the tough metroid

[MrPopo]

I do not have time to be stuck somewhere forever, thus extending my play of a given game. Capisce?

Would you rather read a synopsis of a long movie, to save you time, as well?

A better analogy would be to compare having to replay a part of a game over and over with having to watch a certain scene over and over to pick up everything that happened during it.

[RCBH928]

what MrPoPo said is right

If you really love that movie, sure
but for most movies, I just watch it once, there is no reason to watch it over and over and over again. This what happens in gaming.

You know Remy , you wouldn't be wrong. I would like to enjoy games and feel like its a real adventure, but you know what is holding me back?
1)There is just so many hours in my life that I can spare to play games and ENJOY by PROGRESSING , I can be stuck in each level for 1-2 hours figuring things out and trying everything possible.
2) There are other games I would like to experience too that repeat the same experience over and over and over again in the same level just to find out how to progress.

If you can stop time for me, I promise I will try my best to figure things out and complete each game as much as possible.

On another note...As I said I go almost line by line in a FAQ to finish that game. It appears that this FAQ is trying to get you a 100% complete status. This is why it is impossible to do. I just figured out you probably do not need 200 missiles and 10 energy banks. Those are extras.

[jfrost]

Would you rather read a synopsis of a long movie, to save you time, as well?

Well, this made me chuckle. See MrPopo's post.

[RemyC]

I do not have time to be stuck somewhere forever, thus extending my play of a given game. Capisce?

Would you rather read a synopsis of a long movie, to save you time, as well?

A better analogy would be to compare having to replay a part of a game over and over with having to watch a certain scene over and over to pick up everything that happened during it.

Yes, that does work. The point I was trying to make, however, was the time saving one. Following a walkthrough line for line, is saving these gentlemen their precious time. Reading a quick synopsis of a movie, as opposed to watching it, saves you a great deal of time as well...but you then miss out on everything else about the movie. Sure you know what happens, but in a movie such as, Memento, its not only about knowing what happens, its about the delivery and execution.

If you really love that movie, sure

You totally missed my point. (See above)

There is just so many hours in my life that I can spare to play games and ENJOY by PROGRESSING

Is it impossible for you to have fun when you aren't progressing, or given a pat on the back for every minor accomplishment? You are progressing, every time you fail, if you are paying attention. Every failure you have, makes you aware of what not to do. So the next time around, you have a better shot at success.

There are other games I would like to experience too that repeat the same experience over and over and over again in the same level just to find out how to progress.

SOOOO many games rehash the same experience. The easiest genre to illustrate this with, is of course the 2D fighter. In theory every 2D fighter is the exact same. 2 dudes slug it out, and one wins. Why are there so many damn 2D fighters? The EXACT same thing is happening in each and every single one of them: Two guys just fight. Why are only a few of these games the ones that have tournaments being held for them? Why do some of these games that are over a decade old STILL hold strong against recent games? Because, only a few of them do it the best. None of the others matter. They offer the same experience, but not on the same level.
Sure you can use a walk-through to get you through every game quickly, so that you can experience 10 different iterations of the same game. Or, you can devote your time to a few of them. Once you have mastered a game in a genre, you will understand what can be improved. Then you pick out games with a critical eye.

[marurun]

Yes, that does work. The point I was trying to make, however, was the time saving one. Following a walkthrough line for line, is saving these gentlemen their precious time. Reading a quick synopsis of a movie, as opposed to watching it, saves you a great deal of time as well...but you then miss out on everything else about the movie. Sure you know what happens, but in a movie such as, Memento, its not only about knowing what happens, its about the delivery and execution.
...
Is it impossible for you to have fun when you aren't progressing, or given a pat on the back for every minor accomplishment? You are progressing, every time you fail, if you are paying attention. Every failure you have, makes you aware of what not to do. So the next time around, you have a better shot at success.

Using an FAQ on a game is nothing like using a synopsis to avoid watching a movie. In a movie all the content (except perhaps flashbacks) is novel. In a game replaying a scene can come to be repetitious. It's the difference between watching a classic movie over and over until you've picked out every little bit of subtext and memorized every line versus just watching the movie once for the surface level of entertainment. Some people don't want to "master" the movie or "master" the game. They want that surface level experience and that's good enough for them. I often feel that way as well.

There's also something about the number of times you have to repeat something. Having to repeat sections of an area a few times is usually not a problem, but when you play an action game and you end up repeating a 10 minute segment of game enough times that you've suddenly spend a couple hours on it, that can be really frustrating and not enlightening or fun at all. I don't think anyone's making the case that they should never have to repeat a section of a game in order to learn. I think the argument is that they shouldn't have to repeat a section of a game so gosh-darn-many times. People have different thresholds for what's fun and what's frustrating.

I've noticed, RemyC, that you're responses on issues like this are fairly black and white. Perhaps you need to see that most people fit into the gray area in-between issues and understand that people play and enjoy games differently.

[RemyC]

Using an FAQ on a game is nothing like using a synopsis to avoid watching a movie.

Poor choice of words on my part. Replace "synopsis" with, "Spark Notes" or something of that nature that breaks down everything for you.

I've noticed, RemyC, that you're responses on issues like this are fairly black and white. Perhaps you need to see that most people fit into the gray area in-between issues and understand that people play and enjoy games differently.

I'm a man that knows what he likes.
I don't understand the "gray areas" mentality. I'm sorry, if I come off as a snob, this is just my way of learning/teaching.

I think the argument is that they shouldn't have to repeat a section of a game so gosh-darn-many times

My problem roots from a mentality that normally comes along with this. The player will argue, "the game shouldn't be so hard". I see the problem as, the player isn't good enough.
If you wanna play a run-n-gunner, but don't like dying when you make a minor mistake, put down Contra/Metal Slug, and pick up Gunstar Heroes. Don't cry and criticize the game saying, "This game sucks, it's so cheap".
People wanna play a platformer, and complain that the controls in Castlevania suck, cause they can't make a simple jump. Don't blame the game. Learn the controls, or stop crying, and go play Megaman.

[marurun]

My problem roots from a mentality that normally comes along with this. The player will argue, "the game shouldn't be so hard". I see the problem as, the player isn't good enough.
If you wanna play a run-n-gunner, but don't like dying when you make a minor mistake, put down Contra/Metal Slug, and pick up Gunstar Heroes. Don't cry and criticize the game saying, "This game sucks, it's so cheap".
People wanna play a platformer, and complain that the controls in Castlevania suck, cause they can't make a simple jump. Don't blame the game. Learn the controls, or stop crying, and go play Megaman.

So I shouldn't complain about the US government. I should instead move to another country. Even though I generally prefer the US government to others and just have some complaints about it. Good to know we can't want things to be better. Sorry dude, this is a discussion forum about games. What we dislike about games is just as valid as what we like about games. It's too hard (for me) is a valid complaint.

It's true that if a game seems to hard for you you probably should set a limit on yourself as to how long you're going to go at it before you give up and move on. However, it's hard to tell how challenging a game is before you buy it or start to play it. And many games have different challenge levels, allowing you to play in easy mode or hard mode and such. This often isn't on the box. These days you can't return games to most places so if it turns out to be too hard you're out whatever you spent. For this reason it's probably better for companies to err on the easy side, since that's more inclusive of a wider range of buyers and players.

Check out Shamus's ideas at the Escapist on some ways to accommodate varied player skill.
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/article ... s-Ungaming

Also, how the hell did you get that someone who thinks Castlevania is too hard should go to Mega Man? Mega Man has always been a difficult series, harder than Castlevania. At least pick an example that makes sense ; )

[jfrost]

Using an FAQ on a game is nothing like using a synopsis to avoid watching a movie.

Poor choice of words on my part. Replace "synopsis" with, "Spark Notes" or something of that nature that breaks down everything for you.

I've noticed, RemyC, that you're responses on issues like this are fairly black and white. Perhaps you need to see that most people fit into the gray area in-between issues and understand that people play and enjoy games differently.

I'm a man that knows what he likes.
I don't understand the "gray areas" mentality. I'm sorry, if I come off as a snob, this is just my way of learning/teaching.

Yes, you know what you like, and you like to give bullshit on other people who don't share your patently ridiculous opinion ("Oh, don't like the difficulty? Your fault, loser! Game developing never has it wrong, chap!").

I think the argument is that they shouldn't have to repeat a section of a game so gosh-darn-many times

My problem roots from a mentality that normally comes along with this. The player will argue, "the game shouldn't be so hard". I see the problem as, the player isn't good enough.
If you wanna play a run-n-gunner, but don't like dying when you make a minor mistake, put down Contra/Metal Slug, and pick up Gunstar Heroes. Don't cry and criticize the game saying, "This game sucks, it's so cheap".
People wanna play a platformer, and complain that the controls in Castlevania suck, cause they can't make a simple jump. Don't blame the game. Learn the controls, or stop crying, and go play Megaman.

Oh, please. Now games can never be wrong, learning curve can never be too steep, controls are never sloppy. Only the stupid gamers don't want to take their time and learn how to play. Right.

No one said games should never be hard. But if the games are hard, they better justify their difficulty. Right now I'm playing Gradius V and the game's pretty tough, but it hasn't turned me off. Why? Because the level design is great and it pays off to learn how to play, even if it takes a while. You can't seem to fathom that not all games pay off like this.

[RemyC]

So I shouldn't complain about the US government. I should instead move to another country

I'm not going to touch politics.

Good to know we can't want things to be better. Sorry dude, this is a discussion forum about games. What we dislike about games is just as valid as what we like about games. It's too hard (for me) is a valid complaint.

With certain games, making them easier wouldn't make them better. Their are a lot of games that are catering to people of my tastes, and people that aren't prepared for that kind of challenge, think that it is too much.
In Contra Hard Corps, a game that was designed so that one hit kills you, becomes pretty easy after you've figured out a bosses patterns. A lot of people say that it would be a better game if you had a health bar. I say that that would make it a boring game. I've heard claims from people saying that it is impossible to beat the game! I've gotten to the final boss fight several times, without dying. If anything, I think that a lot of the bosses needed some more randomized attack patterns.
In other words what I'm trying to say is: If you are the kind of person that has trouble getting through Sonic the Hedgehog...Why are you playing a game like Contra? A person that struggles with Sonic The Hedgehog doesn't have a legitimate voice, to state what would improve Contra. Chances are; that person wouldn't want a Contra game. They'd probably want to put the rings in Contra, and the gun in Sonic (the game - hahaha).

it's hard to tell how challenging a game is before you buy it or start to play it

This is where we go back to what I said earlier about mastering a game in a genre(Even if it is Sonic The Hedgehog), to have a solid understanding of how to improve it. Now, if that isn't for you. Find a friend, or someone on the internet that has, so that they can provide you with the appropriate insights.

Check out Shamus's ideas at the Escapist on some ways to accommodate varied player skill.
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/article ... s-Ungaming

I believe that problem is that, their are no (very few) games that require simple executions to play, being released for the newcomers. Everyone is trying to increase complexity by giving you 20 context sensitive buttons.

how the hell did you get that someone who thinks Castlevania is too hard should go to Mega Man?

I forgot to toss in the, "X"

Yes, you know what you like, and you like to give bullshit on other people who don't share your patently ridiculous opinion ("Oh, don't like the difficulty? Your fault, loser! Game developing never has it wrong, chap!").

If someone had terrible ball control in football (Soccer), and said, "This game sucks, I should be allowed to pick up the ball and run with it, while I push over every guy in my way!", what would you say?

the game's pretty tough, but it hasn't turned me off. Why? Because the level design is great and it pays off to learn how to play, even if it takes a while. You can't seem to fathom that not all games pay off like this.

What game DOESN'T pay off/become easier, once you learn how to play it? If it doesn't, then it's a broken game...then, I totally agree, don't play it.
I'm taking my shots at the folks that don't want to learn how to play the game, and want the game to bend to THEIR rules.

[marurun]

In Contra Hard Corps, a game that was designed so that one hit kills you, becomes pretty easy after you've figured out a bosses patterns. A lot of people say that it would be a better game if you had a health bar. I say that that would make it a boring game. I've heard claims from people saying that it is impossible to beat the game! I've gotten to the final boss fight several times, without dying. If anything, I think that a lot of the bosses needed some more randomized attack patterns.

You picked another bad example. In Japan the game gave you 3 hits before you die. It was changed to 1 hit in the US in order to make the game more challenging. My understanding is that being able to take 3 hits before dying didn't hurt the game at all. I think the European version, one of the Probotector titles, also retained the 3-hit mechanic. And I can safely say that while I've made it to a couple of the last bosses, the only path I can actually beat is the secret ending/arena path, and I don't necessarily have that problem with Contra and Super C.

In other words what I'm trying to say is: If you are the kind of person that has trouble getting through Sonic the Hedgehog...Why are you playing a game like Contra? A person that struggles with Sonic The Hedgehog doesn't have a legitimate voice, to state what would improve Contra. Chances are; that person wouldn't want a Contra game. They'd probably want to put the rings in Contra, and the gun in Sonic (the game - hahaha).

I disagree thoroughly. For one thing, difficulty isn't a line. There isn't hard on one end and easy on the other. Some people find games I think are hard easy, but games I don't find particularly hard somewhat difficult. Someone who has trouble with Sonic the Hedgehog might actually be really good at Contra just because of the difference in play styles.

Furthermore, I don't think you have to be an expert in an area to be able to suggest improvements. I think experts often suggest different kinds of improvements, improvements which are more detailed and sometimes more feasible, but also those with a slant towards other experts. Keep in mind that the majority of players who play games don't master them. It's only a select few who do. If you were trying to tweak the difficulty on the next mass-market Contra game would you only query existing, experienced Contra players? If they've already mastered the mechanics they might suggest making it harder even though the game may already be hard enough that newcomers to the series will be crushed.

Newcomers are part of the vast games market for even hardcore games. That's why variable challenge levels are valuable. Every time you decide that newcomers are not in consideration with your game you shrink your potential sales market that much more. I doubt any company out there is trying to deliberately do this. I think they just don't understand how many people play. See, I've studied usability and it's important when testing products and interfaces to ensure that both novices and experts are catered to wherever possible, with only a few exceptions. Games do not fall into that exception category.

it's hard to tell how challenging a game is before you buy it or start to play it

This is where we go back to what I said earlier about mastering a game in a genre(Even if it is Sonic The Hedgehog), to have a solid understanding of how to improve it. Now, if that isn't for you. Find a friend, or someone on the internet that has, so that they can provide you with the appropriate insights.

See earlier for commentary that applies to this. Reviews and friends are good sources but they still lack the accuracy of being able to try out the game yourself.

Check out Shamus's ideas at the Escapist on some ways to accommodate varied player skill.
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/article ... s-Ungaming

I believe that problem is that, their are no (very few) games that require simple executions to play, being released for the newcomers. Everyone is trying to increase complexity by giving you 20 context sensitive buttons.

That certainly plays a role, but he's talking more about what we're talking about. He has an earlier example (and a movie to go with it) which uses Grand Theft Auto 3 as the subject. Basically, when you screw up before the end of a mission you have to go back and run through all the crap you already did successfully. Using his example from the article, when you miss a basket in basketball you aren't forced to start over outside the gym. Being forced to replay 5 minutes of game because you can't get one particular jump is a poor way to help people get over the hurdle of that difficult jump. The players can already deal pretty well with the 4.9 minutes leading up to that jump and there's no reason they should have to play that 4.9 minutes over and over again to get better at a single difficult jump.

I'm taking my shots at the folks that don't want to learn how to play the game, and want the game to bend to THEIR rules.

But, again, you refuse to see any middle ground. The player either adapts to the game or they want the game to bend to their rules. What about players who are learning and adapting to the game in many places but are getting stuck at one or two points which seem disparate in either skills utilized or challenge level to the rest of the game? Especially with these larger, longer games there are so many different modes of interaction. Look at modern Sonic games. I love the Sonic segments, usually, but in many of them, to move forward, you also have to play other characters or other play modes which have different levels of interaction or frustration. Same with GTA games and others. What if I'm great at doing the on-foot missions in GTA but some of the funky jumps in the driving portions are too hard? I can't complain about it? I can't wish that the developers gave me some means of circumventing that jump or some other way of moving forward in the game?

RemyC, I hope you never design games. I really do. Your attitude on this issue is too black and white and lacking in subtlety. Game designers have a lot of things to juggle and appropriate accommodations in the area of difficulty is one of the hardest. However, there's little excuse for not offering different challenge levels for different players. Video games aren't like sports. Video games draw on a much more limited set of skills and are marketed to large audiences. Any game studio which fails to take into account the breadth and depth of the market with succumb and be forced out of the market.