasonable.


----------



## Citizen66 (Oct 30, 2011)

Of course multiplayer solves this particular problem. The game is only as difficult as your opponents skills / your lack of.


----------



## Shippou-Sensei (Oct 30, 2011)

why is that apropreate?  why should  you not  be allowed  to play?    who  is hurt  by allowing  easy modes?


----------



## tarannau (Oct 30, 2011)

Then only choose games with a cheat mode. You have a choice - hence the cheeky childrens games comment earlier - but you seem to be whining and insisting on foisting your preferences on others.

For me , a game needs to be challenging to provide that sense of 'fantasy wish fulfilment'. I'll too often take the easy mode if it's there - it's just too tempting if you know the ability exists - and thus prefer some kind of base level difficulty. Cripes - it's way easier than I was a nipper after all - those shady years on impossible pixel-precious platformers and slow loads by beeping tape saved games just make me appreciate just how much more easily we get to consume games now. But it's now about consuming a whole game for the sake of it, because it's there - you often should have to earn the higher levels and feel the game develop. Less and it often just feels like a procession towards the end cut scenes, a largely passive and unrewarding experience.


----------



## Random (Oct 30, 2011)

Shippou-Sensei said:


> why is that apropreate? why should you not be allowed to play? who is hurt by allowing easy modes?


For one thing you're asking game developers to tailor their work to making sure everyone can finish the game. I'd rather that they did their best to realise their vision.


----------



## Shippou-Sensei (Oct 30, 2011)

Random said:


> You're asking for your personal choice to be available in all games and that's just not reasonable.



why isn't it reasonable?

for  ages  all PC  games had cheats.   didn't hurt any of them.    i bet all games still have developer modes  they just  don't allow casual players access to them.

it's simply a choice  and  no one has explained to me  why     someone  should make  a choice than  makes  games unplayable  for a percentage of the people who buy them?


----------



## ATOMIC SUPLEX (Oct 30, 2011)

Random said:


> Dontt you enjoy those moments when you're down to your last few soldiers/health points, your heart's pumping, your fingers are shaking and then you bring off a success and are well chuffed? Playing a game on easy or god mode sounds like you're just clicking your way to the next cut scene. Might as well watch a film.



Not really.
I like blasting everyone away with ease on a level I am well versed in. Most games don't even seem to let me go back and do a level I enjoyed again.
Fuck it, I don't think games were made with me in mind, I only play very very very rarely. Actually I think all my machines are in the loft.


----------



## Random (Oct 30, 2011)

Shippou-Sensei said:


> it's simply a choice and no one has explained to me why someone should make a choice than makes games unplayable for a percentage of the people who buy them?


It's not a simple choice, it's about how the game is developed. Like I said before about books; books can be read on different levels, but some people will simply find a particular book 'too difficult'. Fine, pick up another one that you do like.


----------



## tarannau (Oct 30, 2011)

Loads of people have explained to you - you just choose not to listen. The presence of a walkthrough or ridiculously easy mode provides too much of an unwanted temptation and lessens the experience for others. It should be up to the developers to decide, not for you to foist your preferences onto others.


----------



## Citizen66 (Oct 30, 2011)

Has anyone ever finished jet set willy? It was even impossible with infinite lives. 

I think part of the appeal is that it is very difficult to finish.


----------



## Shippou-Sensei (Oct 30, 2011)

i seriously don't get why you think i'm being unreasonable

i'm not  forcing the game to  do anything  beyond what it already can do in specific circumstances (games all have dev modes  when being produced)

i'm not saying all players  should  be forced to play with cheats or play in  the easy mode

all i'm saying is developer should allow for people   who don't have the skill to play the games unaided   access to  sytems that allow them to finish the game.

why are people so against that?  why is that a bad thing?


----------



## Shippou-Sensei (Oct 30, 2011)

tarannau said:


> Loads of people have explained to you - you just choose not to listen. The presence of a walkthrough or ridiculously easy mode provides too much of an unwanted temptation and lessens the experience for others. It should be up to the developers to decide, not for you to foist your preferences onto others.



wtf?

so it is better to make a game unplayable for a pecentage of people than to allow other gamers the fear of temptation

and you said i was being unreasonable!


----------



## tarannau (Oct 30, 2011)

Because it makes the game too easy and ruins it for others. Why go back and struggle your way through when you've already seen all the best stuff and glided through with minimal effort? Things are fine as they are - let others choose games that appeal to them and choose games that suit your own playing styles and abilities.


----------



## Random (Oct 30, 2011)

Shippou-Sensei said:


> i'm not forcing the game to do anything beyond what it already can do in specific circumstances (games all have dev modes when being produced)


I'm all for games being as acessible and moddable as possible. Maybe what you're saying could be brought in easily. But some games are, by their nature, hard even if you have infinite lives and can walk through walls. To take Hearts of Iron as an example, I'm always going to find it too hard since it involves all sorts of knowledge that I don't want to learn. Or a racing game, I'm going to find it too hard unless all teh otehr cars are reduced to half speed, or I can cut across the track or something.


----------



## Random (Oct 30, 2011)

tarannau said:


> Why go back and struggle your way through when you've already seen all the best stuff and glided through with minimal effort?


Why not just ignore the 'easy' option?


----------



## Shippou-Sensei (Oct 30, 2011)

tarannau said:


> Because it makes the game too easy and ruins it for others. Why go back and struggle your way through when you've already seen all the best stuff and glided through with minimal effort? Things are fine as they are - let others choose games that appeal to them and choose games that suit your own playing styles and abilities.



that argument is in my opinion ridiculous. all that it requirtes is for people who like hard games to have a tiny bit of self control

the way you want it to be locks many people out of the enjoyment of a game. and it's not like they know a game will be too hard for them. how was i to know there would be a section of prototype that i found to difficult? how am i meant to devine what games i can play?


----------



## Citizen66 (Oct 30, 2011)

Random said:


> Why not just ignore the 'easy' option?



Indeed. Easy isnt usually the default setting.


----------



## tarannau (Oct 30, 2011)

Because it's too easy to want to take the instant gratification option, ruining it for yourself? Either way I value appropriate levels of difficulty on games and don't see why developers should have to compromise their own games to satisfy everyone. It's like insisting on authors writing an abridged version of their copy in simplified texts so that folks can speedread through to the end - sometimes the toughness of the text or challenge is considered vital to the experience.


----------



## Shippou-Sensei (Oct 30, 2011)

Random said:


> I'm all for games being as acessible and moddable as possible. Maybe what you're saying could be brought in easily. But some games are, by their nature, hard even if you have infinite lives and can walk through walls. To take Hearts of Iron as an example, I'm always going to find it too hard since it involves all sorts of knowledge that I don't want to learn. Or a racing game, I'm going to find it too hard unless all teh otehr cars are reduced to half speed, or I can cut across the track or something.



see you have  given  solutions  to  some of the problems  right there.   why not  have  a  cheat  or a training mode  which reduces  other cars speed. or  a  special button that kicks in slow-mo for a short period.

i'm not against all difficulty in a game  i just feel that  people  who do find games difficult  should  be allowed some help.


----------



## Random (Oct 30, 2011)

Shippou-Sensei said:


> why not have a cheat or a training mode which reduces other cars speed. or a special button that kicks in slow-mo for a short period.


That would be really really embarrassing, though. What about a football game where a special button suddenly replaces the opposing team with 4-year olds? It would make it easier to win but would also take away all feeling of accomplishment. I'd understand if a game developer didn't want to compromise their game concept by bringing in something as patronising as that.


----------



## Citizen66 (Oct 30, 2011)

Maybe architects shouldn't compromise their designs with annoying things like wheelchair access.


----------



## Random (Oct 30, 2011)

Citizen66 said:


> Maybe architects shouldn't compromise their designs with annoying things like wheelchair access.


----------



## Shippou-Sensei (Oct 30, 2011)

Random said:


> That would be really really embarrassing, though. What about a football game where a special button suddenly replaces the opposing team with 4-year olds? It would make it easier to win but would also take away all feeling of accomplishment. I'd understand if a game developer didn't want to compromise their game concept by bringing in something as patronising as that.



if that is the level  of the capability of the player then  why is it bad?  not being able to win also takes away  any feeling of accomplishment.

why is it  patronising to thank that  the people playing your games will have massively varying skill levels?


----------



## Random (Oct 30, 2011)

Shippou-Sensei said:


> why is it patronising to thank that the people playing your games will have massively varying skill levels?


 If you want to beat a game, you need to be good at certain things. If you can only win a car race by having everyone else artificially stuck in the mud then maybe car games aren't for you. Whether you give up on the game, or whether you cheat, either way you've not actually won a race orthy of the name.


----------



## Random (Oct 30, 2011)

Sure there do exist some games that are built so that literally anyone can beat them, but it's not right to demand that all games should be built this way.


----------



## Shippou-Sensei (Oct 30, 2011)

an example of  a  great game   with cheats  is stuff like  fallout 3

i love fallout 3   but  the reasons i love it  aren't  anything to do with  my abilities to shoot  raiders.  i love it for the story the atmosphere and the characters.   therefore i play it  with cheats.   i get what i want out of the game   and as far as i can tell the  cheat capability hasn't damaged the game  for anyone else.

an annoying example  is   assassins creed II   i'm just stuck on a bit.   i love the game  but the is a bit i simply can't  get passed.    i've had  to   just give up and play  brotherhood instead.

surly that's  not right.


----------



## Shippou-Sensei (Oct 30, 2011)

Random said:


> Sure there do exist some games that are built so that literally anyone can beat them, but it's not right to demand that all games should be built this way.



but  why not?

i really  don't get  why they shouldn't be.


----------



## Random (Oct 30, 2011)

Shippou-Sensei said:


> i get what i want out of the game and as far as i can tell the cheat capability hasn't damaged the game for anyone else.


never noticed it myself


----------



## Random (Oct 30, 2011)

Shippou-Sensei said:


> but why not? i really don't get why they shouldn't be.


Because you're putting a strait jacket on game designers. Maybe most games could be the way you suggest, maybe 85%. But to say that all games, even the most indy, even the most experimental, should be rolled out with your demands is just going to cripple interesting possibilities for games' development.


----------



## Shippou-Sensei (Oct 30, 2011)

Random said:


> If you want to beat a game, you need to be good at certain things. If you can only win a car race by having everyone else artificially stuck in the mud then maybe car games aren't for you. Whether you give up on the game, or whether you cheat, either way you've not actually won a race orthy of the name.



i don't get that argument. i don't see why that shouldn't be an option.

if i buy a game and it is too hard for me i can't take it back to the store. there arn't any difficulty warnings on these games. developers generally don't want to sell just to a small set of hardcore gamers.

if there was a game that sold itself on being hard and said so on the box then yes that is ok. but this isn't the case this is mainstream games we are talking about. games ment for everyone

i will accept that maybe some games  that explicitly  state they are for hardcore players only  could be exempt.   i just feel this  should be the exception to  the  majority


----------



## Random (Oct 30, 2011)

Shippou-Sensei said:


> i don't get that argument. i don't see why that shouldn't be an option.


Well if you do't get it, I won't repeat it. As for your second point, I see how it's frustrating, but that's what we have reviewers and comments for.


----------



## Shippou-Sensei (Oct 30, 2011)

actually this is why i didn't buy super meat boy  as it  was  said to be  a  proper hardcore difficult platformer


----------



## Shippou-Sensei (Oct 30, 2011)

Random said:


> I see how it's frustrating, but that's what we have reviewers and comments for.



yeah  but  none of them know how you play  and  none   can  tell you if you will get to a bit in a game  you simply can't pass


----------



## Random (Oct 30, 2011)

Shippou-Sensei said:


> yeah but none of them know how you play and none can tell you if you will get to a bit in a game you simply can't pass


I'm sure one day we'l get to the stage where AIs will know what we play, and will recommend games that we're guaranteed to like. Plus they'll alter in-game experiences to make sure we never fail and always feel almighty.


----------



## Shippou-Sensei (Oct 30, 2011)

perhaps  but what to do untill then?

why is it that mainstream games have this issue?


----------



## Shippou-Sensei (Oct 30, 2011)

i guess it's the way of the console

i just wish developers whould take the time to think about  all players not  just the average one


----------



## Termite Man (Oct 30, 2011)

At what point does easy become too easy for some gamers that find normal too hard though. You want there to be a balance but the level of difficulty needs to be balanced for everyone and there are so many variables that you will never please everyone. Maybe the developers didn't get prototype easy setting wrong, maybe they just set it higher than your level (and if you haven't played it on normal how can you say they haven't reduced the difficulty significantly?)


----------



## Citizen66 (Oct 30, 2011)

Or maybe the problem is in linear games. With games like oblivion you can cherry pick which quests you want to do and simply discard ones that you can't be bothered with or are too difficult. Which is why it was so ridiculous you being bit by a vampire as that quest simply couldn't be discarded once you had contracted the condition.


----------



## Shippou-Sensei (Oct 30, 2011)

i think there needs to be a level that  makes games accesable to all.  i feel it is worse  to make something impassable than it is  to  make it easy.

i'm not complaining  about  simply  dieing once or  twice when you  attempt something  but  getting hoplessly stuck to the point where you give up

also if you want  more balence  put in more modes.   doom had  5 difficulty settings  for example


----------



## Shippou-Sensei (Oct 30, 2011)

Citizen66 said:


> Or maybe the problem is in linear games. With games like oblivion you can cherry pick which quests you want to do and simply discard ones that you can't be bothered with or are too difficult. Which is why it was so ridiculous you being bit by a vampire as that quest simply couldn't be discarded once you had contracted the condition.



sandbox style games  do   benifit  from suffering from this less   but   some games just are just liner in nature.  it's impossible to make all games non liner


----------



## Random (Oct 30, 2011)

Shippou-Sensei said:


> sandbox style games do benifit from suffering from this less but some games just are just liner in nature. it's impossible to make all games non liner


What if I want all games to be non-linear, otherwise they're not accessible to me?


----------



## Shippou-Sensei (Oct 30, 2011)

Random said:


> What if I want all games to be non-linear, otherwise they're not accessible to me?



that argument has no logic in it

how does linearity  affect your ability  to play a game?


----------



## Random (Oct 30, 2011)

Shippou-Sensei said:


> that argument has no logic in it
> 
> how does linearity affect your ability to play a game?


 Why can't there be a button that allows me to jump over one linear section, or go back to an earlier one? I'm sure developers can do this, so why can't I?


----------



## Shippou-Sensei (Oct 30, 2011)

Random said:


> Why can't there be a button that allows me to jump over one linear section, or go back to an earlier one? I'm sure developers can do this, so why can't I?



i don't think wanting random features is quite the same as wanting to be able to  play a game to the end.


----------



## Citizen66 (Oct 30, 2011)

Random said:


> Why can't there be a button that allows me to jump over one linear section, or go back to an earlier one? I'm sure developers can do this, so why can't I?



You can return to an earlier point if you save the game.


----------



## Termite Man (Oct 30, 2011)

Shippou-Sensei said:


> i think there needs to be a level that makes games accesable to all. i feel it is worse to make something impassable than it is to make it easy.
> 
> i'm not complaining about simply dieing once or twice when you attempt something but getting hoplessly stuck to the point where you give up
> 
> also if you want more balence put in more modes. doom had 5 difficulty settings for example



why is it worse to make something impassable instead of too easy. There are games that I have completed on hard pretty quickly and didn't feel like I got my moneys worth but you want things made easier so *you* can complete them. I'm trying to think what part of prototype you're on about because I completed it and while it did have some challenging bits there was nothing as hard as you describe, maybe you just aren't suited to that kind of game? Do you have problems on similar games as well?


----------



## Shippou-Sensei (Oct 30, 2011)

the person who found it too easy at the very least got to enjoy the story the enviroment the graphics the dialogue the cool mechanics etc etc

the person who found it impassable got nothing beyond the point they reached

however i'm not saying scrap hard mode just allow for a proper easy mode

and i don't think that i am particularly terrible at games
i think it's a bad choice to make a game which stops normal people from playing it


----------



## Shippou-Sensei (Oct 30, 2011)

if i were to avoid games like prototype  i would have to ignore some of  my favourite games.

it's not a sensible solution


----------



## Termite Man (Oct 30, 2011)

Shippou-Sensei said:


> the person who found it too easy at the very least got to enjoy the story the enviroment the graphics the dialogue the cool mechanics etc etc
> 
> the person who found it impassable got nothing beyond the point they reached
> 
> ...



but for me the fun of a game is the challenge to complete it, I understand where you're coming from but like I said there are so many variables that to make a game to suit everyone is going to be almost impossible, more difficulties would get past that but how do you know what difficulty to play on to get maximum enjoyment from the game? If I were to play a game on difficulty 2 (on a scale of super easy = 1 very hard = 5 ) how do I know if thats the right option for me?


----------



## Shippou-Sensei (Oct 30, 2011)

are not those minor difficulties compared with not being able to play a game at all past a certain point?   and  given most games already  have  diffrent difficulty levels  isn't  that already a problem.   wouldn't having a super easy mode be better   as then you would know not to pick it?

i get there are complexities invloved but i still think some solution is needed if a game makes itself impossible for some players


----------



## treelover (Oct 30, 2011)

I hate this, why do level designers do it, i haven't been able to finish the Joker boss battle at the end of BAA and the necessarily dextrous hand to hand fighting in COD3 means i have to ask my young neighbour to progress the game...

the former means that BAA while a must purchase is on hold...


----------



## Termite Man (Oct 30, 2011)

Shippou-Sensei said:


> are not those minor difficulties compared with not being able to play a game at all past a certain point? and given most games already have diffrent difficulty levels isn't that already a problem. wouldn't having a super easy mode be better as then you would know not to pick it?
> 
> i get there are complexities invloved but i still think some solution is needed if a game makes itself impossible for some players



The problem is if you pick an option thats too easy you have done the game, and there are very few games I will replay once I have finished them.

which is the bit your stuck on?

http://uk.guides.ign.com/guides/950254/page_20.html


----------



## Shippou-Sensei (Oct 30, 2011)

you have done the game?

how long do the games you play last?

if it's that bad try to chalenge yourself by not picking up certain ammo or something

i get you want challenge but isn't it unfair to make a game unplayable for some just to make it extra fun for you?


----------



## Termite Man (Oct 30, 2011)

Shippou-Sensei said:


> you have done the game?
> 
> how long do the games you play last?
> 
> ...



yeah I finished it on normal difficulty IIRC

I'm really not sure which bit your talking about, is it right near the start where you don't have many powers and you need to get the hunters to the military base? That just involves lots of avoiding hunters and using the army weapons, I think I had trouble with that bit but I did manage to get through it. If you are having trouble there then you're probably right to give up because there are much harder missions later in the game.


----------



## Shippou-Sensei (Oct 30, 2011)

i was remaking on your comment  "if you pick an option thats too easy you have done the game,"  not  asking about prototype

it seems that  it's a bit of an  odd statement  as if  the gamnes were but moments long


----------



## Shippou-Sensei (Oct 30, 2011)

and i'm not even that bad at  video games  and i'm having difficulty with an easy  bit?  doesn't that sound like there is a problem with the game?


----------



## Termite Man (Oct 30, 2011)

Shippou-Sensei said:


> i was remaking on your comment "if you pick an option thats too easy you have done the game," not asking about prototype
> 
> it seems that it's a bit of an odd statement as if the gamnes were but moments long



but if the option is too easy you can breeze through most games. The thing is if they make 5 difficulty options who says the current easy wouldn't be made the easiest option with a level between easy and normal added in?

As for prototype , maybe the game just isn't for you because I didn't have any major trouble getting through it, in fact I'd say it was just the right level with challenging parts which made me feel like I'd achieved something but the whole of the game not being too hard that I felt like giving up at any point. It's a similar thing with Deus Ex Human Revolution ( which I finished on Thursday) a few hard boss fights (2 of which I had lots of trouble on) and normal gameplay set at just the right level.


----------



## Shippou-Sensei (Oct 30, 2011)

for all the small bad point surly  none of them is as bad  as making a game unplayable for some people?

and  just because you  found the game not to be hard  why can't other people have an easy option

it seems really shitty.   you have to be this  good   or fuck you your not allowed to find out what happens at the  end.

perhaps the problem is your too good at games?     see how daft that statement is?  well  the your not good enough statement is equally as daft


----------



## Termite Man (Oct 30, 2011)

Shippou-Sensei said:


> for all the small bad point surly none of them is as bad as making a game unplayable for some people?
> 
> and just because you found the game not to be hard why can't other people have an easy option
> 
> ...



I've never said 'your not good enough' I said this game might not be for you, I had trouble with the bit you're talking about and a couple of other bits but I kept at it and either fluked my way through or got better at the game. All I'm saying is that you want to enjoy the product, but so does everyone else who plays the game, what makes your desire to enjoy the game by completing a watered down easy version greater than my desire to enjoy it by being challenged, and I've said several times that to get the balance of ease to play and provision of a challenge (and with the quality of some computer game scripts I'm sure a lot of people don't play them for the story, but thats another argument) is not going to please everyone and in this case maybe it's you thats missing out, on another game it might be me that misses out on the enjoyment of playing while you have fun and finish the game.


----------



## Shippou-Sensei (Oct 30, 2011)

how is  "not  good enough"  and "not for you" different  if i'm stopping because i can't get passed a certain point?

i think your bringing up a false argument  that  somhow my  easy mode stops there being a hard mode  or  forces  people   to pick a mode that is too easy.

if normally  find games easy  then  start on the hard mode.

if you have ddifficulty with games then what?   don't buy games?


----------



## Termite Man (Oct 30, 2011)

Shippou-Sensei said:


> how is "not good enough" and "not for you" different if i'm stopping because i can't get passed a certain point?
> 
> i think your bringing up a false argument that somhow my easy mode stops there being a hard mode or forces people to pick a mode that is too easy.
> 
> ...


 
You're missing my point, I'm not saying I accidentally play games on easy but there may be someone like you out there that plays the games on the easy level and they may find that the easy level on prototype is right for them but it's not for you, do you want that made easier so you enjoy the game but they don't. I understand where you're coming from about adding an extra easy level but how would you know which one to start playing? I assume you don't have much trouble with most games with 3 difficulty levels so how would you know if you need easy or extra easy, and at what point does it become obvious that you have either picked the option that too easy or too hard.

For me personally I have no problem with the 5 difficulty levels but surely the same thing could happen there and then you would be here asking for 7 difficulty levels etc.


----------



## Termite Man (Oct 30, 2011)

also 'not for you' could also mean 'you give up too easily'


----------



## Termite Man (Oct 30, 2011)

so they need to make games for people like this


----------



## Shippou-Sensei (Oct 30, 2011)

i think  having to restart  due to a poor choice in difficulty level is a smaller  bad point than  not being able to finish a game.
also ideally you could switch difficulty midgame  which a lot of games allow you to do.

and  all i'm asking for  is  a difficulty mode or  cheats sytem that allowed all (or as near as possible) people to get to the end of a game

games are expensive and  often  may   take 30+ hours to play  and  being in a situationed where you get stuck  an hour or so into  a game s   is  really really shitty.  it's  like you wasted most of yourt money and for what?    it could  be fixed  with out that much of a problem  and  all the  other possible negativities   seems    to pale in comparison to the shitness of not being able to finish a game  you purchased


----------



## Shippou-Sensei (Oct 30, 2011)

i don't see this thread going anywhere.. .


----------



## Termite Man (Oct 30, 2011)

and then there is this kid


----------



## Shippou-Sensei (Oct 30, 2011)

is this really your  responce?


----------



## Termite Man (Oct 30, 2011)

Shippou-Sensei said:


> is this really your responce?



that was just me looking at people going mental over computer games 

the question is where do you draw the line with difficulty, if easy for prototype was set at a level just right for you but there was someone who still couldn't do it would they have to make it easier for them , and then maybe there is someone even worse, do they need accommodating as well , by which time the easy level is too easy for you and you're back to square 1 of not enjoying the game.

I understand where you're coming from, games are expensive and you want to enjoy them as much as possible, which is why I get pissed off at short games which I complete relativly quickly because I always feel I didn't get enough game time for my money, but a line has to be drawn somewhere and the prototype developers obviously decided they were going to put it at a difficulty too high for you in this case, and even if there were more difficulty options it's not going to guarantee everyone can play the games to the end anyway.


----------



## Termite Man (Oct 30, 2011)

this is my favourite computer game related freakout though


----------



## Shippou-Sensei (Oct 30, 2011)

i was actually thinking cheats would be best

cheats allow for dynamic easing. maybe as little as getting more ammo or a better gun or maybe doubling xp on kills

but still i think that if people can't finish a game something is wrong. the solution might be tricky but there needs to be a solution or else games as a medium will forever be limiting themselves

i think arguing that you shouldn't do something because the solution may not be perfect is a really daft position to take. if we all did that nothing would ever change


----------



## Ax^ (Oct 30, 2011)

Harder Games should come with warning sticker "if you are impatient,  ham fisted and graced with the eye hand coordination of a drunk..  Then  This game may not be for you" just to avoid any confusion


----------



## Shippou-Sensei (Oct 30, 2011)

how droll


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Oct 30, 2011)

There's obviously not much point in having endless twitch games have easy modes - instead they need a proper learning curve that covers a reasonable section of the player population. Games which dump you in at the start in impossible bullet storm mode are just poorly designed - it's much easier to have people able to skip ahead.

Games which rely a lot on exploration and plot should allow progress no matter how poor your reflexes are though. Or, at the very least, they should make it fairly unchallenging to keep trying until you get it right - not restrict lives, or have awkward save points, or whatever. I recently completed VVVVVV, which is a retro platform-esque thing that is at times extremely hard, but I kept working at the worst bits because it spawned me at proper points and let me keep trying. (It's actually a really well designed game.)

In contrast, Jet Set Willy, to which it owes a lot, I don't think is a well designed game. As noted, it's extremely hard, but more importantly it has limited lives and kicks you back to the start when you run out, which doesn't increase difficulty, just _annoyance_. As a child I loved the idea of exploring the house but was incredibly frustrated by the play style and eventually didn't bother - in fact I started writing my own exploratory games which weren't that hard.


----------



## Big Gunz (Oct 31, 2011)

Flog 'em on ebay, simples.


----------



## Shippou-Sensei (Oct 31, 2011)

STEAM GAME


----------



## Orang Utan (Oct 31, 2011)

i always play on easy and usually have the walkthrough on my laptop to hand. i can't be bothered with games that involve skill. i just want to shoot things to bits.


----------



## Greebo (Oct 31, 2011)

Orang Utan said:


> i always play on easy and usually have the walkthrough on my laptop to hand. i can't be bothered with games that involve skill. i just want to shoot things to bits.


You play for catharsis then, nothing wrong with that.  I prefer the ones needing a bit more thinking, but give me an RPG and I'll try running the character off the cliff just to see what happens.


----------



## Citizen66 (Oct 31, 2011)

FridgeMagnet said:


> In contrast, Jet Set Willy, to which it owes a lot, I don't think is a well designed game. As noted, it's extremely hard, but more importantly it has limited lives and kicks you back to the start when you run out, which doesn't increase difficulty, just _annoyance_.



Even with the infinite lives cheat, one slip off a ledge that has you falling into a lower screen you lose your life ad nauseum as the game places you at where you entered the screen for your new life; IE - falling again.


----------



## tarannau (Oct 31, 2011)

Shippou-Sensei said:


> but still i think that if people can't finish a game something is wrong. the solution might be tricky but there needs to be a solution or else games as a medium will forever be limiting themselves



You see, I think totally differently. What's the point of most games if there's not a challenge? It's like being able to play like Messi immediately , everyone bosching in goals left, right and centre on their first touch of a football - where's the reward or lasting fun in that? It just lacks sense of progress or achievement, little incentive to improve or pick up again. That's more of a limitation to me.

You seem to want all games to play as some kind of non-competitive procession. For some games that's ok - take the old Laserdisc Dragons Lair type affairs - but it makes the whole think often seem like a bit of unrewarding certainty. You don't necessarily buy a game with the expectation of accessing all the content - you often buy it for the gaming experience and chance of winning. It should be more like a bet or challenge than a sure thing. That way lies boredom to me


----------



## Orang Utan (Oct 31, 2011)

I don't want a challenge. I want fun, not frustration


----------



## tarannau (Oct 31, 2011)

Fine -plenty of options clearly remain for you. Fun for me is often having a decent, well pitched level of difficulty and the sense of vague achievement in seeing the game (and your skills) develop. I've got plenty of games I've never picked up again after discovering too much, too quickly.

This idea that it's somehow 'unfair' that not everyone can access all the same content is false if you ask me. Part of that sense of achievement is wrapped up in the knowledge that others are trying (and struggling) to overcome the same challenges, not waltzing through on cheat modes and leaving spoilers

Different strokes for different folks seems a good thing to me. Let the developers (and players) decide which type of games they want to purchase, not reduce everything to the expectation that all games must be there on a plate to all.


----------



## Shippou-Sensei (Oct 31, 2011)

i want games to be more interactive storytelling than skill challenges.  i love stuff by bethesta  who are probably chapions at this type of thong  but  the same  applies to any game that has significant story.   what makes  something like fallout 3  epic?  is it the skill or the story?   personally i play it  in god mode just  for the story and atmosphere.   same  with all bethesta stuff actually

but  anyhow that is kinda beside the point  i'm arguing  for  a world  where   people who want ther skill challenge can have it  but those who want the storytelling experiance can have it as well.   best of both worlds here people


----------



## Greebo (Oct 31, 2011)

Orang Utan said:


> I don't want a challenge. I want fun, not frustration


Agreed.  Some of the PS1 and 2 games have such complex controls (or menus) that it takes ages to work out how to walk the character around, switch what they're using, change viewpoint, and check what you're doing.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Oct 31, 2011)

Citizen66 said:


> Even with the infinite lives cheat, one slip off a ledge that has you falling into a lower screen you lose your life ad nauseum as the game places you at where you entered the screen for your new life; IE - falling again.


Oh yes, that's true as well, that's even worse. Much as these early games are seminal etc etc, some of them are just not that well designed in terms of player friendliness, and probably relied too much on you having nothing else to do but sit in your bedroom every day for hours with the Spectrum and not have any better games.


----------



## Citizen66 (Oct 31, 2011)

You could easily lose all your lives exploring the place. I think I gave up quite early on actually trying to finish it. It's nice to go down memory lane sometimes though so if you want to be, once again, infuriated...

It lives here > http://www.darnkitty.com/jsw/


----------



## Sunray (Nov 1, 2011)

To answer the original question, ensure that you use all the points you collect to buy upgrades, never horde points there isn't any point. Hunters are easy to kill if you use the hammer fist against them, though takes a bit of time, its one to build up early in the game as it gives you quite an edge against them. Never directly attack them head on, they have this sort of berserker mode which fucks you up the arse with a hot poker, no matter how hard you are at the time.

anyway....

Certain games are a challenge to your hand eye coordination and Prototype is a fairly solid challenge to that because its got shit loads of moves and stuff to get to grips with, part of the fun is learning them and then timing them in combat, which means that hunters in Prototype can barely touch me any more, which was a relief as they were pissing me off. This is one of the essential game experiences of games of this type.

If you are content to seek out what a game offers without the challenge of learning the controls and how to play the game why not watch a movie, they are generally better experiences?


----------



## Random (Nov 2, 2011)

Shippou-Sensei said:


> what makes something like fallout 3 epic? is it the skill or the story? personally i play it in god mode just for the story and atmosphere. same with all bethesta stuff actually


 A lot of the unique atmosphere in Fallout 3 is about being a vulnerable survivor, alone with limited resources. If you change the settings so that you're instead an untouchable god bestriding a shattered world then you may access all the 'content' but at the same time you've lost one of the most touching and human elements of the story/atmosphere.


----------



## tommers (Nov 2, 2011)

I liked hardcore mode in fallout new vegas.  Really added to it.


----------



## Shippou-Sensei (Nov 2, 2011)

Random said:


> A lot of the unique atmosphere in Fallout 3 is about being a vulnerable survivor, alone with limited resources. If you change the settings so that you're instead an untouchable god bestriding a shattered world then you may access all the 'content' but at the same time you've lost one of the most touching and human elements of the story/atmosphere.



so either your a resorectionist  who  reincarnates  every time you die  or you simply don't die

both are equally  ridiculous.  both would ruin the atmosphere if you let them.

for me i equate the  two


----------



## Random (Nov 2, 2011)

Shippou-Sensei said:


> so either your a resorectionist who reincarnates every time you die or you simply don't die
> 
> both are equally ridiculous. both would ruin the atmosphere if you let them.
> 
> for me i equate the two


 They're not the same thing, as even if you 'resurrect' you still strive as hard as you can, with limited resources, to _not_ die. A survival game with horror elements like Fallout 3, but where you can never die, and where nothing can hurt you is missing two important parts of teh experience.

There's a good discussion of the philiosphical implications of death and savegame resurrection at http://www.escapistmagazine.com/art...on/8753-Extra-Punctuation-Death-in-Videogames btw


----------



## Shippou-Sensei (Nov 2, 2011)

Sunray said:


> If you are content to seek out what a game offers without the challenge of learning the controls and how to play the game why not watch a movie, they are generally better experiences?



so i should never buy games  just in case i can't beat them?


----------



## Shippou-Sensei (Nov 2, 2011)

the thing is   i'm not saying you should play the game  that way i'm just asking  for it to be an option.  i don't want to damage  your experiance  i just  want to experiance it for myself.

and a lot of games allow this.  all the bethesta games have cheats.  all valve games have cheats.   are  these  games  any worse off for having them?  no!  and  by having them it  allowed  me to experiance them the  way i wanted.

giving the person who doesn't want the challenge in a game does not detract from other peoples experiance


----------



## Random (Nov 2, 2011)

Shippou-Sensei said:


> the thing is i'm not saying you should play the game that way i'm just asking for it to be an option. i don't want to damage your experiance i just want to experiance it for myself.


 And likewise I'm not saying you shouldn't play games in a way you like. I'm just arguing that you're not actually getting the whole experience, the full content if you play with god mode on. You're getting a different experience, and also missing another one.


----------



## Shippou-Sensei (Nov 2, 2011)

for me that  experiance isn't an enjoyable one    and i'm not sure it  really is the "full"  experience  simply  just another way to experiance the game

if you don't  value  an aspect of a  game  it  adds nothing for you.   i don't  find  that death adds  anything to a game  except frustration .


----------



## Shippou-Sensei (Nov 2, 2011)

Random said:


> And likewise I'm not saying you shouldn't play games in a way you like.



wait so does this mean you think games should have super easy/cheats?


----------



## fractionMan (Nov 2, 2011)

I will send 10 quid to anyone here who's completed moria.

Now that's a hard game.

I'm with shippy here though, easy really should be just that, easy. I don't have fucking forever to master some stupid game and I just want to have fun blowing things up or whatever. I don't want it to be so super hard it pisses me off.


----------



## Random (Nov 2, 2011)

Shippou-Sensei said:


> wait so does this mean you think games should have super easy/cheats?


I said earler that, if a cheat/easy mode can just be 'turned on', based on already existing game features, then I don't have a problem with this. I do think it's unfair to make game designers work towards that goal, though. And right now I'm just arguing about aesthetics, and how we define the concept of 'game content' and the full experience.


----------



## Random (Nov 2, 2011)

A couple of pages ago I said "I'm all for games being as acessible and moddable as possible. Maybe what you're saying could be brought in easily." Sorry if that wasn't clear, but it meant what I say above.


----------



## Shippou-Sensei (Nov 2, 2011)

i'd say that cheat modes are not extra work for developers.  in fact i'd have thought they are standard development tools  which  they must choose to lock out.

as for arguing the point of  the full experience.  i can understand  how death is an aspect of the experiance   but  i'd argue  that  a  lessened  experience is better than  either a frustrating  experience  or perhaps  no experience at all.

to continue to use fallout as an example  i'd say  that  it is preferable to be able to access they story in a manner you find pleasing than it is  to  experience a specific  game play mechanic  which plays  part of the atmosphere.


----------



## Random (Nov 2, 2011)

Shippou-Sensei said:


> to continue to use fallout as an example i'd say that it is preferable to be able to access they story in a manner you find pleasing than it is to experience a specific game play mechanic which plays part of the atmosphere.



I'd say the 'mechanic' is itself a part of the story. How do I use the spoiler code, to give an example from the game's ending?


----------



## Shippou-Sensei (Nov 2, 2011)

[    spoiler   =  something ]    [  /   spoiler  ]


----------



## Random (Nov 2, 2011)

fuck it i can't work it!


----------



## Shippou-Sensei (Nov 2, 2011)

it's not part of the story it's an atmospheric element  that  can  either enhance or  detract from the story depending on your  personal taste.

i think it's like dubbing

i dislike dubbing. i feel  that even the best dubs  are still a layer away from the original experience  and i would  never listen to one.  I do however understand  why some people prefer them.


----------



## Random (Nov 2, 2011)

Shippou-Sensei said:


> i think it's like dubbing


 Only if all through the story other characters keep on referring to the fact that your lips aren't synched.


----------



## Shippou-Sensei (Nov 2, 2011)

remove the spaces!



Spoiler: ending



that ending is a bit broken.  you have  radiation proof  characters in your group who suddenly  don't want to go into the chamber?
besides that's  just like  any  cut scene material   sometimes games just take away your control.   you might  want  to see if you could run through tthe chamber in a radiation suit  spaming  a hot key for radaway.    the game  kills you no matter what your gameplay is like


----------



## rover07 (Nov 2, 2011)

I dont mind games being too hard. They are meant to be a challenge. If you cant progress beyond a certain point then tough, you aren't good enough.

I dont like cheats or easy mode, what is the point if you never die or have unlimited ammo.


----------



## Shippou-Sensei (Nov 2, 2011)

Random said:


> Only if all through the story other characters keep on referring to the fact that you're lips aren't synched.



actually  more like  all the charactors still try  to pretend they are a certain nationality  and are trying to be from a particular  culture  even though they don't  speak the  language and don't  convey  the same subtleties of language


----------



## Shippou-Sensei (Nov 2, 2011)

rover07 said:


> I dont like cheats or easy mode, what is the point if you never die or have unlimited ammo.



story?


----------



## Random (Nov 2, 2011)

Shippou-Sensei said:


> story?


And another point! Games' stories are usually tailored to a learning/power curve. You're referred to as weak and inexperienced at the start, you face pathetic foes, etc. If you're rock-hard all the way through you're not really interacting with the story in the appropriate way for the story to be believable.


----------



## rover07 (Nov 2, 2011)

Shippou-Sensei said:


> story?


What do you mean?


----------



## Shippou-Sensei (Nov 2, 2011)

Random said:


> And another point! Games' stories are usually tailored to a learning/power curve. You're referred to as weak and inexperienced at the start, you face pathetic foes, etc. If you're rock-hard all the way through you're not really interacting with the story in the appropriate way for the story to be believable.



but most of these games  are not realistic or believable in any  meaningful way.  even in "realistic" games you can soak up gunshots  like your skin was 50% kevlar.  realism is a sliding scale in games.


----------



## Shippou-Sensei (Nov 2, 2011)

to use fallout as an example again (well new vagas this time) even the hardcore mode allows for unrealistic things like  fast travel.

but as much as  having hardcore mode in that game adds to some peoples  experience i wouldn't  say fallout 3  had  a worse story due to the lack of that mechanic


----------



## Random (Nov 2, 2011)

Shippou-Sensei said:


> but most of these games are not realistic or believable in any meaningful way. even in "realistic" games you can soak up gunshots like your skin was 50% kevlar. realism is a sliding scale in games.


They're believable within the conventions of (for example) heroic fantasy. There is a sliding scale, I agree, but that surely contradicts your point about there being no difference if you've got god-mode on.


----------



## Shippou-Sensei (Nov 2, 2011)

god mode is believable in the context of a story telling experience.  It is  the extreme end of the scale.   you don't expect the hero of your film or book  to die. they always make it out somehow.  They never get hit  by the  army of gunmen.

what i mean by no difference is  the story remains the same  the  experience is different.  like  with dubbing  or  perhaps 3D.   if a film is shown in 2D or 3D the story is the same  but the experience is different.


----------



## Random (Nov 2, 2011)

Shippou-Sensei said:


> god mode is believable in the context of a story telling experience. It is the extreme end of the scale. you don't expect the hero of your film or book to die. they always make it out somehow. They never get hit by the army of gunmen.


 And that's why people are telling you that maybe you should be watching a film instead. A film presumably not by Sam Pekinpah or written by William Goldman.


----------



## rover07 (Nov 2, 2011)

Yeah I never finished Fallout. Too hard.


----------



## Shippou-Sensei (Nov 2, 2011)

Random said:


> And that's why people are telling you that maybe you should be watching a film instead. A film presumably not by Sam Pekinpah or written by William Goldman.



by that logic i should have never played fallout!  that's  fucking ridiculous!


----------



## Shippou-Sensei (Nov 2, 2011)

besides death is only a single mechanic in a game games are about lots of things including setting your own path and exploration. it's a bit insulting to say don't play games

some  games  take the route of intentionally never letting you get into an unwinnable situation.  that was a big thing in lucas arts  games like monkey island


----------



## stuff_it (Nov 2, 2011)

If I get really upset I look for a walkthrough of that level online in case I've been missing the obvious.


----------



## Sunray (Nov 2, 2011)

FYI : if you find games hard, don't get super meat boy.


Shippou-Sensei said:


> besides death is only a single mechanic in a game games are about lots of things including setting your own path and exploration. it's a bit insulting to say don't play games
> 
> some games take the route of intentionally never letting you get into an unwinnable situation. that was a big thing in lucas arts games like monkey island



Would you attempt to free climb to the top of a climbing wall if you knew you couldn't climb, or attempt to do a Tour De France Alps stage on a bike when you knew you'd not be able and then post on here that you found the experiences frustrating because you couldn't do them?

Not saying don't play games, just saying don't play games that clearly require good hand eye coordination when you don't have it and then moan about them not being the experience you wanted.


----------



## Shippou-Sensei (Nov 2, 2011)

how on earth do you  tell which games are which?

i couldn't tell they would be a bit of prototype i couldn't do before hand.  even if i played the demo i wouldn't have been able to tell

i do avoid stuff like super meat boy     hell i've  even avoided stuff like touhou   because even though i would love to see the story unfold i know the game play is like this



but  is something as  standard as prototype really  meant to be  a test   of skill above the not so good gamers ability?


----------



## Random (Nov 3, 2011)

Shippou-Sensei said:


> by that logic i should have never played fallout! that's fucking ridiculous!


No, I'm just pointing out that the experience you value is similar that which one gets from films. You seem to want games to be less gamey. It's not games' fault that they involve winning and also teh cahnce of losing. That's part of the definition of a game.


----------



## Shippou-Sensei (Nov 3, 2011)

Random said:


> maybe you should be watching a film instead.



is not

maybe you should play games that have a cinimatic experiance


----------



## Random (Nov 3, 2011)

Shippou-Sensei said:


> is not
> 
> maybe you should play games that have a cinimatic experiance


Maybe you should. But most games do not have your cinematic experience built in. They're built around problem-solving, skills and winning and losing.


----------



## Orang Utan (Nov 3, 2011)

boooooooorrrrriiiing!


----------



## kabbes (Nov 3, 2011)

Shippou-Sensei said:


> i'd say that cheat modes are not extra work for developers. in fact i'd have thought they are standard development tools which they must choose to lock out.


Funny enough, there is a four-page feature on that exact thing in this month's Edge. Turns out that cheat modes can represent hundreds of man-hours of extra work for developers. The problem is that everything in the game has to be totally stable. A cheat might somehow break the game. One example given was for a cheat that turned out to delete your save game!

Anyway, I think you've framed this debate incorrectly, Shippy, which is why you're getting into this mire. It seems to me that you aren't really complaining about difficulty _per se_. You're complaining about difficulty _spikes_. The one moment in a game that has a difficulty wildly out of line with the rest of the game, which results in you getting stuck.

And that's a totally valid complaint. Considerable research is done by developers these days to try to work out where such spikes appear. In today's online world, they will know what % of games complete each level, and where large numbers of gamers completely stop.

True difficulty spikes are not a case of a developer choosing to present a particular skill curve. They're just bad design. Increasingly, you don't see them. And thank God for that, because they are as frustrating as hell.

I think the worst one I encountered was right near the end of God of War. You had to climb a considerable distance on a rotating column of spikes. One false move and you died. Changing the difficulty level didn't help, because that just affected NPC enemies, not the platforming. I'm bloody good at third-person action games, even if I say so myself, and that 5 minute section still took me about 2 hours to get past. Apparently the vast majority of gamers never made it. That's the kind of difficulty spike that helps nobody.


----------



## revol68 (Nov 3, 2011)

Orang Utan said:


> I don't want a challenge. I want fun, not frustration



people like you are why we can't have nice things!


----------



## revol68 (Nov 3, 2011)

and yes games need to be bloody harder, they're far too easy these days, just a constant procession of progress and various achievement validation for doing the most basic things.

Halo 3 had a couple of massive difficulty spikes in it and whilst somewhat frustrating getting past it gave you that "fuck yeah, take that you cunt" fist pump at the screen that is lacking from 99% of single player games.

The problem is gamers like my wee bro who have no patience, he is probably now the core demographic for game publishers, whereas back in the day it was reclusive fuckwits like myself.

I think the Halo series has the best difficulty arrangement and enemy AI of all the single player games I've played lately.


----------



## Shippou-Sensei (Nov 3, 2011)

oh well so much for cheats.

but no i wasn't just talking about spikes, although they are an issue too. i was just more commenting about difficulty in general and the evolution of games to being more than just skill tests but storytelling mediums

i think as games evolve  and markets open up  things like difficulty  will become a limitation on games.


----------



## kabbes (Nov 3, 2011)

The problems you raised all seemed to be related to spikes, though.


----------



## Shippou-Sensei (Nov 3, 2011)

yes  but  even if it is a steady curve  the can be a point at which you can't proceed any further


----------



## Random (Nov 3, 2011)

Shippou why do you refuse our attempts to help you?


----------



## Random (Nov 3, 2011)

Shippou-Sensei said:


> i think as games evolve and markets open up things like difficulty will become a limitation on games.


 As I've been saying again and again, difficulty is also an enabler of storytelling in games.


----------



## DotCommunist (Nov 3, 2011)

Hows about this then shippy. They could sell easy versions of the games and then hard versions of the game.

The likes of tyrannasur can just buy the hard version and other can opt for the easy version.

I see no flaw in this


----------



## kabbes (Nov 3, 2011)

If you're talking about difficulty in general then I'd say we potentially have problems.  Problems that are _specifically_ related to games as a storytelling medium.

Look, the whole point of telling a story via a game (rather than a film or book) is the nature of its interaction.

There are many, many disadvantages to telling a story in a game, all related to the loss of author agency.  The author loses the ability to direct the shot -- you might be looking the wrong way or get the pacing wrong.  The author also loses the ability to direct the motivation and even emotion -- you, as the star, may simply not feel the things that the author wants the character to feel.

Where games exceed passive authored media, however, is in interaction and player agency.  The game has the chance to make you feel a different type of emotion, related to being actually placed inside a situation.  At the simple level, there is an adrenaline rush from defeating a bad guy that no film can ever replicate.  At the more complex level, you have something like Shadow of the Colossus, which artfully creates questions surround the whole nature of following orders by forcing the player to make decisions with imperfect knowledge that have profound consequences; again, no book or film can match this.

So then we come to difficulty level (as opposed to the aforementioned difficulty spike).  What is the difficulty there for, in a storytelling medium?  It can only be to serve this kind of player agency. It makes the decisions real; there are real consequences for actions, which heightens the nature of the interaction.

Given this, there is an artistic compromise involved in neutering difficulty beyond that which the developer believes is appropriate in order to set up the story interaction.  If you lose too much difficulty, you're left without the consequence of player agency and all you're left with is a heavily (_heavily_) compromised film-like story instead.  It doesn't play to the strengths of the medium at all.

So, in summary, if you're serious about games as a storytelling medium, the last thing you should be insisting on is pacifying the difficulty beyond the point that the developer sees as appropriate.  Games will never create the stories that their potential promises if you take that route.


----------



## Shippou-Sensei (Nov 3, 2011)

i get that argument totally.

i'm not asking for the total removal of difficulty from games i'm asking for an alternate approach for people for who the standard method denies access.

i don't think this has to be an all or nothing approach

is it not better that the people who can't finish the "full experience" at least get something out of the game?

people with hearing difficulties can opt  for subtitles.  it isn't the full experiance  it loses much of the full experiance but it does allow   for them to experiance the game in their own way.


----------



## kabbes (Nov 3, 2011)

I dunno, Shippy.  There comes a point at which the nature of the experience is so changed that the developer might no longer wish to stand behind it.  If all you want to do is see the cut scenes then you can do that on YouTube.

This is all strictly within the framework of treating games as storytelling experiences, you understand. If you want to argue from other perspectives then there are discussions to be had there too.


----------



## Shippou-Sensei (Nov 3, 2011)

cut scenes alone are not the full story experience.

i'f always  enjoyed playing games on god mode.  there is a whole welth of experiance between  playing  a game normally  and just watching cut scenes

with some games   like   mass effect or fallout  personally  i feel  the branching story lines  and  player choice experience massively outweighs  the  combat  experience.


----------



## revol68 (Nov 3, 2011)

Shippou-Sensei said:


> i get that argument totally.
> 
> i'm not asking for the total removal of difficulty from games i'm asking for an alternate approach for people for who the standard method denies access.
> 
> ...



But why this need for "inclusion", games aren't for everyone and shouldn't attempt to be. Any media that tries to include everyone ends up watered down shit that satisfies no one.

It used to be something to complete a game, now it's nothing and you have people whining that they cos they paid for a game they have a divine right to see all the content ie complete it.

Those who argue games should be simply fun and not entail things like frustration are missing the point, you need that frustration to frame the fun, the enjoyment comes from learning and improving. It is this that games have over other media forms that it can't afford to lose otherwise what you end up with is shitty vaguely interactive movie. You need a sense of learning, of development, of getting to grips with more and more mechanics and slowly mastering them, not simply to be told every 5 mins you are great and here's some achievement points for doing something basic.


----------



## kabbes (Nov 3, 2011)

Shippou-Sensei said:


> cut scenes alone are not the full story experience.


No, that's right.  Cut scenes are not even a drop in the ocean of the full story experience, because the full story experience includes player agency, which requires in turn a certain degree of difficulty.



> i'f always enjoyed playing games on god mode. there is a whole welth of experiance between playing a game normally and just watching cut scenes
> 
> with some games like mass effect or fallout personally i feel the branching story lines and player choice experience massively outweighs the combat experience.



You can watch those branching story lines on YouTube.
Or you could read those branching story lines in a couple of minutes on numerous sites.

What makes the player choice meaningful is the fact you have to live with the consequences of your decisions in the combat that follows.  And what makes the story lines meaningful is that you had to fight to get to them.


----------



## Shippou-Sensei (Nov 3, 2011)

i simply disagree with that.  i feel that there is a separation between player choice and player combat


----------



## revol68 (Nov 3, 2011)

also Shippy with games like Fallout 3 and Mass Effect there needs to be a sense of danger, a sense of consequence.

Bioshock's idea of having you respawn back would have ruined the game for me if I had made use of it, after there were people just hitting a Big Daddy a couple of times, dying, respawning, hitting it a couple more times, dying, respawning and so on until the Big Daddy eventually died. That is a shit mechanic.

Also if you can't complete a modern game on easy you should probably go back to your colouring in books.


----------



## Shippou-Sensei (Nov 3, 2011)

kabbes said:


> Or you could read those branching story lines in a couple of minutes on numerous sites.



and by that comparison i never have to watch a film again as the plots are avalible online


----------



## Shippou-Sensei (Nov 3, 2011)

revol68 said:


> Also if you can't complete a modern game on easy you should probably go back to your colouring in books.



and that's you not arguing just being a dickhead


----------



## revol68 (Nov 3, 2011)

Shippou-Sensei said:


> i simply disagree with that. i feel that there is a separation between player choice and player combat



that's the problem with a lot of games, there is, the choice is arbitrary, a tacked on option at the end of a gamplay section. As such the majority of your game time becomes redundant to actual choices


----------



## kabbes (Nov 3, 2011)

Shippou-Sensei said:


> and by that comparison i never have to watch a film again as the plots are avalible online


Ah, but films play to _their_ strengths as a storytelling medium, which means viewing their "cut scenes" means watching the entire movie.


----------



## revol68 (Nov 3, 2011)

Shippou-Sensei said:


> and that's you not arguing just being a dickhead



it's true though.

should great novels be simplified for children learning to read?
also you do realise when I said "if you can't" and "go back to your colouring in books" I was talking in a general sense and not aimed at you, who I always assumed to be pretty damn good at gaming.


----------



## kabbes (Nov 3, 2011)

revol68 said:


> that's the problem with a lot of games, there is, the choice is arbitrary, a tacked on option at the end of a gamplay section. As such the majority of your game time becomes redundant to actual choices


Indeed, there are a lot of games that don't tell good stories at all.  For those games, the entire argument based on storytelling fails -- from both perspectives.

These are the games that are focused on game mechanic.  We can have the discussion about whether these type of games are reliant on a certain level of difficulty too, if Shippy wants.


----------



## Shippou-Sensei (Nov 3, 2011)

i don't see why giving a wider range of choice is such a problem

i don't see why  things have to exist  in a manner that excludes people

i see  reasons why   the options  are perhaps less than ideal  but i've not yet  see an argument that   shows  that making games have easy options  is worse than making games that are unfinishable for some

why is  easy worse than unplayable?


----------



## Shippou-Sensei (Nov 3, 2011)

i have said before i feel that games that exist primarily as skill chalenges   are  fairly much exempt


----------



## kabbes (Nov 3, 2011)

Shippou-Sensei said:


> i don't see why giving a wider range of choice is such a problem
> 
> i don't see why things have to exist in a manner that excludes people
> 
> ...


Games shouldn't be unplayable.  And there should be difficulty levels.

AND, I would argue, these difficulty levels should be dynamic -- no game should force you to choose at the outset before you even know how difficult you are going to find it and then stick with that choice.

Nor, really, should we be restricted to "easy, medium, difficult".  Games can offer a lot more assistance than that; assistance that doesn't necessarily interfere with player agency.  (Goldeneye Wii is an interesting example; there are control mechanisms that even allow people with no gaming experience to control it, as an FPS.  The game is assisting them but it is nothing to do with difficulty level).

There's a big gap between all of that, though, and saying that the easy level should be arbitrarily easy to the point that literally anybody can walk their way through a game.  A degree of peril always has to remain and that peril may mean that some people find it too difficult.


----------



## revol68 (Nov 3, 2011)

Shippou-Sensei said:


> i don't see why giving a wider range of choice is such a problem
> 
> i don't see why things have to exist in a manner that excludes people
> 
> ...



I think games should have easy difficulty settings, but as we know the settings can only affect certain things, it can't change fundamental game mechanics, puzzles etc

The problem is many games are becoming far too easy in their fundamental mechanics, and so whilst yes the option exists to play at a harder difficulty, all it does is change a number of variables such as number of hits you can take, the amount of hits it takes to kill an enemy, or gives the enemies ridiculous vision and accuracy. So yes it is more difficult but it is still simplistic.


----------



## Santino (Nov 3, 2011)

I loved that bit in the final battle in Homeworld when a new enemy fleet suddenly materialises out of hyperspace and I thought 'Fuck this, I can't beat them too,' and then they turned out to be on my side and helped win. Awesome.

HTH.


----------



## kabbes (Nov 3, 2011)

Homeworld


----------



## Santino (Nov 3, 2011)

Homeworld: Cataclysm was less satisfying.


----------



## Shippou-Sensei (Nov 3, 2011)

kabbes said:


> Games shouldn't be unplayable. And there should be difficulty levels.
> 
> AND, I would argue, these difficulty levels should be dynamic -- no game should force you to choose at the outset before you even know how difficult you are going to find it and then stick with that choice.
> 
> ...



overall i agree with this.  i was only  focusing on  games that offer  difficulty choices as a start as i felt  that they gave a false choice.  they  allowed you to pick easy   but then presented  something that  i would say most regular people  wouldn't call easy.

i just feel that ideally  a game shouldn't exclude *anyone. *

i don't think there is just one gaming experience  and i think  that  a game without skill challenges is  equally valid as a game  if it has player choice as it primary form of agency


----------



## kabbes (Nov 3, 2011)

Do you have an example of such a game?  One focused on the problem of general difficulty rather than difficulty spikes?


----------



## Ax^ (Nov 3, 2011)

Let's just hope he never tries to Dead souls


----------



## kabbes (Nov 3, 2011)

Ax^ said:


> Let's just hope he never tries to Dead souls


Demon's Souls?
Dark Souls?


----------



## Random (Nov 3, 2011)

Shippou-Sensei said:


> i just feel that ideally a game shouldn't exclude *anyone.*


 It's inevitable that all games will exclude someone. As kabbes says, there's always someone for whom the easy setting is too hard. Sounds like you want no difficulty at all, for a game to be a choose-your-own-adventure book.


----------



## Shippou-Sensei (Nov 3, 2011)

kabbes said:


> Do you have an example of such a game? One focused on the problem of general difficulty rather than difficulty spikes?



not off the top of my head i'm not a  big gamer  and a lot of my games i play with cheats on.


----------



## revol68 (Nov 3, 2011)

Shippou-Sensei said:


> overall i agree with this. i was only focusing on games that offer difficulty choices as a start as i felt that they gave a false choice. they allowed you to pick easy but then presented something that i would say most regular people wouldn't call easy.
> 
> i just feel that ideally a game shouldn't exclude *anyone. *
> 
> i don't think there is just one gaming experience and i think that a game without skill challenges is equally valid as a game if it has player choice as it primary form of agency



A game should never try to include everyone, that leads to bullshit games that satisfy no one.

Gaming as a whole however should definitely be more inclusive and by more inclusive I don't mean shitty Wii style party games, I mean that the plots and genres should be less narrow. I mean Gears of War 3 is a perfect example of how not to be more inclusive, that game is a fucking retarded mess and it's attempts at inclusion of women and black characters would be offensive if not so laughable.


----------



## Shippou-Sensei (Nov 3, 2011)

Random said:


> Sounds like you want no difficulty at all, for a game to be a choose-your-own-adventure book.



i don't feel like that would be a bad idea.

it works for stuff like  point and click adventures.  one of my favorite games of all time   is  grim fandango  and  that operates on that level


----------



## kabbes (Nov 3, 2011)

revol68 said:


> A game should never try to include everyone, that leads to bullshit games that satisfy no one.
> 
> Gaming as a whole however should definitely be more inclusive and by more inclusive I don't mean shitty Wii style party games, I mean that the plots and genres should be less narrow. I mean Gears of War 3 is a perfect example of how not to be more inclusive, that game is a fucking retarded mess and it's attempts at inclusion of women and black characters would be offensive if not so laughable.


It's interesting how much Heavy Rain caught the attention of people well outside the usual demographic, just because it was about real people.


----------



## kabbes (Nov 3, 2011)

Shippou-Sensei said:


> not off the top of my head i'm not a big gamer and a lot of my games i play with cheats on.


To be honest then, Shippy, I'm not sure you have a case.  Your argument is that some games are generally too difficult even on the easiest setting and that this is true above and beyond the existence of difficulty spikes.  But you have precisely no examples of what you are claiming to be the case.


----------



## revol68 (Nov 3, 2011)

Shippou-Sensei said:


> i don't feel like that would be a bad idea.
> 
> it works for stuff like point and click adventures. one of my favorite games of all time is grim fandango and that operates on that level



yeah it works for those games, or rather those games are inherently like that through their design.

it doesn't work for other games though because for them to be enjoyable they have to offer a challenge and you have to feel like there are consequences to fucking up. One of the things about real freedom of choice is that you need to be able to make a poor choice and deal with the consequences of that.


----------



## Shippou-Sensei (Nov 3, 2011)

just because i can name one they don't exist?  does not the hypothetical argument work anyhow?

anyhow i'm not even sure my case was a spike  it  may have just  been the point where i reached the limit of my abilities at the time

if  you can't get passed a point   how  do you know ifit is a spike?  other had said the game got harder after that point anyhow


----------



## revol68 (Nov 3, 2011)

kabbes said:


> It's interesting how much Heavy Rain caught the attention of people well outside the usual demographic, just because it was about real people.



yeah I'd love to try that and ICO/SOC and Wipeout HD, unfortunately I don't have a PS3 and after spending £140 on a new gfx card for BF3 I won't be a position to buy one.

I always thought a war fps/rpg where you could play as numerous characters with actual back stories would be awesome. Like not just being a Marine but also maybe an Al Qaeda member, showing the back stories of how they both ended up where they are, dealing with complex politics etc.

But alas they'd never do it.


----------



## Shippou-Sensei (Nov 3, 2011)

revol68 said:


> yeah it works for those games, or rather those games are inherently like that through their design.
> 
> it doesn't work for other games though because for them to be enjoyable they have to offer a challenge and you have to feel like there are consequences to fucking up. One of the things about real freedom of choice is that you need to be able to make a poor choice and deal with the consequences of that.



choice or  skill?  i feel fine  about player choice in a game. i love games with player choice

i'm less keen where player skill prevents access to  player choice.

this argument  seems  to be going in circles


----------



## revol68 (Nov 3, 2011)

Shippou-Sensei said:


> just because i can name one they don't exist? does not the hypothetical argument work anyhow?
> 
> anyhow i'm not even sure my case was a spike it may have just been the point where i reached the limit of my abilities at the time
> 
> if you can't get passed a point how do you know ifit is a spike? other had said the game got harder after that point anyhow



either get better and get past it or don't and get over it.

arguing that all games should be completeable by anyone of any skill level cos of it is a bit mad.


----------



## kabbes (Nov 3, 2011)

revol68 said:


> yeah I'd love to try that and ICO/SOC and Wipeout HD, unfortunately I don't have a PS3 and after spending £140 on a new gfx card for BF3 I won't be a position to buy one.
> 
> I always thought a war fps/rpg where you could play as numerous characters with actual back stories would be awesome. Like not just being a Marine but also maybe an Al Qaeda member, showing the back stories of how they both ended up where they are, dealing with complex politics etc.
> 
> But alas they'd never do it.



I started a short-lived thread previously about The Stanley Parable, a Half-Life 2 mod that is about the nature of choices.  It's a fascinating first-person non-game that has nothing to do with shooting.

Now, that isn't the kind of thing you could make a proper game out of.  But it does show an interesting approach to thinking of game spaces as something other than being all about run'n'gun.


----------



## revol68 (Nov 3, 2011)

Shippou-Sensei said:


> choice or skill? i feel fine about player choice in a game. i love games with player choice
> 
> i'm less keen where player skill prevents access to player choice.
> 
> this argument seems to be going in circles



they shouldn't be seperate.

for example you could have a choice of doing something one way which is harder but gives a better pay off/ consequence, that should then lead to a consequence of it becoming more difficult. And on the otherhand if you are playing really well it should open up more choices for your character.

That way choice and consequence permeates through out the entire game and doesn't feel tacked on and arbitrary.


----------



## kabbes (Nov 3, 2011)

Shippou-Sensei said:


> just because i can name one they don't exist? does not the hypothetical argument work anyhow?



If nobody can name one then by definition they don't exist.  You're the only one suggesting that they exist, so if you can't name one then, well...

The hypothetical argument is only interesting to a point.  Eventually, it comes down to specifics.  What, precisely, constitutes "too hard"?  Could that game be nerfed and still enjoy the consequences necessary to the interactive storytelling?  Without a game to assess, we're stuck.



> anyhow i'm not even sure my case was a spike it may have just been the point where i reached the limit of my abilities at the time
> 
> if you can't get passed a point how do you know ifit is a spike? other had said the game got harder after that point anyhow


Did it get harder and harder to continue until you ran out of steam?  Or were you going along quite happily until you reached a particular point that just seemed impossible?


----------



## Shippou-Sensei (Nov 3, 2011)

i've said this time and again.  it's  not  that i don't see why things like difficulty  play a part in the gaming  experience  i just feel that a reduced experience is better than no experience.


----------



## kabbes (Nov 3, 2011)

Shippou-Sensei said:


> i've said this time and again. it's not that i don't see why things like difficulty play a part in the gaming experience i just feel that a reduced experience is better than no experience.


Maybe the developer disagrees.


----------



## revol68 (Nov 3, 2011)

kabbes said:


> If nobody can name one then by definition they don't exist. You're the only one suggesting that they exist, so if you can't name one then, well...
> 
> The hypothetical argument is only interesting to a point. Eventually, it comes down to specifics. What, precisely, constitutes "too hard"? Could that game be nerfed and still enjoy the consequences necessary to the interactive storytelling? Without a game to assess, we're stuck.
> 
> Did it get harder and harder to continue until you ran out of steam? Or were you going along quite happily until you reached a particular point that just seemed impossible?



Well the menus were pretty straight forward and the cut scene I did in one go but after that...


----------



## Shippou-Sensei (Nov 3, 2011)

kabbes said:


> Did it get harder and harder to continue until you ran out of steam? Or were you going along quite happily until you reached a particular point that just seemed impossible?



a spike  would requitre that game play got  easyetr again afterwards.   at best  you can only say that  the curve  was steady or sharp at this point


----------



## revol68 (Nov 3, 2011)

Shippou-Sensei said:


> i've said this time and again. it's not that i don't see why things like difficulty play a part in the gaming experience i just feel that a reduced experience is better than no experience.



no it's not.

especially if no experience for 5% of muppets without the skill or patience means that 95% don't have to have a reduced experience in a futile attempt to include absolutely everyone.


----------



## Shippou-Sensei (Nov 3, 2011)

kabbes said:


> Maybe the developer disagrees.



perhaps

but this then leads me back to my original question.  what do you do then?

do you think you should be able to return your  game to the developer?

at the moment the  purchaser  kinda gets screwed


----------



## revol68 (Nov 3, 2011)

Shippou-Sensei said:


> a spike would requitre that game play got easyetr again afterwards. at best you can only say that the curve was steady or sharp at this point



oh come on, now you are being a semantic arse.


----------



## revol68 (Nov 3, 2011)

Shippou-Sensei said:


> perhaps
> 
> but this then leads me back to my original question. what do you do then?
> 
> ...



Sell it, trade it in or lock it away as a token of their ineptitude and muppetry.

They certainly shouldn't embarrass themselves by lobbying for an extra easy retard setting.


----------



## Shippou-Sensei (Nov 3, 2011)

revol68 said:


> no it's not.
> 
> especially if no experience for 5% of muppets without the skill or patience means that 95% don't have to have a reduced experience in a futile attempt to include absolutely everyone.



where the fuck did i say you HAD to play the recduced experience?


----------



## revol68 (Nov 3, 2011)

Shippou-Sensei said:


> where the fuck did i say you HAD to play the recduced experience?



well haven't we just discussed how difficulty is more than just a setting and instead involves core mechanics that can't be turned up or down the way enemy bullet damage and health can be.


----------



## Shippou-Sensei (Nov 3, 2011)

i think the waters are too muddy to point at particular mechanics

i don't think this is an impossible task

i do feel it is something  to aspire to


----------



## ska invita (Nov 3, 2011)

I took me about 3 years to get to level 5 of Nebulus, and never got past that. There are 9 levels I think. Brilliant game. You cant win them all


----------



## Orang Utan (Nov 3, 2011)

Did you not get bored?


----------



## kabbes (Nov 3, 2011)

Nebulus was brilliant but impossible.  I suck at 2-D platformers.    That's why I tend to avoid them. (Except for Braid and Limbo, because some things have to be tried.)


----------



## revol68 (Nov 3, 2011)

Shippou-Sensei said:


> i think the waters are too muddy to point at particular mechanics
> 
> i don't think this is an impossible task
> 
> i do feel it is something to aspire to



I think it's impossible without breaking the game mechanics and I also think it's a futile task motivated by the same pathetic ideology of "inclusion" that reduces everything to the lowest common demonitar.


----------



## Orang Utan (Nov 3, 2011)

what we need is a sandbox game called massacre. no challenges, no learning, no puzzles, just 100% murder.


----------



## Shippou-Sensei (Nov 3, 2011)

Orang Utan said:


> what we need is a sandbox game called massacre. no challenges, no learning, no puzzles, just 100% murder.



saints row  with cheats is kinda that


----------



## Termite Man (Nov 3, 2011)

Shippou-Sensei said:


> i've said this time and again. it's not that i don't see why things like difficulty play a part in the gaming experience i just feel that a reduced experience is better than no experience.



but you have had a reduced experience, it's just not the reduced experience you wanted. Going back to the question of different difficulty settings, where do you draw the line for these extra easy settings, you may be having trouble with this one bit so that gets made easier on another difficulty setting but it's still too hard for someone else so it's made easier again etc. You just happen to fall into the category of people who just can't do it, which to be honest is a risk with games when you buy them because IMO that is the main point of the gaming experience.


----------



## Shippou-Sensei (Nov 3, 2011)

i never said i had a perfect solution

i just feel that the current  position leaves LOTS to be desired.

i'm not against challenge  but  feel that its  often handled  badly  and  will often come down to just  reflex chalenges


----------



## Termite Man (Nov 3, 2011)

The problem is there is a massive risk with any game that it won't be as good as you want which you don't know until you play it, whether it's too easy, too hard, too repetitive you just don't get a proper feel for it even if you play a demo. I guess this wouldn't be an issue if the games cost less which is why I only buy games a long time after their original release and the price has dropped.

I got Assasins Creed for christmas when it came out and I was really looking forward to playing it but the game was repetitive, and easy (and the story was pretty shit as well) all things the developers could have changed but there is nothing I can do about that either and I didn't start moaning about it because I understand the risk that when you buy a game it may not suit you, I think this is the case with you and prototype (unless it happens a lot with you and this is just the game that sent you over the edge enough to complain here about it)


----------



## Cloud (Nov 3, 2011)

WoW is too hard for me, I'm shit at it yet played for 5 years, I can't be bothered with all the add on's and macros and micro statistically gearing your player. You are given choices but diverting from the norm doesn't work, one build is the best and thats it.

I rarely buy games but I'm definately a FPS action type of person, naturally paranoid and on edge, twitch gaming suits me.


----------



## Shippou-Sensei (Nov 4, 2011)

i really like  games  with leveling systems  as a way round this.  in an rpg or fps with  leveling  if i find a certain bit too difficult i just grind an area for a while     for those  who  want challenge they  can attempt  the  boss early


----------



## Epona (Nov 4, 2011)

Shippou-Sensei said:


> i really like games with leveling systems as a way round this. in an rpg or fps with leveling if i find a certain bit too difficult i just grind an area for a while for those who want challenge they can attempt the boss early



Yeah this is why I play RPGs (that and the story and the role-playing too of course) 'cos when they're done right it's about character skill rather than player quick reactions and button mashing. Something too difficult? Go do other stuff for a while to gain some levels then try again. Mind you there are some RPGs that got this terribly wrong - eg. Oblivion (which I still think is a good game btw) with enemies that levelled with you and the levelling just added more and more HP to them making combat at higher levels long-winded and tedious and didn't really leave you with any feeling that your character was more powerful than at the beginning of the game (in fact it feels like the reverse is true!) - and Alpha Protocol which had horrible mini-games requiring quick reactions and mouse movement, I couldn't even get through the tutorial because I'm a bit cack-handed. There's something wrong with a game that bills itself as an RPG that does that - this is IMO what comes of FPS/twitch-game fans trying RPGs and then moaning that they want them to be more FPS-y, developers try to produce weird hybrids that fully satisfy neither market.


----------



## Random (Nov 6, 2011)

Epona said:


> Yeah this is why I play RPGs (that and the story and the role-playing too of course) 'cos when they're done right it's about character skill rather than player quick reactions and button mashing. Something too difficult? Go do other stuff for a while to gain some levels then try again.


This is pretty much what I do. Play very few fps. The lock picking mini-game in Fallout 3 was about as close to a skill challenge as I want to get.


----------



## Epona (Nov 7, 2011)

Random said:


> This is pretty much what I do. Play very few fps. The lock picking mini-game in Fallout 3 was about as close to a skill challenge as I want to get.



On the whole, I fucking hate mini-games - if I want to play a frustrating and tiresome little game over and over again, there are hundreds if not thousands of flash games that I can play online for free that provide much the same experience. In FO3 though I found it alright, because there was a marked decrease in difficulty tied in with your character skill level - at a high character skill level, the very hard locks had a much bigger "sweet spot" than the easy locks at a low skill level, so it reflected your character's skill. Hacking terminals was the same, at higher skill levels you got more bracketed code allowing you to remove duff passwords - at high hacking level you could easily remove all the incorrect passwords on any terminal so you didn't even need to work it out like a game of mastermind - and even at lower levels, neither was a test of your mouse/button finger reflexes and reaction time!

Never could get the hang of lockpicking in Oblivion (some people say it is piss easy to pick even a very hard lock at a low level, but I just can't do that mini-game AT ALL) - doesn't matter because there is an auto-pick button, just stock up on lockpicks and generally speaking, the amount of picks you get through trying to auto-pick a lock is related to your lockpicking skill level, or practice your alteration skill to get the best lock-related spells, either way it's not going to prevent you getting through the game.

But then looking back at Morrowind, a lot of people complained that when in combat if you have a low skill level you make a lot of misses - your spell doesn't work or you don't hit the rat with your sword when you swipe at it. I never had a problem with that because I came to computer games via table-top pen and paper RPGs and then onto stuff based on the AD&D ruleset like Baldur's Gate - and if your skill level is low or you get a bad roll, you miss, or your spell backfires - so for me that seemed a perfectly natural way to represent character skill level in any RPG - but then all the whiners came along and said they were standing in front of the rat and their aim as a player is good so obviously should have hit it, and let's have less "dice roll" based combat and more player skill involved, and then you start getting RPGs that become less about character skill and more about player skill, enter the action-RPG and trying to please all of the people all of the time etc etc....


----------



## Shippou-Sensei (Nov 7, 2011)

it took me  forever to workout how to do lockpicking in fall out  but as soon as i got it  i was  away

oblivion lockpicking was weird.  and  difficult  i broke so many picks even when all the pins looked aligned.  glad i was playing a mage  and  quickly  got the fuck your lock  spell


----------



## Random (Nov 9, 2011)

Epona said:


> I never had a problem with that because I came to computer games via table-top pen and paper RPGs and then onto stuff based on the AD&D ruleset like Baldur's Gate - and if your skill level is low or you get a bad roll, you miss, or your spell backfires - so for me that seemed a perfectly natural way to represent character skill level in any RPG.


 Yes, me too. Never noticed that about the bracketed code on F3; although I got my computer skill up high, always takes me ages to hack. Maybe I'm doing it wrong by not looking out for those brackets.


----------



## Blackandyellow (Nov 12, 2011)

No such thing as being too hard. You just haven't tried enough times yet. Seriously. It's all about the strategy. And if you reach a point where you think you tried everything you could possibly think off, you could always check the game's forums and see what other players did to finish the level / game.


----------



## Orang Utan (Nov 12, 2011)

That's boring though


----------



## fractionMan (Nov 14, 2011)

Back when I had a DS I just gave up on advance wars. Couldn't be fucking bothered replaying levels over and over again.

I think I stopped being bothered right after I completed xenon2 at the age of 14.


----------

