What are your thoughts on hard videogames?

[nattybohman]

I've had a good time with both easy games and difficult games. One thing I never understand is why people get upset about the existence of an easy mode or easy mode being added without taking away the other more difficult options. More options always seems like a good thing to me.

 

[fake-chan]

I've had a good time with both easy games and difficult games. One thing I never understand is why people get upset about the existence of an easy mode or easy mode being added without taking away the other more difficult options. More options always seems like a good thing to me.

Elitism, plain and simple.

 

[moonbits]

To me, games have to provide a certain challenge but sometimes some people don't want challenge, just entertainment so it's difficult thing to balance nowadays. Most of my friends (30 year olds) do not play games in hard or even medium, they go straight to easy. I on the other hand, require challenge but that's because I'm an avid gamer.

Another thing I'd like to mention is learning curve, a lot of gamers do not have patience and this is primarily illustrated with the rise of Souls games and how they are perceived as "difficult" but once you get the hang of it, they can be a relatively challenging but enjoyable experience.

 

[Ikagura Ikagura]

Sounds like you won't like Kirby games, then. /j

And even then Kirby had, since the first game, a harder post-game mode that will turn the game upside down and makes is much more challenging.

Sure, it's probably one of the harder Extra Mode in the series compared to most others but there's also the True Arena which is an interesting boss rush.

Hypocritical post incoming: as someone who has dark souls as their favorite, I could not stand the idea of “harder = good”. My least favorite souls entries are the ones that lean the most into difficultly like bloodborne. I only really like the main trilogy, and even then I don’t like DS3 as much as DS1 (DS2 is weird, it carries over a lot of great DS1 stuff, but it does not feel intentional at all, and can only be understood if you play it). I sincerely believe DS1 was not made with the idea of being difficult. Mysterious and enigmatic? Absolutely, but not necessarily “hard”, maybe some parts are intended to be challenging, but 9 times of ten it’s almost always supposed to be a “puzzle” or a DPS check. Or just a test of how much you explored the world.

I never seek difficulty in games. I cannot get into DMC for that reason although I plan to give it a second chance.

People (well, journalists) put Dark Souls as one of the hardest game despite that it's quite forgiving and with a good build you can basically run on it.

 

[FlameSpice]

A difficult Game is more fun in my opinion. Like Elden Ring, for example, a great game but difficult to beat. The difficulty of a game is what gives the thrill, finally defeating the boss you keep dying to is insane level of satisfaction.

 

[Lokgamer]

Personally, I think there has to be a balance. I don't like hard games, but if a game is too easy, it might be boring. A difficult, we could be considered normal and give a player the posibility of choice should be the answer.

 

[RanmyakuIchi's icon RanmyakuIchi RanmyakuIchi]

I love a game that's "Tough but fair". Stuff like modern Ninja Gaiden, Metal Slug, a number of Shmups, Souls-likes, etc. Doubly so if it has a high potential for player expression though gameplay.

I have a *very* low tolerance for fake or artificial difficulty, however. I want to be pushed to get better and improve, not to be made to feel that my odds are down to chance.

 

[LaserMoose]

I feel as though the degree in which challenge matters to me is highly dependent on the game's objective.

Devil May Cry 3's "Dante Must Die" difficulty feels like the game's true identity is revealed to the player. Because the player must play through the game in Normal, Hard, and Very Hard, "Dante Must Die" operates under the assumption that the player is ready for its challenges, and drastically alters the way the game is played by giving enemies access to Devil Trigger, which is not seen in other difficulty options. DMC3 has the player unlock Dante's (or Vergil's) full moveset over consecutive playthroughs at different difficulty settings, which additionally gives the impression that DMC3 was designed around offering players a difficult challenge to overcome.

This all being said, I don't believe that the difficulty of DMC3 is what makes the game good. Rather, the sum of its parts (atmosphere, gameplay, story, music, character design, and player expression, to name a few) is what makes DMC3 a good game in my eyes.

By contrast, I'll look at a game series like Pokemon. In the vast majority of games in the series (that I've played, at least) the in-game battles are a walk in the park. The difficulty is determined by player expression (i.e. the Pokemon the player uses), yet most mainline games can be beaten using only one Pokemon, such as the player's starter. The primary objective of Pokemon in the early generations was never to be difficult, but instead to create a game centered around collecting and trading creatures. It was only later on in which the series shifted its objectives to cater more towards a competitive audience, as shown via the QoL improvements directed towards online battling in Scarlet and Violet.

Is the difficulty the reason why people play Pokemon? For some who play challenge runs to forcefully limit their options, perhaps, but I believe that the vast majority still play the games to collect, battle, and trade with others using a team of monsters that they've hand-picked. The games have survived and thrived off of their interesting monster designs, addictive gameplay loop, generally well-done music, and the mass appeal of monster collecting.

While I no longer play the Pokemon franchise personally, I enjoyed the Pokemon series more than almost any other when I was a kid, so I can't say that easy games are automatically worse than hard games.

 

[PKT]

I've played enough modded Celeste to know that difficulty can enhance a game. Difficulty can lead to frustration (how much depends on the game and person), but if a game is designed well it can add a lot of spice to the experience

 

[Trix_]

My best friend plays hard games most of the time. I don't know how he got used to that, but he likes challenges.

I'm a huge fucking noob, so I end up relying on guides and maps even when I want to avoid them.
Due to my disabilities, I have trouble with directions and I get lost easily.
My disabilities affect my logic skills as well, so it's hard for me to solve most puzzles.
When I play point and click adventure games, I always get a walkthrough because of the moon logic puzzles that make no sense... and besides, the story is more important to me.

I think that you should play games to have fun, first and foremost. Although I can't deny that I feel 'inferior' for choosing easy or normal mode, or for needing help to get through a level. In my case, I guess it's because I compare myself to my friend.
As fake-kun said, there are a lot of elitists, and they can ruin your enjoyment of things. I almost stopped listening to music completely because of them.

 

[Deleted member 171852]

I have seen many times before people in retro gaming places state that they don't want to play certain games because they are too difficult or grindy, i assume because retro gaming fans tend to be older and face more responsibilities like having a family so they don't want to spend their time playing challenging games when they could just be chilling with a game after a day of work.
In my case i often seek difficult games by default(even uncounsciously) and i think the whole challenge is what makes it fun for me, losing and struggling never was something that made me have less fun with a game but i guess i'm just a dirty NEET zoomer

I am actually curious to know what people in RGT think about difficulty in games since i noticed that this community is very diverse but with people's average age being a little higher than most gaming communities out there. I've also noticed that most people here are more leaning into sort of casual RPG games in general rather than competitive, flashy or notoriously challenging games.

You think difficulty is detrimental for your enjoyment of the game or you don't care at all as long as the game is good?

(gif unrelated)

 

[Flamebeard]

The one thing I'm not really fond when it comes to retro games (despite loving them to death) is having to restart an entire game because you lost all your lives. I'm otherwise perfectly fine with a game being a challenge. Though these days, I tend to play some games on an easier setting if I can help it as I need to just relax and unwind.

 

[Frickinfrik]

Sometimes, when a game is extremely brutally difficult, I’m convinced that the developers hate the player.

 

[Akiba]

Is the difficulty a well considered part of the experience?

Some SNES games are difficult just in a you need to memorize it and good luck beating it in the rental period lol

Some games are designed with difficulty in the mind in order to craft a better overall impression and to inflect different levels of progression, IE, a Dark Souls or something like that.

Grinding the same shit for hours just to make numbers go up in an FF game is boring and I want to an hero.
Grinding Malenia for 5 hours just so I can beat her ass with my fists is a good grind that actually helps me train pattern recognition and keeps my reaction time sharp. As well as helps me practice to stay calm under pressure.

It depends on the game.

 

[Deleted member 797290]

A difficult in games is important otherwise it would just be boring. I couldn't imagine playing only simple games there should always be a bit of difficulty.

 

[Cantarella]

iunno, totally a case by case basis. just depends on the kind of difficulty. some times it just feels like a totally arbitrary test of patience. At its best your brain is pushed and you get the satisfaction of winning. That satisfaction can't really exist when a game is super easy.

I've also noticed that most people here are more leaning into sort of casual RPG games in general rather than competitive, flashy or notoriously challenging games.

this is just the case across all aspects of life. more people are casual than 'hardcore' or whatever in any hobby. Until you get to really niche things where to be in the hobby at all you have to be seriously invested.

 

[Deleted member 171852]

Is the difficulty a well considered part of the experience?

Some SNES games are difficult just in a you need to memorize it and good luck beating it in the rental period lol

Some games are designed with difficulty in the mind in order to craft a better overall impression and to inflect different levels of progression, IE, a Dark Souls or something like that.

Grinding the same shit for hours just to make numbers go up in an FF game is boring and I want to an hero.
Grinding Malenia for 5 hours just so I can beat her ass with my fists is a good grind that actually helps me train pattern recognition and keeps my reaction time sharp. As well as helps me practice to stay calm under pressure.

It depends on the game.

I share a similar opinion related to difficulty.
I love difficult games but i only grind stuff that isn't just mindless grinding where you just mash the same button for hours and hours, i enjoy seeing myself improve as i keep playing and that makes it so gratifying to me. This is kinda why i'm not much fond of MMORPGs

 

[Deleted member 819841]

a eazy game is like a tasteless food for the gym when i play a game my ass need to be burnt that's why im a dark souls fan

 

[Tortuga]

I have seen many times before people in retro gaming places state that they don't want to play certain games because they are too difficult or grindy, i assume because retro gaming fans tend to be older and face more responsibilities like having a family so they don't want to spend their time playing challenging games when they could just be chilling with a game after a day of work.

I actually think it's the opposite: younger people interested in retro games because its a popular thing now, but too spooked because of scary stories about impossible difficulty or whatever

Anyway difficulty is important, if game is too easy it become bored fast, and at the end you feel like it was waste of time
That doesn't mean every need to be painfully hard but it need to have challenge

I also dont think most old game was that hard, sure some are but mostly it just require you to learn mechanics and get used to UI and controls

While many modern games are so damn streamlined they all, look same, play same and even has same god damn UI
If you ask me learning more complex game is simply more fun

 

[Deleted member 171852]

iunno, totally a case by case basis. just depends on the kind of difficulty. some times it just feels like a totally arbitrary test of patience. At its best your brain is pushed and you get the satisfaction of winning. That satisfaction can't really exist when a game is super easy.



this is just the case across all aspects of life. more people are casual than 'hardcore' or whatever in any hobby. Until you get to really niche things where to be in the hobby at all you have to be seriously invested.

I agree, difficulty is interesting because of seeing you grow and evolve.

I said that mainly as an observation on the forum being into this sort of genre rather that anything else. I don't really think people only play these games here because it's casual

 

[Deleted member 660650]

TBH there was no concept of "difficulty" back then. From the start we accepted games are developed in the way you cannot finish it. So we had no "finishing a game" mentality. So many arcade games we grew up with before console games was in the way you just play it until you die.

So, the concept of "progression" probably invented in NES-era but I honestly still had arcade mentality. For example playing Super Mario on NES, I went to the castle and princess wasn't there so I unlocked the next castle and princess wasn't there again I was like "princess is a lie" and never played a Super Mario until this day lol. The game was playable but it was so easy to not die I didn't see any point in playing the game because we already got used to dying. We were already master of surviving.

So in this regard the idea of video games started as "survival game". The longer you survive and do stuff to raise your highscore the more it matters.

For example I have no idea why video game consoles had highscore stuff because who can see it other than me? Arcade places had highschool thing so we can flex and some guy from another town challenge us to beat our score. There were bets about it and special events for it. So back then video gaming wasn't limited to playing a game, it was mostly about what society did about video game and all the friendship we had along the way lol.

But then survival sense continued in many NES games but then it was more like "boring games" especially developed in the way you cannot finish it because if you had finished it it would take 20 minutes to finish it. There are so many boring NES games and they had no arcade sense of survival. In arcade games when you die it's your fault and because of it you wanna play it, but when it's not your fault you don't wanna play it. NES games had no idea how to make you die because it's your fault lol. For example:

This is not difficulty, this is BS. Just because of one pixel or two you die. If arcade games were that BS they wouldn't be hit and video gaming would die there lol.

And then I think around Sega Genesis-era I learned the concept of "difficulty" because games could have "easy" modes. Until then I didn't think games are "easy" or "hard". It was either "you died" because you gotta get used to the game or "you don't die" because you learned the ropes. So seeing dfficulty options in games activated a neuron or something in my brain. When game was badly designed in a way it's game's fault that you die because of BS ways I made the game easy, if it's still my fault because I die even in hardest difficulty I enjoyed playing in insane hard way.

So this difference is important but what's important is if a game worth mastering because it gotta be cool and fun to even play that game.

Then we started to come up with the concept of speedrunning, but in our mind it was mostly about "perfect gameplay" so not necessarily finishing it as fast as we can. We would play the game so many times we could finish them without losing health or something. However speedrunning was natural result of being able to play the game so perfectly. When you play the game perfectly it gets "easy" to you but if the game is hard it would be still hard because lots of games required complex thinking as in multiple things at once and jedi reflexes to survive.

In that regard when it comes to difficulty it's important that game always have an obvious way to make you survive and if you cannot survive it shouldn't be because game is BS. No one wanna play a game that's BS so if a game is that BS that this game is not "hard" and ain't gonna waste my life to beat this game lol:

What's actually enjoyable is being able to beat last boss of Metal Gear Rising in hardest difficulty without taking damage so you get S ranking. This is fun, not the bloody Silver Surfer lol:

Bahawahaha ha, come at me bro!!! *Jack the Ripper mode activated* lolol

 

[Esidemoken]

I think that video games should have a minimum difficulty for sure, I would say enough so that it doesn't look like you activated an invincibility cheat and beat enemies with one hit.
Personally as an adult the difficulty doesn't affect me more than the duration, only in RPGs I don't mind if they are long as long as it's not artificial.

Finally I am of the idea that games should not lower their difficulty to suit the players, we are the ones who should learn to overcome that difficulty and if we can't then look for another game.

 

[Deleted member 819841]

being a dark souls fan ir a guy like difficulty has it pros and cons pros are ur reaction is good except anything cons people think ur a weirdo for liking ur ass to burn and ur suggestions will have dark souls and ur friends hate u because the game is impossible

 

[KaiserMk7]

The difficulty has to feel surmountable in some fashion and lead you to develop ways to overcome it. Low-penalty deaths make it better. RNG must only produce manageable problems and not be so poorly implemented as to be able to ruin your entire attempt if you're not some sort of speedrunner. The works.

 

[Deleted member 171852]

I actually think it's the opposite: younger people interested in retro games because its a popular thing now, but too spooked because of scary stories about impossible difficulty or whatever

Anyway difficulty is important, if game is too easy it become bored fast, and at the end you feel like it was waste of time
That doesn't mean every need to be painfully hard but it need to have challenge

I also dont think most old game was that hard, sure some are but mostly it just require you to learn mechanics and get used to UI and controls

While many modern games are so damn streamlined they all, look same, play same and even has same god damn UI
If you ask me learning more complex game is simply more fun

I think it's also true that people that never were exposed to retro games had this thought that they were super impossible yeah, but i usually see more people that were already retro gamers(since they started when gaming was still so early) complaining that they lost interest in certain games because of thinking it's inconvenient to spend so much time in a challenging game.

I agree a lot that this notion that old games were absolutely harder is bullshit.

TBH there was no concept of "difficulty" back then. From the start we accepted games are developed in the way you cannot finish it. So we had no "finishing a game" mentality. So many arcade games we grew up with before console games was in the way you just play it until you die.

So, the concept of "progression" probably invented in NES-era but I honestly still had arcade mentality. For example playing Super Mario on NES, I went to the castle and princess wasn't there so I unlocked the next castle and princess wasn't there again I was like "princess is a lie" and never played a Super Mario until this day lol. The game was playable but it was so easy to not die I didn't see any point in playing the game because we already got used to dying. We were already master of surviving.

So in this game the idea of video game started as "survival game". The longer you survive and do stuff to raise your highscore the more it matters.

For example I have no idea why video game consoles had highscore stuff because who can see it other than me? Arcade places had highschool thing so we can flex and some guy from another town challenge us to beat our score. There were bets about it and special events for it. So back then video gaming wasn't limited to playing a game, it was mostly about what society did about video game and all the friendship we had along the way lol.

But then survival sense continued in many NES games but then it was more like "boring games" especially developed in the way you cannot finish it because if you had finished it it would take 20 minutes to finish it. There are so many boring NES games and they had no arcade sense of survival. In arcade games when you die it's your fault and because of it you wanna play it, but when it's not your fault you don't wanna play it. NES games had no idea how to make you die because it's your fault lol. For example:

This is not difficulty, this is BS. Just because of one pixel or two you die. If arcade games were that BS they wouldn't be hit and video gaming would die there lol.

And then I think around Sega Genesis-era I learned the concept of "difficulty" because games could have "easy" modes. Until then I didn't think games are "easy" or "hard". It was either "you died" because you gotta get used to the game or "you don't die" because you learned the ropes. So seeing dfficulty options in games activated a neuron or something in my brain. When game was badly designed in a way it's game's fault that you die because of BS ways I made the game easy, if it's still my fault because I die even in hardest difficulty I enjoyed playing in insane hard way.

So this difference is important but what's important is if a game worth mastering because it gotta be cool and fun to even play that game.

Then we started to come up with the concept of speedrunning, but in our mind it was mostly about "perfect gameplay" so not necessarily finishing it as fast as we can. We would play the game so many times we could finish them without losing health or something. However speedrunning was natural result of being able to play the game so perfectly. When you play the game perfectly it gets "easy" to you but if the game is hard it would be still hard because lots of games required complex thinking as in multiple things at once and jedi reflexes to survive.

In that regard when it comes to difficulty it's important that game always have an obvious way to make you survive and if you cannot survive it shouldn't be because game is BS. No one wanna play a game that's BS so if a game is that BS that this game is not "hard" and ain't gonna waste my life to beat this game lol:

What's actually enjoyable is being able to beat last boss of Metal Gear Rising in hardest difficulty without taking damage so you get S ranking. This is fun, not the bloody Silver Surfer lol:

Bahawahaha ha, come at me bro!!! *Jack the Ripper mode activated* lolol

I agree with you but i think there is many ways you can find a way to have fun with this sort of bs games, it all depends much of the mentality of wanting to overcoming self imposed challenges, which is one of the principles of speedrunning.
But i'm 100% aware is not easy as i say to simply have this mentality over stupid games and many times it's not worthy. But it's something i found to make me have fun at the end just by the fact that "damn, i spend so much time into this arbitrary pointless thing and i made it, i feel like i accomplished my own goal" and it makes me satisfied lmao