Register | Login
Views: 19364387
Main | Memberlist | Active users | ACS | Commons | Calendar | Online users
Ranks | FAQ | Color Chart | Photo album | IRC Chat
11-02-05 12:59 PM
1 user currently in General Gaming: supernova05 | 4 guests
Acmlm's Board - I2 Archive - General Gaming - Games Getting Easier? | |
Pages: 1 2 3Add to favorites | "RSS" Feed | Next newer thread | Next older thread
User Post
Kasumi-Astra
Administrator
Level: 62

Posts: 1531/1867
EXP: 1971846
For next: 12840

Since: 03-15-04
From: Reading, UK
Uni: Sheffield, UK

Since last post: 1 day
Last activity: 12 hours
Posted on 05-29-05 06:24 PM Link | Quote
This came about from my experiences playing Link to the Past in comparison to Ocarina of Time. I owned Ocarina of Time and played it to completion before I owned Link to the Past. I've just started my second serious attempt at playing LttP the entire way through.

Now, just playing makes me realise how games are getting so much more easier. When I played Ocarina of Time for the first time, I died a lot in each dungeon but not nearly as much as in Link to the Past. I'm also realising how easy it is to get yourself killed in the overworld in LttP.

I think it comes down to a few important points:

Enemy density in LttP, overworld > OoT
Enemy density in LttP, dungeons > OoT
LttP expects the player to go out and find heart pieces + extras than OoT
LttP is designed to give more "Game Overs" than OoT
LttP offers less in-game hints and directions than OoT (Navi)

So, this is what it really comes down to... As a population, are gamers becoming less tollerant of difficulty in games, or is technology improving to offer more creative ways of suggesting to the player what they should do? Do you think some games are designed with strategy guides in mind? Which games, if any, do you play with a strategy guide, and how do you use them?


(edited by Kasumi Skywalker on 05-29-05 01:25 AM)
Emptyeye
I am a real American!
Real American
Level: 67

Posts: 1835/2273
EXP: 2488421
For next: 104451

Since: 05-24-04
From: I DUNNOOOOOOOO!!

Since last post: 9 hours
Last activity: 4 hours
Posted on 05-29-05 07:59 PM Link | Quote
Well, I do think strategy guides are far more prevalent now than, say, in 1992 when ALttP came out. That said, it's important to make a distinction here. Just because games seem EASIER than they were in the "old days"--be it because the games are actually easier, or because practically all of them, including action games, give you moreplaces to save (Meaning less mind-numbing repetition of stages like the NES Ninja Gaiden's 6-2)--doesn't mean that they're SHORTER at their core. For proof, one need look no further than LttP versus OoT in terms of speeding through the game--if you know what you're doing, the former can be completed in under 2 hours, the latter takes at least 5.
Xeolord

- B l u e s -
Power Metal > All
Level: 81

Posts: 1992/3418
EXP: 4884196
For next: 108653

Since: 03-15-04
From: Yeah

Since last post: 15 hours
Last activity: 15 hours
Posted on 05-29-05 08:43 PM Link | Quote
LttP, was somewhat hard?
Guess I've played that game too much, I usually go through it without dying. OoT in my opinion was actually harder, it was more frustrating with levels like the Water Temple, and so on.

Games really have gotten much easier though over the past years. Simply look back to games like Battletoads, Gradius, Thunderforce, Strider, and plenty of other games that would actually "kick your ass".

And I don't think Ninja Gaiden cuts it. That game really wasn't all that hard in my opinion, it just required skill, you had to "try". I even beat the game on Hard and that was still nothing compared to the level of difficulty of games in the past.

As for strategy guides, I'm one who thinks they "take away from the game", so it would be rare to see me using one. Example, I bought the Final Fantasy IX strategy guide when I was on the 4th disc of the game. I only bought it to get all of the cards, and to basically find everything that I may have missed at the end of the game.

I'm somebody that also thinks games these days are "too short", but Emptyeye brings up a good point. I think the main thing is, is that games nowadays don't have the replay value that they had 10 years ago. Games for the NES, and SNES, you probably played over, and over again because it never got old (at least I did?), but games these days seem to either be a one time play through, or maybe just twice. Thus, we think they have less value when it comes to length.

All in all I really don't know what else to say other than "Yes, I think games are a lot easier than compared to what they used to be".


(edited by Darth Xeodious on 05-29-05 03:44 AM)
Ran-chan

Moldorm
eek, when are they going to stop growing...
Level: 143

Posts: 9708/12781
EXP: 35293588
For next: 538220

Since: 03-15-04
From: Nerima District, Tokyo - Japan

Since last post: 12 hours
Last activity: 12 hours
Posted on 05-29-05 08:57 PM Link | Quote
Originally posted by Darth Xeodious


Games really have gotten much easier though over the past years. Simply look back to games like Battletoads, Gradius, Thunderforce, Strider, and plenty of other games that would actually "kick your ass".



I
Private Adamant

Hardhat Beetle
Moderator
It's teh fun!!!
Level: 37

Posts: 428/551
EXP: 316129
For next: 22124

Since: 03-15-04
From: Halden, Norway

Since last post: 22 hours
Last activity: 14 hours
Posted on 05-29-05 10:17 PM Link | Quote
You haven't played Wind Waker, have you? It's practically impossible to die in that game.

One thing that made OoT easier than it should've been is the fact that faeries completely fill your heart meter. They can be found anywhere, often in the middle of dungeons. I mean, there's absolutely no point in having the red potion in the game anymore.
Kitten Yiffer

Purple wand
Furry moderator
Vivent l'exp����¯�¿�½������©rience de signalisation d'amusement, ou bien !
Level: 135

Posts: 9732/11162
EXP: 28824106
For next: 510899

Since: 03-15-04
From: Sweden

Since last post: 3 hours
Last activity: 4 min.
Posted on 05-29-05 10:43 PM Link | Quote
Well, OOT can be very challanging if you decide to not pick up heart pieces at all. Otherwise it is very easy.

They could have scaterred a more enemies on the fields in OOT, but that would affect perfomance too.

I would love seeing a hard mode in more Zelda games, Master quest was little harder as enemies did 2x damage. (it just made the game hard in the beginning, and as easy near the end thought...)

I prefer games where I can choose the difficulty. First time players probably won't want to die as soon they make a simple mistake, but a pro probably would wish to have it very challanging. I would love seeing something like that in a Zelda game.

And about faeries, Four Swords is the Zelda game I die the most in for some reason. In the same game you get a ridecolous amount of faireis...
Kirbynite

Vire
Holy Cucco!
Level: 55

Posts: 1038/1366
EXP: 1233975
For next: 80214

Since: 03-15-04
From: On some floating island, Earth

Since last post: 14 hours
Last activity: 4 hours
Posted on 05-29-05 11:00 PM Link | Quote
Well, four swords is meant to be like a party game. What lives really do is keep you from redoing entire levels, and for some, I know it's annoying. It's annoying to me too. ;

I just bought Mega Man X8 last week (And I beat it already, it's my curse with games. Beat non-RPGs before a week and such) and I've never died so much in a long while. Of course... By the time I beat the game, I just flat out became a pro at it. I went back into hard mode and only lost two lives in general, and three more in the final level.

After a while, I've come to believe that 3d games are easier than 2d games. There's something about 2d games where my reckless actions actually scold me. Though... Capcom likes to make me rethink about that, because I can remember Resident Evil 4 giving me trouble for a bit.. Running around with low health constantly was always a problem.. Until I beat the game and somehow became a pro at it...

... My words are a jumbled mess ;
GeckoYamori

Paratroopa
Level: 18

Posts: 13/153
EXP: 25084
For next: 4813

Since: 05-10-05

Since last post: 1 day
Last activity: 7 hours
Posted on 05-29-05 11:52 PM Link | Quote
Are games getting easier, or are we simply getting better?
Ran-chan

Moldorm
eek, when are they going to stop growing...
Level: 143

Posts: 9710/12781
EXP: 35293588
For next: 538220

Since: 03-15-04
From: Nerima District, Tokyo - Japan

Since last post: 12 hours
Last activity: 12 hours
Posted on 05-29-05 11:59 PM Link | Quote
I don
Legion
banning people for no reason sure is fun
Level: 101

Posts: 4143/5657
EXP: 10399737
For next: 317938

Since: 03-15-04
From: The Crossroads is under attack!

Since last post: 5 days
Last activity: 5 days
Posted on 05-30-05 12:11 AM Link | Quote
Fable has got to be the easiest game in the world. In fact, some people thought up their own challenge for that game: Get to the Game Over screen.
Personally, I've never seen it. It's just way too hard to get there.

And if you want to talk about insanely hard games, then what about Ghosts and Goblins and Monster Party? They don't make crazy things like that anymore.
Kitten Yiffer

Purple wand
Furry moderator
Vivent l'exp����¯�¿�½������©rience de signalisation d'amusement, ou bien !
Level: 135

Posts: 9736/11162
EXP: 28824106
For next: 510899

Since: 03-15-04
From: Sweden

Since last post: 3 hours
Last activity: 4 min.
Posted on 05-30-05 01:14 AM Link | Quote
Ah like Black and White then.

You see, the problem with Black and white was. It is easy but it takes alot of time, especially if you want to do the peaceful way. Way to go lionhead, the game is almost impossible to beat if you want to be good but on the other hand it's also impossible to get game over. So it tends to turn into a stalemate situation where the computer dosen't do much expect from defending his cities. It's not challanging, it just makes things lengthy.
Emptyeye
I am a real American!
Real American
Level: 67

Posts: 1836/2273
EXP: 2488421
For next: 104451

Since: 05-24-04
From: I DUNNOOOOOOOO!!

Since last post: 9 hours
Last activity: 4 hours
Posted on 05-30-05 01:49 AM Link | Quote

And if you want to talk about insanely hard games, then what about Ghosts and Goblins and Monster Party? They don't make crazy things like that anymore.


Battletoads isn't that hard (Fettster). Neither is Monster Party except for Level 6, partially because you could go back and forth and kill guys for constant health powerups.

Ghosts N' Goblins, on the other hand, owns me at level 2. Continually.
Kasumi-Astra
Administrator
Level: 62

Posts: 1534/1867
EXP: 1971846
For next: 12840

Since: 03-15-04
From: Reading, UK
Uni: Sheffield, UK

Since last post: 1 day
Last activity: 12 hours
Posted on 05-30-05 04:19 AM Link | Quote
Of course, OoT takes a lot longer to complete because the game world was far bigger in comparison to LttP, even though they are comparable in complexity. In my experience, LttP demands more patience from the player, expecting them to play through the same portions of gameplay more. LttP demands far greater persistance from the player.

Also, aquiring extra heart pieces, bottles and potions is a lot more common in LttP at an earlier stage than in OoT. In OoT you can quite happily go without extra bottles right up until the Water Temple.


I love games that take an established concept and take it to another level. Zelda games have Master Quest. Platform games have Mario World's Star Road and Viewtiful Joe. Shooters have Ikaruga and Radiant Silvergun. Driving games have Gran Turismo. Rhythm Action has Ten Footers and Pump It Up. Games like these are a joy for gamers, because they set the normal players apart from the elite. They are designed to exploit a natural tallent for gaming. Personally, I suck at the shooters and platformers, but I'm almost through Master Quest, I can breeze through Gran Turismo and Sega Rally (I can complete the arcade version) and I'm learning the nine foot catas on DDR.
Xeolord

- B l u e s -
Power Metal > All
Level: 81

Posts: 1999/3418
EXP: 4884196
For next: 108653

Since: 03-15-04
From: Yeah

Since last post: 15 hours
Last activity: 15 hours
Posted on 05-30-05 04:44 AM Link | Quote
Alright, I think we need to be more specific.

As for "damage" wise, and things like that, yeah OoT was a piece of cake. What I meant when I said it was frustrating, was basically that some of the puzzles (a la Water Palace) were hard to figure out at first.

Other than that, the actual fighting in that game was never really challenging at all.

So, are we meaning like "hard" as in dying here?

Emptyeye: That games not that bad, at least you didn't say Super Ghouls n' Ghosts. I've seen way too many people say that's a hard game, truthfully it's pretty easy in my opinion. Ghouls and Ghosts for the Genesis on the other hand ...
Kasumi-Astra
Administrator
Level: 62

Posts: 1536/1867
EXP: 1971846
For next: 12840

Since: 03-15-04
From: Reading, UK
Uni: Sheffield, UK

Since last post: 1 day
Last activity: 12 hours
Posted on 05-30-05 05:02 AM Link | Quote
Ocarina had gameplay far in advance of Link to the Past in terms of complexity, yet the gameplay at it's simplest was easier. There was less trial and error. There was less demand for early exploration, we all went to see the Gerudos before our time but the game did not require this to seek out new heart pieces because the dungeons were highly demanding.
The "tips" as to where to go next were far more obvious. Instead of a single line of dialogue as on the SNES, the N64 could provide a whole paragraph as well as the camera shifting focus to, say Death Mountain after going to Hyrule Castle for the first time.

OoT's puzzles were more demanding, but you could afford to take your time over these. LttP made dungeons last longer by keeping you under pressure from enemies that could kill you in three or four hits in relatively confined spaces. When you play LttP the game over screen is to be expected. Your persistance is what is rewarding in the game, which hasn't deviated in OoT, but occupies a smaller part of satisfaction in completion. It can be argued that OoT only requires persistance in defeating the bosses themselves. The puzzles will tax you, but will offer much less of a chance of deating you.
HyperLamer
<||bass> and this was the soloution i thought of that was guarinteed to piss off the greatest amount of people

Sesshomaru
Tamaranian

Level: 118

Posts: 4670/8210
EXP: 18171887
For next: 211027

Since: 03-15-04
From: Canada, w00t!
LOL FAD

Since last post: 2 hours
Last activity: 2 hours
Posted on 05-30-05 07:32 AM Link | Quote
2D games had 3 simple sources of difficulty that are very difficult to do in 3D:

-You either go over, under or through enemies. None of this walking around them crap.
-More enemies, because it barely takes any more processing power to add 4 more animated tiles as opposed to a full 3D model.
-Much less space to move!
Colleen
Administrator
Level: 136

Posts: 8413/11302
EXP: 29369328
For next: 727587

Since: 03-15-04
From: LaSalle, Quebec, Canada

Since last post: 3 hours
Last activity: 1 hour
Posted on 05-30-05 07:44 AM Link | Quote
Plus don't forget that you were trying to get as much bang for your buck in the early 8-bit/16-bit eras. So even if you came up with a short 7-stage game, you'd likely want to add multiple difficulty levels or just make the game flat-out hard to increase replay value.

Granted, some things have evolved over time in terms of complexity... Dragon Warrior and Final Fantasy being two obvious examples. And you'll still have hard RPG's and action games being released to satisfy the older gamers who grew up on challenge, or those who just think everything's way too easy.

True, some companies think that easy = fun, but that's not always the case. Thankfully we at least have a good mix of games available now - and a crapload of old, hard games in case we don't find anything we like. Like Ghosts and Goblins.
Scatterheart

Panser
Level: 29

Posts: 191/342
EXP: 143409
For next: 4476

Since: 06-06-04
From: Sydney, Australia

Since last post: 17 hours
Last activity: 4 hours
Posted on 05-30-05 08:38 AM Link | Quote
Sure, games with difficulty levels hella-alter... Difficulty!
But in my opinion, this feature is absolutly useless unless you get rewarded for finishing it on the higher difficulty. A new ending, even a little bit extra to the ending, or a couple of more stages. Games without them are pointless.
Zerodius

Aquamentus
Level: 65

Posts: 1490/2036
EXP: 2243783
For next: 91845

Since: 03-16-04
From: ???

Since last post: 2 days
Last activity: 2 days
Posted on 05-30-05 11:45 PM Link | Quote
Games ARE getting easier... but when hard games are released today, they are MUCH harder than the older hard games.

Personally, I do not calculate difficutly in number of deaths or health lost but rather in the effort needed to succeed at a puzzle, fight, whatever.

Sure Battletoads was hard... but it was a case of memorizing everything. First, you would have a first run, getting crushed repeatedly by traps and then, you would be able to pass the sections (very) easily. In other cases, the game was just cheap. You had to replay the stage until the game stopped putting that random impossible obstacle in your face at the end of section A-2.

On another hand, games like Metroid Prime just doesn't get easier when replayed. It doens't matter how well you know a boss's pattern: in order to beat the bosses, you have to do a LOT of shooting, dodging, and even puzzle-solving sometimes! Also, you cannot espect to get lucky and have the enemy do something stupid, like in the past.

Another thing is that games are getting longer. Try and do a speed run in a newer game. It will take you a LOT more time than in the older games.

One final detail is that the players are getting better.

In the original megaman game, all the final boss had to do to be considered hard was to move back and forth lobbing big fat balls at the player.

Today, we have a floating angel robot thingy that teleport around at crazy speed, fill the screen with thunderbolts and beams in terms of seconds, and is protected by a force field that only deactivate once in a while for a second or two.

Yet, the first case is considered harder. Why? Becease players are getting better.


(edited by Zerodius on 05-30-05 06:47 AM)
Xeolord

- B l u e s -
Power Metal > All
Level: 81

Posts: 2016/3418
EXP: 4884196
For next: 108653

Since: 03-15-04
From: Yeah

Since last post: 15 hours
Last activity: 15 hours
Posted on 05-31-05 12:20 AM Link | Quote
Not exactly true, it depends if the person has been a gamer for some time then.

I have a few friends who are big time gamers now, but they weren't really into gaming 10 years ago. I'll take over, say my Megaman Anniversary Collection to their house so they can try it out, and to be blunt, they absolutely suck at the games.

Yet, they do fine in games nowadays.

So, it all mainly depends on the gamer. Basically what you said [Zerodius].


(edited by Darth Xeodious on 05-30-05 07:20 AM)
Pages: 1 2 3Add to favorites | "RSS" Feed | Next newer thread | Next older thread
Acmlm's Board - I2 Archive - General Gaming - Games Getting Easier? | |


ABII


AcmlmBoard vl.ol (11-01-05)
© 2000-2005 Acmlm, Emuz, et al



Page rendered in 0.018 seconds.