The difficult thing about difficulty

[Hatta]

Either of these can be fine experiences, depending on what you want. The former is more rewarding, but not always what you want after a long day at work.

[Balasubbie]

I strongly agree with the sentiment that difficulty is the worst, cheapest, most ripping means of elongating a rather short game.

[Korpi]

I have the problem, that I lose interest in easy games, don't feel games to me.

I do think though, that in many 3D, cinematic games, anything with proper story or campaign mode to go through difficulty can be very bad thing. If the story doesn't continue fluidly, I lose interest and can't immerse myself to same story again, until few years have gone by and start the game again from scratch. That's why I rather read book or watch movie if I'm in the mood for a story (which is rare though).

Whether the game has high replay or not also affects what difficulty is desirable. Strategy, shmups, some puzzle games, management games, sandbox games, some RPG's, simulators, fighters, racing games etc all have extremely high replay value. I like to find new strategies, try different things out of curiosity and hone my skill in those games. They are also easy to pick up play in the sense, that you have skirmish modes in strategy games and shmups are by nature very accessible etc. Perhaps they initially have learning curve, but after that it's refining your gameplay and finding new interesting details in game mecahnics.

I don't play platformers too much, but the move from 2D to 3D made biggest shift there, in my opinion, as the gameplay got less about running through skillfully requiring, but accessible game levels, and more about following somewhat deep story, running around from place to place, relaxing. It's like those games are played for completely different reasons now.

For me that running around fluff and watching cut-scenes is also superficial way of extending the game, just like extreme difficulty is, although in my case the latter is preferable, but in the end of the day it's all about balance and good game design.

[isiolia]

How I see it is that difficulty has a purpose, which in some cases is no longer relevant.

For example, arcade games want to kick your ass and send you to the continue screen so you feed them more quarters. Hardly different than an MMO designed to keep the subscription fees rolling in. Succeeding in that regard doesn't necessarily correlate to being the best actual game.

It's also compensation for limited resources. If you only have the memory to implement six stages that last 5-10 minutes apiece, putting high demands on the player just to get through them stretches that small amount of content out. An hour (or less) of actual game might take them days or weeks to complete as a result, albeit via replaying the same small amount of content over and over and over.
There's little reason to do this anymore if it doesn't suit the game. As much as people complain about modern game length, there's often little repetition in those ~8-12 hours it usually takes just to run straight through 'em.

On top of that, challenges in form of extra-hard modes, trophies/achievements, unlockables, and so on can represent a far more dynamic experience than simply reaching the end credits. There's even less of a reason to set the bar particularly high just to get through the game on normal - should be just enough that you can't bullshit your way through it. If you want to master the game, that's what Hard/Nightmare/etc and Platinum trophies are for - and a fun initial experience is what will convince a player to do that.

[Evildeadmanwalking77]

I don't mind a difficult game and in fact I welcome it. There is a happy medium though. In all my years as a gamer there have been plenty of games that were ruined for me because of an insane difficulty level, mostly on the NES like Silver Surfer for example, but then you have some difficult games that are fun regardless like Battletoads. Btw, hats off to you JT for beating both Battletoads and Ninja Gaiden without any assistance from enhancers or emulators, that's hardcore brother!

[fastbilly1]

I enjoy a game with a ramping difficulty. Give me enough of a challenge to get my blood boiling but then ease off right after, then make it slightly harder next time. Serious Sam does this well. I typically play games on the standard difficultly, since I believe that is what the game designers imagined the games around, and if I replay will play it on easy or normal. The only exception is horror titles - always played on easy.

Recently I was playing through Halo Reach after playing alot of Descent and it was very similar to Hattas graph.

[J T]

It's interesting that some of you have mentioned trial-and-error as a major problem for difficulty. Part of why I made this thread is because Kieron Gillen (whom I like as a reviewer) just hated Limbo. He claimed it was poor, even rude design to make a game that relies so heavily on you learning the rules of the game by means of repeated death.

Here's him in a debate with John Walker over Limbo's form of difficulty:
http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2011/08 ... out-limbo/

[o.pwuaioc]

It's interesting that some of you have mentioned trial-and-error as a major problem for difficulty. Part of why I made this thread is because Kieron Gillen (whom I like as a reviewer) just hated Limbo. He claimed it was poor, even rude design to make a game that relies so heavily on you learning the rules of the game by means of repeated death.

Here's him in a debate with John Walker over Limbo's form of difficulty:
http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2011/08 ... out-limbo/

As long as there are frequent checkpoints like in VVVVVV, there's no problem in deaths as a teaching tool. Beats a convoluted tutorial.

[J T]

VVVVVV is different though because you can see what you have to do, it's just hard to do it. In a game like Limbo, you don't realize you are going to die until you walk into something and see your kid get eviscerated by a giant spider or something.

I think games like VVVVVV, Super Meat Boy, and Give Up Robot 2 are all brutally difficult, but in a good way. The goals are evident or easy enough to intuit on the play screen, quick reflexes can save you even in new territory, there are checkpoints after major challenges, the controls are fluid and precise, and they aren't breaking the flow of a story by putting obstacles in the way of narrative, since they are all gameplay focused games instead of story focused games. They also stay cheerful and playful throughout so that the whole thing doesn't feel like a drudgery. I think these are the kind of conditions under which a game is actually enhanced by ramped difficulty that really pushes the player to test their abilities.

When difficulty confines you from being able to explore the world or finish the story, or when a game is hard without being clear about your goals or giving you shoddy controls, these are the times when I think difficulty is a problem.

[Erik_Twice]

That Kieron guy doesn't exactly look very nice. I mean, he may be right when it comes to labelling the game as "kitschy" but he only writes statements, not reasons. And that hurts his point. He looks angry and anger doesn't help make insightful comments.

Really, half of his lines are about GOTHS THIS AND GOTHS THAT. Which is silly.

Anyways, I feel the argument can be boiled down to this:

A: It's bad!
B: It's not bad, it's a deconstruction!

For example, there's a book called 5 hours with Mario which I HATE HATE HATE HATE. In fact, it's 400 pages of ranting by a short-sighted fascist dumb sexist racist dick woman.

And it's the point, and it's good! But most people who read it would simply label it as bad. And it would even look like a fair review on paper! It's Star Wars all over again.

So yeah, not a topic I'm too eager to jump into.

It's interesting that some of you have mentioned trial-and-error as a major problem for difficulty.

The problem with trial and error is that it's unfair, removing player choice. However, that doesn't make certain trial and error elements always bad or that an unfair game element is bad.

I recall a game that had a very good unfair moment. You walk down a corridor and there's this part that looks like a slide. So you jump and go Weee.

And then spikes appear and you die. It's so unfair and so fun at the same time! Hell, it wouldn't be fun if it weren't unfair*

It's a good use of unfairness.



*Note that it's unfair in the context of this game, were this a Sierra adventure it would be fair, for example.