"Retro gamers" should be able to beat these games

[Dyne]

This guy wanted this video shared with "retro gamers, wherever they hang out" so here you go.

Honestly, just skip the first 1:15 of the video because its just a (admittedly entertaining) clip from an old movie that has little to do with anything else in the video.

I got a kick out of this video. I enjoyed the lack of any fucks given about how he says things.
But he also throws a lot of shade at the retro gaming community. A little of it might be warranted but I think he exaggerates it.
Side note: I grew up in California and the way this guy talks is exactly how I grew up talking lol.

While I agree with a lot of what he said, it's pretty elitist to say you have nothing useful to share about retro games if you haven't beat certain games. I don't think "you're not a real retro gamer if you haven't beat X game" but I do get what he's saying. There are a lot of people who do more collecting than playing. Hell, I've been guilty at times of spending more time curating my roms and configuring emulators than actually playing the games. It kind of made me want to go back and knock a few of the harder NES games off my backlog once and for all. For a lot of the games he mentions, "I got far in it but I never beat it" would have to be my answer. Feels bad man.

So what do you think?

 

[Ikagura Ikagura]

Hell, I've been guilty at times of spending more time curating my roms and configuring emulators than actually playing the games.

I'm finding myself in there as well.

On the other hand, in video games, movies, music and other media, the whole "you're not a real enthusiast if you haven't watched/listened/played [very old/very obscure thing from said medium]" is not the best mindset to have with anything related to fandoms. People won't say that somebody who hasn't touched an Odyssey nor a Pong machine cannot call themselves gamer because that's totally arbitrary.

 

[qw90700]

So while the dude speaks like Bill & Ted he "let go" of his pent-up emotions about what is wrong among "retro gamer world" (bigger than just a community dude) in the way he didn't like and he glorifies the group he belongs to while half of the video is an ad while assuming he is da commander demanding what people should do like who you are to even talk? Even if I had self-identified myself as "da retro gamer" I wouldn't think there is actually something offensive. His take is like what I disagree and it is his opinion. It was like listening to a person who doesn't like pasta so he glorified eating meat. So what? And like a kid he is he was like "if I offended you I will laugh at you reading your comments" come at me bro attitude. In America being a cringe is the new superior person lolol. This is how I literally imagine if we could understand how dogs talk it would be the translation of what we would hear ayy lmao. He is a child in an adult body but it make me wanna pat his head and give him a candy, the way he talks even kinda cute lolol.

I know when a person barks a like dog it can be attractive for some people, but all I heard is "woof woof dude" that was really funny actually without anything really annoying. He keeps going on and on saying pretty much same shits trying to stretch the video like Americano tv series about nothing but they were ordered to direct 12 episodes so they did anything to stretch that shit and that's all about the video. At least it showed some funny movie scenes and cool games and all so it wasn't entirely rubbish lol.

 

[NotReallyHere]

But he also throws a lot of shade at the retro gaming community. A little of it might be warranted but I think he exaggerates it... it's pretty elitist to say you have nothing useful to share about retro games if you haven't beat certain games.

Exactly this.

I had a NES as a kid. Never beat Ninja Gaiden, Batman, or any of the other games in that screenshot, for that matter. There's a simple reason why - I never owned them! I either rented them once or twice, or played them at a friend's house. And either way, that didn't give me a lot of time to "git gud."

On the flipside? I can beat Mike Tyson's Punch-Out!! And I can also finish Metroid in one sitting, without looking at a map, and get the best ending. And I can also beat Mega Man 3 without getting a game over or having to look up the boss order. And why's that? Because I actually did own those games back in the day, and had plenty of time to practice

There's some retro games that I know I'll never finish, despite my best intentions. That doesn't mean I don't consider myself a retro gamer, though! And if that's not good enough for some rando YouTuber, well... that's a "them" problem

 

[qw90700]

Exactly this.

I had a NES as a kid. Never beat Ninja Gaiden, Batman, or any of the other games in that screenshot, for that matter. There's a simple reason why - I never owned them! I either rented them once or twice, or played them at a friend's house. And either way, that didn't give me a lot of time to "git gud."

On the flipside? I can beat Mike Tyson's Punch-Out!! And I can also finish Metroid in one sitting, without looking at a map, and get the best ending. And I can also beat Mega Man 3 without getting a game over or having to look up the boss order. And why's that? Because I actually did own those games back in the day, and had plenty of time to practice

There's some retro games that I know I'll never finish, despite my best intentions. That doesn't mean I don't consider myself a retro gamer, though! And if that's not good enough for some rando YouTuber, well... that's a "them" problem

Don't worry you don't have to beat any game. If it is boring just fuck it lol. It's okay to play a game without caring to ever finish it and just playing it until you're done having fun with it.

 

[Not_Red]

I think the real problem here is that not everyone has the same interests when it comes to retro games. Like, I'm mainly an RPG guy so games like Ninja Gaiden, Mario or DK are never even on my radar when it comes to things I want to play. On the other hand I do try some older stuff like early SMT or FF games, even the old DQ games I've beaten because I just like the genre a lot.

 

[diet_orange]

View attachment 124990

So while the dude speaks like Bill & Ted he "let go" of his pent-up emotions about what is wrong among "retro gamer world" (bigger than just a community dude) in the way he didn't like and he glorifies the group he belongs to while half of the video is an ad while assuming he is da commander demanding what people should do like who you are to even talk? Even if I had self-identified myself as "da retro gamer" I wouldn't think there is actually something offensive. His take is like what I disagree and it is his opinion. It was like listening to a person who doesn't like pasta so he glorified eating meat. So what? And like a kid he is he was like "if I offended you I will laugh at you reading your comments" come at me bro attitude. In America being a cringe is the new superior person lolol. This is how I literally imagine if we could understand how dogs talk it would be the translation of what we would hear ayy lmao. He is a child in an adult body but it make me wanna pat his head and give him a candy, the way he talks even kinda cute lolol.

I get the sense that he's joking/making a shitpost. Listen to how he talks about "retrogamers spending hundreds to get their favorite games not to look like shit." and then starts talking about using Retrotink himself

 

[Clippy]

I know I'm an outlier but damn. My gaming life revolved around computers so I never even played, let alone beat these games. The only one I have any experience with is Castlevania but, uh, the less said about the Amiga port the better.

What a way to find out I have no street cred according to a source as reliable and authoritative as some random YouTuber. This does beg the question though - am I tax-exempt or anything like that now? I goddamn better be. All those years I thought I was a 'real gamer' (hard 'r' and (TM)) only to find out I was living a lie. How will I recover, pray tell?

Jokes aside, he raises some good points. Games are meant to be played and not just collect dust on your shelves. However, whether or not you can or even want to beat them isn't really relevant. Older games' difficulty tends to stem from crap design rather than a thought out challenge more often than not and there's nothing wrong with putting down a game that frustrates you. His entire Castlevania section is nothing but Stockholm Syndrome. 'Bad controls are actually good because you have to commit to the jump' is a really stupid argument. Bad controls are bad. Just because you can navigate around them and still beat the game doesn't magically make them good.

Another point of his that I liked was his allusions to the retro gamer industrial complex. I noticed it too. The last 20 years or so have cemented a sort of status quo when it comes to old games. There are games that have an opinion associated with them and if you go against the grain you're ostracized. He brought up some guy making a list of his favorite Jaleco games I think it was and included a game that he 'clearly barely played'. Now that's something I can get behind. It's your list. You don't have to have played every single game in existence to make one. I know there are people out there who will eat anyone who doesn't include their game in a list like that alive but what do you care? Just say you haven't played something or that you don't like a given game and move on instead of conforming to what at this point is becoming just as bad as mainstream. You don't have to be different for the sake of being different but if it happens that your taste in gaming diverges from the norm then more power to you. If it happens that your journey of discovery of a company's games is incomplete and you want to list what you've played so far that's cool too. Don't feel pressured to include a game just because there's a consensus that a game should be included in such a list.

Finally, I like his confrontational/shitposty style. This is something you won't get from any of the big fish on YT. Chasing that ad money and trying to be as non-offensive as possible to avoid stupid people and their drama makes for boring content. Tell it how you think it is. Some will agree, some won't and that will be that. It's more fun that way.

 

[qw90700]

I get the sense that he's joking/making a shitpost. Listen to how he talks about "retrogamers spending hundreds to get their favorite games not to look like shit." and then starts talking about using Retrotink himself

Yes it's mainly like 10 minutes ad he could barely "disguise" and then by using the words "retro gamers" in the title he was fishing for views and to fill the video he let his emotions run wild because he didn't have anything else to say so he was like a broken record and our dude Dyne here became a willing pawn in his game. FIN lol.

Why he called for drama to make retro gamers attack: If anyone had attack him it would be an excuse for him to make a video about how he was the victim and talking more bad about retro gamers to fish views and like.

Naturally it is his job, he try to make money from it. He do care to put on a show to express himself for ego masturbation too. In the end he seriously doesn't care to make videos about video games, he make videos about himself playing games and his sheep loves him barking like a dog. He is like a cult leader in his own context. He will lead to the salvation of true gaming. "Repent retro gamers!!!" lol.

So when I see a Youtuber like that I do question if they really believe in their own BS, and he really seem like he doesn't really believe in the way he barks. He try to say what is popular to say around to be likeable like a girl wanna be popular girl of the high school. After all a Youtuber who wanna make money is nothing without their audience so he become a bitch of the audience. When a person is like that I cannot take them seriously because their words are a big zero lol. Never trust a person who does anything because it is their job. So same as I don't believe medical doctors actually care about my health I don't believe a Professional Youtuber or any Youtuber who only care to get popular by seeking acceptance, support and followers really mean what they say. Like a popular girl of the school while they wish for everyone to die they will fake wishing world peace!!! lolol

 

[Dyne]

I know I'm an outlier but damn. My gaming life revolved around computers so I never even played, let alone beat these games. The only one I have any experience with is Castlevania but, uh, the less said about the Amiga port the better.

What a way to find out I have no street cred according to a source as reliable and authoritative as some random YouTuber. This does beg the question though - am I tax-exempt or anything like that now? I goddamn better be. All those years I thought I was a 'real gamer' (hard 'r' and (TM)) only to find out I was living a lie. How will I recover, pray tell?

Jokes aside, he raises some good points. Games are meant to be played and not just collect dust on your shelves. However, whether or not you can or even want to beat them isn't really relevant. Older games' difficulty tends to stem from crap design rather than a thought out challenge more often than not and there's nothing wrong with putting down a game that frustrates you. His entire Castlevania section is nothing but Stockholm Syndrome. 'Bad controls are actually good because you have to commit to the jump' is a really stupid argument. Bad controls are bad. Just because you can navigate around them and still beat the game doesn't magically make them good.

Another point of his that I liked was his allusions to the retro gamer industrial complex. I noticed it too. The last 20 years or so have cemented a sort of status quo when it comes to old games. There are games that have an opinion associated with them and if you go against the grain you're ostracized. He brought up some guy making a list of his favorite Jaleco games I think it was and included a game that he 'clearly barely played'. Now that's something I can get behind. It's your list. You don't have to have played every single game in existence to make one. I know there are people out there who will eat anyone who doesn't include their game in a list like that alive but what do you care? Just say you haven't played something or that you don't like a given game and move on instead of conforming to what at this point is becoming just as bad as mainstream. You don't have to be different for the sake of being different but if it happens that your taste in gaming diverges from the norm then more power to you. If it happens that your journey of discovery of a company's games is incomplete and you want to list what you've played so far that's cool too. Don't feel pressured to include a game just because there's a consensus that a game should be included in such a list.

Finally, I like his confrontational/shitposty style. This is something you won't get from any of the big fish on YT. Chasing that ad money and trying to be as non-offensive as possible to avoid stupid people and their drama makes for boring content. Tell it how you think it is. Some will agree, some won't and that will be that. It's more fun that way.

I think this is a really solid take.
Sorry about your street cred.

 

[DanCalibur]

Fun is the key word, I'm not a good player and I managed to beat Castlevania and Batman recently. It takes more perseverance than skill and once I'm having fun it's ok to try again and again. That's also the reason I stopped playing modern games, I wasn't having fun, simple as that.

 

[ThatOneLum ThatOneLum]

"you guys remember when gaming was fresh AF and they had no idea how games were suppoesd to work so they made them unecessarily hard as a throw over from the days of the arcades and also because if they didn't everyone would realize there was only about 30 minutes of game without the constant repeated attempts? I think that you should be able to beat those if you want to call yourself a gamer."

Nah, I'm good. If I have to give up my gamer card because I don't give a shit about Castlevania, Ninja Gaiden, or whatever the fuck else bullshit NES games this guy thinks is the gold standard you need to have reached then so be it.

Fuck it. We're out here making declairations, then you're retro gaming opinions don't matter unless you've beaten Gaelco's Thunder Hooper in it's original Spain. No imports bitches. Why the fuck not.

 

[qw90700]

"you guys remember when gaming was fresh AF and they had no idea how games were suppoesd to work so they made them unecessarily hard as a throw over from the days of the arcades and also because if they didn't everyone would realize there was only about 30 minutes of game without the constant repeated attempts? I think that you should be able to beat those if you want to call yourself a gamer."

Nah, I'm good. If I have to give up my gamer card because I don't give a shit about Castlevania, Ninja Gaiden, or whatever the fuck else bullshit NES games this guy thinks is the gold standard you need to have reached then so be it.

Fuck it. We're out here making declairations, then you're retro gaming opinions don't matter unless you've beaten Gaelco's Thunder Hooper in it's original Spain. No imports bitches. Why the fuck not.

My poor guy blamed himself when a game was hard just because the gameplay design was stupid and based on wasting your time and it wasn't actually fun. He felt weak so it made him go crazy believing you can and should beat any game you play like a sucker as long as it triggers his masochistic ass. This is the stupid target gamer profile made arcade places profit a lot lolol. And he seriously asks new games to be that stupid for a stupid sense of "hard". New games are already stupid for many other reasons, let's not drop the IQ of the video game industry further!!! lolol

 

[PhaseJump]

I beat a ton of NES games back in the day, and as a college aged dumbass smashed on beers I could run NES Contra without using the Konami code, and make it to at least the end of the snow stage without dying.

Now I have no patience for old shitty balls to the wall, hard NES games these days. Fucking nonsense. Youtubers were and clearly still are a mistake for humanity.

 

[Graves Ruinwalker]

I know I'm an outlier but damn. My gaming life revolved around computers so I never even played, let alone beat these games. The only one I have any experience with is Castlevania but, uh, the less said about the Amiga port the better.

What a way to find out I have no street cred according to a source as reliable and authoritative as some random YouTuber. This does beg the question though - am I tax-exempt or anything like that now? I goddamn better be. All those years I thought I was a 'real gamer' (hard 'r' and (TM)) only to find out I was living a lie. How will I recover, pray tell?

Jokes aside, he raises some good points. Games are meant to be played and not just collect dust on your shelves. However, whether or not you can or even want to beat them isn't really relevant. Older games' difficulty tends to stem from crap design rather than a thought out challenge more often than not and there's nothing wrong with putting down a game that frustrates you. His entire Castlevania section is nothing but Stockholm Syndrome. 'Bad controls are actually good because you have to commit to the jump' is a really stupid argument. Bad controls are bad. Just because you can navigate around them and still beat the game doesn't magically make them good.

Another point of his that I liked was his allusions to the retro gamer industrial complex. I noticed it too. The last 20 years or so have cemented a sort of status quo when it comes to old games. There are games that have an opinion associated with them and if you go against the grain you're ostracized. He brought up some guy making a list of his favorite Jaleco games I think it was and included a game that he 'clearly barely played'. Now that's something I can get behind. It's your list. You don't have to have played every single game in existence to make one. I know there are people out there who will eat anyone who doesn't include their game in a list like that alive but what do you care? Just say you haven't played something or that you don't like a given game and move on instead of conforming to what at this point is becoming just as bad as mainstream. You don't have to be different for the sake of being different but if it happens that your taste in gaming diverges from the norm then more power to you. If it happens that your journey of discovery of a company's games is incomplete and you want to list what you've played so far that's cool too. Don't feel pressured to include a game just because there's a consensus that a game should be included in such a list.

Finally, I like his confrontational/shitposty style. This is something you won't get from any of the big fish on YT. Chasing that ad money and trying to be as non-offensive as possible to avoid stupid people and their drama makes for boring content. Tell it how you think it is. Some will agree, some won't and that will be that. It's more fun that way.

I can only partly agree with you .
Its not bad design overall (except the whole LJN-library with some exceptions) when the gameplay is about commitment on the actions and how you could avoid most of the dangers . I think games shouldnt always meant to be easily beatable and offer a challenge for those who want to play that challenge .

Most people demand it to be beatable for everyone that even an toddler with no arms or legs can beat those games with ease but dont wanna give the other spectrum for other people who seek for other approaches of such difficulty and its gameplay to adapt while getting good for it. Its very one-sided and people who defend these older designs still have a great point . Nobody will beat every game in their life-time and its impossible to archieve that . Thats why we should know what our preffered genres are and which games we prefer for ourself that we like personally . Im all for variation in game-design , genres and approaches instead going for trends alone and call blindly every new game-design suddenly the evolution of gaming .

The death of arcade-games and the denial of arcade-designs was already a bad turn of events that led the game industry become such a homogenous boredom-fest for hyper expensive graphics-cards and overpriced consoles and "games" that shys away from gameplay and deliver us almost hour-long cutscenes with walky-talky segments just for questioning ourselves when the game actually starts while being still after 20 hours in the tutorial . Always "marketable" games but not great games . Every game is marketable but its always about how its marketed and not if its marketable .

By the way i hate yellow-paint anyway . The red one tastes like cherry and is better .

 

[qw90700]

I can only partly agree with you .
Its not bad design overall (except the whole LJN-library with some exceptions) when the gameplay is about commitment on the actions and how you could avoid most of the dangers . I think games shouldnt always meant to be easily beatable and offer a challenge for those who want to play that challenge .

Most people demand it to be beatable for everyone that even an toddler with no arms or legs can beat those games with ease but dont wanna give the other spectrum for other people who seek for other approaches of such difficulty and its gameplay to adapt while getting good for it. Its very one-sided and people who defend these older designs still have a great point . Nobody will beat every game in their life-time and its impossible to archieve that . Thats why we should know what our preffered genres are and which games we prefer for ourself that we like personally . Im all for variation in game-design , genres and approaches instead going for trends alone and call blindly every new game-design suddenly the evolution of gaming .

The death of arcade-games and the denial of arcade-designs was already a bad turn of events that led the game industry become such a homogenous boredom-fest for hyper expensive graphics-cards and overpriced consoles and "games" that shys away from gameplay and deliver us almost hour-long cutscenes with walky-talky segments just for questioning ourselves when the game actually starts while being still after 20 hours in the tutorial . Always "marketable" games but not great games . Every game is marketable but its always about how its marketed and not if its marketable .

By the way i hate yellow-paint anyway . The red one tastes like cherry and is better .

That's where adjustable custom difficulty setting is a must for every game. The player has to be able to choose between bullet sponge enemies or "1 shot dead" rule or something.

That's also when accessibility settings should be proper. Instead not designing games with rapid flashing rights you gotta be able to turn it off/on. They assume I'll have a seizure so they also don't put the head bob setting sometimes. They assume I'll suffer from motion sickness. They assume I'm blind so they make yellow paints the default without able to turn it off. They assume you were just born yesterday so they force tutorials. They assume you suck at direction so the whole level is designed to force you to a direction.

It's like designing a school for only disabled people. No stairs, only ramps. Floor filled with guide floors for blind people. And also the school designed for mentally ill people so tons of anything that can be a topic of phobia are absent in the school. There is not even a pencil just because a kid screams when they see a pencil. This is actually not the way to design a game for everyone, they only literally design video games for disabled people who lives on Twitter and perverts who really cares a lot about what is popular insanity in American culture anymore SMH.

 

[Graves Ruinwalker]

I agree with him .
The games aint outdated and are well designed on their own while having sometimes rough edges . Crunchy to beat them but not impossible .

But he says only for action games and is a bit too generalised for his point .
Overall the sentiment aint wrong . Many people shy away the challenge and see the mechanics of older games as bad design which isnt true . You either mind its mechanics and learn to be efficient with them or you wont get far . Even i struggle with many retro-games but i see that i need more practice and need to learn more how i get into the game .

One Youtube-channel i really like and showed me some awesome tricks is ImgudUrBad . Giving up a challenge aint bad and its mostly wiser than hitting the head against the wall for a long time .
I mean im not good at shmups but i still have fun . When i get further at a game , i know that i improved and even memorised the enemy-patterns and the level . Patience is a key to success too because nothing is just given for nothing .

 

[qw90700]

I agree with him .
The games aint outdated and are well designed on their own while having sometimes rough edges . Crunchy to beat them but not impossible .

But he says only for action games and is a bit too generalised for his point .
Overall the sentiment aint wrong . Many people shy away the challenge and see the mechanics of older games as bad design which isnt true . You either mind its mechanics and learn to be efficient with them or you wont get far . Even i struggle with many retro-games but i see that i need more practice and need to learn more how i get into the game .

One Youtube-channel i really like and showed me some awesome tricks is ImgudUrBad . Giving up a challenge aint bad and its mostly wiser than hitting the head against the wall for a long time .
I mean im not good at shmups but i still have fun . When i get further at a game , i know that i improved and even memorised the enemy-patterns and the level . Patience is a key to success too because nothing is just given for nothing .

Sometimes the game is badly balanced like have to shoot at enemies a lot or rocket science requirement to progress in games that you have no way of knowing it which is not fun, but mostly all they cared about it is making players can't finish the game too soon to hide how short the game is and it is actually a nonsense reason IMO. And sometimes they did so to sell their shitty guidebooks. I would prefer 30 minutes long fun game over 7 hours "died a lot and it wasn't clear how to even progress the game" boredoom shit lol. In the end you don't have to play a game for "success" yo, it ain't starting a company lol.

 

[Graves Ruinwalker]

That's where adjustable custom difficulty setting is a must for every game. The player has to be able to choose between bullet sponge enemies or "1 shot dead" rule or something.

That's also when accessibility settings should be proper. Instead not designing games with rapid flashing rights you gotta be able to turn it off/on. They assume I'll have a seizure so they also don't put the head bob setting sometimes. They assume I'll suffer from motion sickness. They assume I'm blind so they make yellow paints the default without able to turn it off. They assume you were just born yesterday so they force tutorials. They assume you suck at direction so the whole level is designed to force you to a direction.

It's like designing a school for only disabled people. No stairs, only ramps. Floor filled with guide floors for blind people. And also the school designed for mentally ill people so tons of anything that can be a topic of phobia are absent in the school. There is not even a pencil just because a kid screams when they see a pencil. This is actually not the way to design a game for everyone, they only literally design video games for disabled people who lives on Twitter and perverts who really cares a lot about what is popular insanity in American culture anymore SMH.

True but some visions and designs arent meant to be played in different difficulties because the content stays the same but the experiences are different which doesnt reflect the good or bad designs overall . A game on easy could be a 10/10 but the same game on normal or hard could be actually a 3-5/10 because you could cheese the game on easy but when all the mechanics are needed on higher diificulties but most of them are just unfinished code-slop , this can turn the game into a bad trip . Enemy-sponges are one of the worst problems lately and even the camera can turn in higher difficulties as a bad idea to be implemented unwisely when the action goes crazier .

Not all companies can pull different difficulty-designs great and flawless . You could hate or Love Doom: the dark ages for its different difficulty sliders but it comes to me that the designers dont wanna design their game anymore and gives the tools for the player which makes devs somehow redundant in some form .

 

[qw90700]

Not all companies can pull different difficulty

Yep, their lack of ability to develop decent games is the new trend. If they can't develop a game worth money then they should work at McDonald's instead of ruining the industry further lol.

If we should be okay with what they can develop then we will be stuck with rubbish games. They gotta up the game in this time and age.

 

[Graves Ruinwalker]

Sometimes the game is badly balanced like have to shoot at enemies a lot or rocket science requirement to progress in games that you have no way of knowing it which is not fun, but mostly all they cared about it is making players can't finish the game too soon to hide how short the game is and it is actually a nonsense reason IMO. And sometimes they did so to sell their shitty guidebooks. I would prefer 30 minutes long fun game over 7 hours "died a lot and it wasn't clear how to even progress the game" boredoom shit lol. In the end you don't have to play a game for "success" yo, it ain't starting a company lol.

Totally agree . I ´ve played enough games which the enemies not only snack my bullets like freshly made doritos , taking hits like i massaging them with love or getting smack me lightly once and need a whole body replacement for that .

While i agree that balance can make or break a game overall , not all aspects need a balance . Its more about the speed , lethality and concept that should go hand in hand that has its core-balance and should be tuned for it. While in Singeplayer games there are more liberties to balance it out , in multiplayer games its pure hell for the devs and unbelievable fine-tuning of the worst kind .

Its like a sauce for a sandwich . It should fit what you make it but too much can ruin the whole taste but too less of it can taste bland and boring .

I learned that from DM-ing in TTRPGs and i realised that too much balance can ruin the fun for the players . There should be limits there but still giving the freedom for the players to experiment and being compelled to be more daring . What makes the adventure fun when everything is easily conquerable ? Danger is the spicy sauce that makes the moments so lively . Having everything in control is mundane and boring ( for more or less people) .

 

[trickybus]

I don't like bullet-hell shooters. Broski is going to have to take 500 off my gamer cred score

 

[qw90700]

Totally agree . I ´ve played enough games which the enemies not only snack my bullets like freshly made doritos , taking hits like i massaging them with love or getting smack me lightly once and need a whole body replacement for that .

While i agree that balance can make or break a game overall , not all aspects need a balance . Its more about the speed , lethality and concept that should go hand in hand that has its core-balance and should be tuned for it. While in Singeplayer games there are more liberties to balance it out , in multiplayer games its pure hell for the devs and unbelievable fine-tuning of the worst kind .

Its like a sauce for a sandwich . It should fit what you make it but too much can ruin the whole taste but too less of it can taste bland and boring .

I learned that from DM-ing in TTRPGs and i realised that too much balance can ruin the fun for the players . There should be limits there but still giving the freedom for the players to experiment and being compelled to be more daring . What makes the adventure fun when everything is easily conquerable ? Danger is the spicy sauce that makes the moments so lively . Having everything in control is mundane and boring ( for more or less people) .

I look at the balance thing in this context:

If X doesn't prevent fun and doesn't actually really cause hardship to players I don't think it has to be changed. This logic can be applied to many aspects of video game development. The key logic for balance should be keeping the game fun; not easier or harder. The game gotta have flow of gameplay that player's attention never broken and it doesn't make unfair for the player. It never should be game's fault because only when player thinks it's the player's fault they won't leave the game beliving the game is rigged from the start and therefore it is pointless to play it.

For example when I look at the Silver Surfer on NES this is video game manifestation of masochism lol. Balance is 0 in the game, it is a stupid game that intentionally or not clearly not developed properly. But for example Megaman games are balanced. Despite games may rely on micro-second differences between life and death and therefore require precise moment, if the game gets easy when you play the game right even on extreme difficulty you gotta say the game is balanced.

But in new generation video game industry balance is ignored, they just either develop the game in the way you gotta try hard to fail or game having Silver Surfer syndrome it is unfair AF.

For example I don't think Dark Souls games are hard, it is unbalanced. It would be a Silver Surfer if you couldn't grind EXP to make your character fuck with the unbalanced nature of the game. In that regard there are hard games like Megaman games and there are unbalanced shit games like Silver Surfer, Armored Core Last Raven and Dark Souls games.

At that point it is up to you if you can only enjoy an extremely hard game that is balanced or you are a masochist enjoying Silver Surfer. Just because there are masochistic people doesn't mean you gotta replace a sense of difficulty with intentionally unbalanced mess. Games can be longer therefore they don't have to rely on unbalance and precise actions to progress the game especially when most sane people only care about having fun with the gameplay and just distracting themselves with the gameplay. People would prefer to really think about their life and goals instead of some stupid game that you don't have to play. A game shouldn't turn into real life crisis and a job to beat it no matter what it takes lol.

As for multiplayer games, often they change shit unnecessarily just to change it and I even see when the next game released to they ruin the previous game so people will buy the next game lol. Shit gets worse if they really care about every baby crying. Naturally you cannot satisfy everyone and for every X people like there will be people who will dislike X. As long as shit ain't unfair it is ok as it is.

 

[Ikagura Ikagura]

I'd also say that a game being hard doesn't systematically makes it better.

For a great challenging retro game there's an ocean of badly balanced ones.

 

[petran79]

because of popularity, retro difficulty in the current mindset is associated mainly with NES games, but if you put the NES on a difficulty tier list, it would be actually somewhere in the middle.

Top difficulty systems in the 80s-90s would be actually the arcade coin eaters with the arcade controls meant for adult hands and afterwards the various computer systems were many games shipped without any serious quality control, plus you had to figure out the technical aspects of the game.
Back then I considered players who finished those arcade and computer games much more skilled than myself who beat a bunch of NES games. Because I had tried those games too and found them ultra difficult.

Whereas nowadays everything is streamlined across both consoles and computers as it is impossible to master everything.

But back then, even if you mastered few NES games, you were a small fry in the gaming world