Originally posted by SwampRob

Sovrath, I always respect your posts.    That said, I must disagree with what you've stated here, at least to a degree.

Please do not include me in your "we".   I, for one, do not think games are too easy.   In fact, I'm confused by people's definition of easy (or hard).    Let me explain:   I've seen people post in forums about how it took them 10 or 20 tries to down a particular end-boss, but eventually they figured out how to do it.   And now, they call that easy.    For me, easy means NEVER dying.   I mean never, ever.

I often liken my games to the literature I read.   In those books, it is very rare that the hero dies, at least not until the very end.   That is the game I want to play.   And I don't mean hardcore permadeath modes where you have to be cautious to the extreme.   But rather a game where I feel like a powerful hero all the time.    Where mere minions, even in groups of two or three, do not provide the tiniest hint of a threat.    I am a hero!     End bosses would be roughly equal to my skill and no more.

I hate dying in games.   HAAAATE it.     It's not the penalty, or the pointlessly annoying walk back to my corpse.    I am the hero of the story!    I shouldn't die, at least, not unless it's in some spectacularly selfless act of heroism.

I'm being a bit extreme here but I think you get my point.      I often scratch my head at how other players seem to actually enjoy defeat.    

Now, this is not to say I feel all games should be like I described, not at all.     There does need to be games for all types of players, but I can't agree with "This is where devs have gone wrong" beyond that.

BTW, I enjoyed Dragon Age. So much so that I played it through completely three times. But after the first run I set it to easy. Partially for reasons I stated above, and partly because after a while, I found the harder setting to be more of a slog. After the first death, succeeding deaths are meaningless. It just means a restart from last save and try again. And again. And as many times as you need until you get past that fight to the next. I would prefer to see far fewer fights but have more of them mean something.

 

Oh I respect that. When I say "we" it's just a coloquialism aimed more toward players who are on the side of desiring harder games and not so much as "everyone/we".

I can easily see your point and even agree. Heck, in Dragon Age I would sometimes put the game on easy because harder modes just halted the flow of everything. Sometimes it's the story that matters more than whether or not you get through the encounter.

I suppose a better way to illustrate what I want to say is that recently in Vanguard I went down into a spider den. Unlike wow or lotro I realized that I could very well die if I wasn't careful. Oh sure, one can die in wow and lotro but I have found that I die way less. If I made one wrong pull or went a bit too far then there was going to be a consequence that I might not be able to escape from. I found this thrilling to a point.

Now, this is not to say that I want to die nor do I require hard death penalties. For me the failure of dying resonates far more than any death penalty can.

But I found that there was a bit more investment on my part.

But I'm also a huge believer in the idea (and fact) that not everyone is built the same way. Some love that heart pumping, adrenaline rush and require it. Me? Not so much. That's actually something I don't find desirable. But I do like to feel that I'm in a dangerous area and that I need to be in the moment or else there will be consequences.

Personally I don't think ALL games should be hard. And I support to a certain degree that games allow part time players or casual players a chance to play without being hard core.

I would just like to see a game for me that had a theme I could identify with and that made me a bit more cautious.

To end, I just used Dragon Age because it was one of the first solo player games I've played in a long time and I had forgotten what it was like to fail and have to reload in order to succeed in a spot. Not to advertise it or set it up as a poster boy for a hard game. I include this because I don't want forum goers to think I'm advertising this game. One could very well just insert another game of their choice that they found challenging.

I've heard about DS... No way in hell am I going to waste my time(and spike my blood pressure) with such a sadistic game.  I'm in this hobby for entertainment and relaxation. There is a difference between a challenging game, and one that is more the Dev's playing sadistic head games with the player.  From the sounds of it, its much like a game called The Void.  Which is also one sadistic head game after another.

Originally posted by SwampRob

Originally posted by Sovrath

I have to admit that I was pleasantly surprised when, in Dragon Age, I was picked up by a large troll creature and pounded within seconds.

At first I hated that there was an "I win" button for the AI but after playing the game and learning more about it I found out how I could mitigate that sort of thing.

I suppose for me I prefer things harder (the "old" old forest in LOTRO for example) but I also tend to prefer the chance to at least overcome or recognize the danger by quickly looking at the scenario before me.

Demons's Souls might be a tad to annoying for my preference but it would be nice if mmo's had more danger. Like in Lineage 2 where, in the starter dark elf area, there was a quest mob that was a monster tree that required a full party to even have the chance to take down. This thing had a wide aggro range. Same in the seap of spores where Orfen would chase you right up to the gates so she could stomp you.

Some of the most fun I've ever had was making sure I knew where orfen was so I didn't get stomped. Since then, NC has made those areas easier, less fog in the swamp where the tree is and now I don't even think it aggros anymore. Oren doens't travel around as much and won't chase you to the gates.

THIS is where the devs have gone wrong.

We do need more challenge. However, for some that challenge will require a stiff death penalty and for others that death penalty will have to be a bit less.

Still, it needs to be said that games like Demons's souls need to be made as clearly there are people who enjoy them.

Sovrath, I always respect your posts.    That said, I must disagree with what you've stated here, at least to a degree.

Please do not include me in your "we".   I, for one, do not think games are too easy.   In fact, I'm confused by people's definition of easy (or hard).    Let me explain:   I've seen people post in forums about how it took them 10 or 20 tries to down a particular end-boss, but eventually they figured out how to do it.   And now, they call that easy.    For me, easy means NEVER dying.   I mean never, ever.

I often liken my games to the literature I read.   In those books, it is very rare that the hero dies, at least not until the very end.   That is the game I want to play.   And I don't mean hardcore permadeath modes where you have to be cautious to the extreme.   But rather a game where I feel like a powerful hero all the time.    Where mere minions, even in groups of two or three, do not provide the tiniest hint of a threat.    I am a hero!     End bosses would be roughly equal to my skill and no more.

I hate dying in games.   HAAAATE it.     It's not the penalty, or the pointlessly annoying walk back to my corpse.    I am the hero of the story!    I shouldn't die, at least, not unless it's in some spectacularly selfless act of heroism.

I'm being a bit extreme here but I think you get my point.      I often scratch my head at how other players seem to actually enjoy defeat.    

Now, this is not to say I feel all games should be like I described, not at all.     There does need to be games for all types of players, but I can't agree with "This is where devs have gone wrong" beyond that.

BTW, I enjoyed Dragon Age. So much so that I played it through completely three times. But after the first run I set it to easy. Partially for reasons I stated above, and partly because after a while, I found the harder setting to be more of a slog. After the first death, succeeding deaths are meaningless. It just means a restart from last save and try again. And again. And as many times as you need until you get past that fight to the next. I would prefer to see far fewer fights but have more of them mean something.

 

 

 I think that the heroes in those books arn't heroes because the enemies are weak,but because they are good at what they do. Now,superheroes are different. Anyways, I think that some games should stick to this,like Demon Souls(Though,havn't played it,but have read up on it. Can't wait to try) if your not good enough to be the hero,then you won't feel like the hero. At least,thats how I see it.

I just want to mention Civilization 4 as perfect example where hard difficulty doesnt stop players from taking the challenge again and again. The game has great replayability and after you get your butt kicked you think to yourself, ok one more try, even when there is late night. 

Game can be superhard when designed well. I guess DS is such a game if people dont ragequit.

I enjoyed The Immortal, I hated Battletoads. Both games very unforgiving in screwing up... so why like one over the other? *shrugs* Maybe someone else can explain it better.

If done right, major difficulty can be enjoyable and fun, rather than tedious and unrewarding...

Wow's endgame IS EQ1. 

The minute you hit level 80, you're pretty much done doing solo content, and with no experience bar you are now only chasing better gear or farming older content for gold.  You are forced to group with 4 others for "heroics" (which are no longer anywhere near heroic in difficulty, but still not solo-able).  If you're not a tank or healer, this means standing around for 15-30 minutes while queued in the looking for a group tool before every dungeon.  It's like waiting in line at a very crowded ski lift.  Whee.

Once you're fully kitted out in heroic and emblem gear, you can only advance (i.e. get better gear) by doing raids which require 10-25 players.  Many raids won't take you unless you can show them you've completed the content before.  Many raids won't take you unless your level of gear is beyond what's available from the content being raided.

AoC is hard? sorry... I like the game, but the only really challenging part in it is the "death group" in Cradle of Decay, and i think even that got "fixed" later on.. 

Originally posted by galliard1981

I just want to mention Civilization 4 as perfect example where hard difficulty doesnt stop players from taking the challenge again and again. The game has great replayability and after you get your butt kicked you think to yourself, ok one more try, even when there is late night. 

Game can be superhard when designed well. I guess DS is such a game if people dont ragequit.

Dude I totally have to agree with you.  All of the civilization games did their best to absolutly screw you, even to the point of cheating to make it harder in the earlier versions.  I have been playing since Civilization, and still have not beaten the various versions of the title more than a few times on the harder difficulty levels.  But thats what makes it so awesome.  It's seeing how good you did "that time" vs. every other time.  When you finally crush your enemies, or even just some of them, it is immensly rewarding.  You can play it in Puss mode too, but where is the fun in that?  You just get all the tech and are so far ahead of the other countries its pointless.

To continue my rant, I always felt that game "cheats" were just about the lamest thing someone could use.  Cheats, and easy mode for that matter literally allow the player to bypass the whole point of the game.  I play all FPS games in hard mode and all RPG's in hard mode.  It takes a bit longer to get through them but when you do the experience is always that much more memorable.

Applying this rant to MMORPG's though is a little tougher.  Designers want most theme park MMO's (that I have seen) to be easy to slightly moderately easy because it makes them more fast paced, and being more fast paced keeps the attention of the player and their monthly subscriptions rolling in. 

the main issue i find with modern mmo's is that in their efforts to make the game "easy and accessible" the immersion goes by the board.

i agree as some have pointed out however that overly or constantly penalising players or nerfing their toons as a result of their actions is not ideal; but not offering the player a sense of risk to their actions or decisions is equally damaging in terms of playing experience.

Originally posted by MasterWan

Originally posted by galliard1981

I just want to mention Civilization 4 as perfect example where hard difficulty doesnt stop players from taking the challenge again and again. The game has great replayability and after you get your butt kicked you think to yourself, ok one more try, even when there is late night. 

Game can be superhard when designed well. I guess DS is such a game if people dont ragequit.

 

Dude I totally have to agree with you.  All of the civilization games did their best to absolutly screw you, even to the point of cheating to make it harder in the earlier versions.  I have been playing since Civilization, and still have not beaten it more than a few times on the harder difficulty levels.  But thats what makes it so awesome.  It's seeing how good you did "that time" vs. every other time.  When you finally crush your enemies, or even just some of them, it is immensly rewarding.  You can play is in Puss mode too, but where is the fun in that?  You just get all the tech and are so far ahead of the other countries its pointless.

To continue my rant, I always felt that game "cheats" were just about the lamest thing someone could use to literally bypass the whole point of the game.  I play all FPS games in hard mode and all RPG's in hard mode.  It takes a bit longer to get through them but when you do the experience is always that much more memorable.

 I found Civillization:Revolution pretty easy.  Maybe it was just that one? But I do agree with the part of how awesome you did 'that one time' against' what you can do now.

Also play all my FPSs on the hardest mode. CoD:4 hardest one in along time. Going through that without dieing was nearly impossible,lol.

I don't think I could agree with you more on this column. In he past several years MMOs have gotten easier. The simple reason for this is the easier it is the more people will play it, the more people that play it, the more of a bottom line you have, and in the end of the day you and your investors are overwhelmingly happy, which I'm sure everybody on this tread no doubt gets.

I hope that in the future we see some more difficult games like EvE, because they are the only reason that I play, challenges that make me feel great.

Originally posted by Dominisi

I don't think I could agree with you more on this column. In he past several years MMOs have gotten easier. The simple reason for this is the easier it is the more people will play it, the more people that play it, the more of a bottom line you have, and in the end of the day you and your investors are overwhelmingly happy, which I'm sure everybody on this tread no doubt gets.

I hope that in the future we see some more difficult games like EvE, because they are the only reason that I play, challenges that make me feel great.

Darkfall is very hard.  But your right, overall MMO's have become easier and easier.

Thanks for the article.

I learned:

- I will NEVER play Demon Souls, as I do not enjoy getting kicked in the enthusiasm as a form of entertainment.

- You are a person completely different from me. When I spend $40-$60 on a game, I expect to be able to play the entirety of the content I paid for. Just because for me that meas setting the difficulty at 'Normal' to 'Easy' does not take awy fromt eh fun for me.

When I got my first chess program on my Commodore 64, I was only able o beat the first two levels of difficulty...so what. I'm glad there are some eople who like playing the most punishing games, the game industry needs the diversity of all the varous types, genres, and difficulties of games to remain vital and to evolve to the futur.

Please keep telling us which games scratch your masochistic itch, so I can avod them like a plague.

Originally posted by SwampRob

Wow.   From what I've read of your description of the game, you are a masochist.      To each his own, but there's no chance I'd set a virtual foot in that game ever.    For me to enjoy a game, all my characters have to slowly, steadily, make progress or improve in some way.   They may hit walls, but that progress should never be backwards.    But, whatever floats your boat.

 

In Demon's Souls you and your character slowly progress and improve in many ways every minute you play.

But the way the game works make you feel much more rewarded it in a way you will probably never feel in any other game.

Even when you lost souls you learn something, your progress in Demon's Souls is never backwards.

Originally posted by ProfRed

Demon's Souls is one of the best games ever made.  I would love if they made an MMO based off of it.

I disagree.

The way multiplayer works in Demon's Souls is original and unique and the way the game is "saved" every second make the game somehow persistent for the player. If they made it into a traditional MMO, a lot of the special details of Demon's Souls will be lost.

But a new MMO with similar atmosphere and combat would be very interesting.

I am not even sure they should create a second Demon's Souls. I don't think it would be easy to create such masterpiece two times in a roll...

Originally posted by Jadegogetter

I think im one of the few who dislikes Dragon Age. I disliked how the story was flat, how combat was dull (Including killsyncs do not make it epic) and how OP the mage class was. Take a look at Baldurs Gate II, an old game with epic combat. It was also not full blown cheese fantasy like Dragon Age. The romance scenes were so cringe worthy in Dragon Age I almost quit the game there and then.

Ofc the game had its merits, great back history and musical score.

But back to the topic! Current games, excluding Demons Souls, have become 'hold the gamers hand' and 'kiss the poor sore spot if hurt' kinda gaming. But look at the defenition of hard gaming. To increase the difficulty to epic does not make the game 'hard' but gives the computer an unfair advantage. Hard for me is skill based, platforming, tactics, timing on certain events. Its down to YOU to pass the area, kill the boss, jump that timed jump. And if you fail, YOU DIE! You re-step to the check point which is FAR back.

Death is now a joke for games. Spirit walk to your corpse :O Such a harsh life. I wish games would take EVEs approach to death.

While I understand the fondness toward "ye old games of yore" (trust me, I really do...I'm old, and played a lot of those old games), I've come to the conclusion that there is plenty of death, struggle, and misery in REAL life. Myself, (and I know I'm not alone in this) I would prefer LESS pain and misery in gaming. To me, it's not FUN to have to repeat something over and over and over and over to succeed. That is just way too fucking much like real life.  Have I always felt this about games?  NO. This opinion has actually changed with age.

Yes, in real life, every failure teaches you something, hopefully, that will bring you closer to success in the future. But seriously now...I don't want to "learn life lessons," necessarily, from games. I want to be interactively ENTERTAINED. For some people, I suppose (maybe those who haven't had that much struggle in real life, I don't know) struggling and painful deaths are entertaining and fun in a game. But since every gamer obviously doesn't agree....this is why I think having games that both do and don't have that required "suffering for success" in them....is a good thing. Otherwise....just give people the OPTION of painful or easy gaming mode....problem solved.

Any game that gives lots of options on HOW you play it, is probably apt to be more successful than a game that doesn't afford anyone any options. That goes for single player games AND MMOs, I believe. The more you allow a player to formulate their own way of playing and having fun...the better, imo.

Originally posted by BowWake

Thanks for the article.

I learned:

- I will NEVER play Demon Souls, as I do not enjoy getting kicked in the enthusiasm as a form of entertainment.

- You are a person completely different from me. When I spend $40-$60 on a game, I expect to be able to play the entirety of the content I paid for. Just because for me that meas setting the difficulty at 'Normal' to 'Easy' does not take awy fromt eh fun for me.

When I got my first chess program on my Commodore 64, I was only able o beat the first two levels of difficulty...so what. I'm glad there are some eople who like playing the most punishing games, the game industry needs the diversity of all the varous types, genres, and difficulties of games to remain vital and to evolve to the futur.

Please keep telling us which games scratch your masochistic itch, so I can avod them like a plague.

^^^^^ I just met my virtual TWIN.  Hi there, Sis or Bro!  And yes...I couldn't have stated it better (trust me...I've been trying). lol

Originally posted by Wraithone

I've heard about DS... No way in hell am I going to waste my time(and spike my blood pressure) with such a sadistic game.  I'm in this hobby for entertainment and relaxation. There is a difference between a challenging game, and one that is more the Dev's playing sadistic head games with the player.  From the sounds of it, its much like a game called The Void.  Which is also one sadistic head game after another.

I understand what you said about sadistic head games, this is not the case.

Every challenge in Demon's Souls is fair, always fair. If you know your character, the weapon you are using and pay attention to all "hints" and details Demon's Souls will be fair with you.

There are a lot of games with unfair challenging that in the end are very annoying, Demon's Souls only ask you concentrate and do your best without fooling around.

Usually people die in D.S because of their own mistakes, not because enemies are overpowerd or unfair. The balance in this game is very impressive.

...

Difficult game. Cruel old school difficulty, excellent graphics, amazingly created "gloomy environment" with a very dark mystical lore. Overall, the best RPG I have ever played, because while it is unforgiving, it is also, in a way very fair. As long as you THINK about every step forward that you take and involve some damn strategy in your sword fights, the sense of achievement you get is greater than level'ing an 80 in WoW. In other words what I'm saying is, and you can take this for a fact, that if you actually think and play this game, you'll find it nowhere as hard as people make it out to be.

Also, best PvP EVER.It would be crazy if this was actually a real MMO.

:3 Demon's Souls. Also, Gamespot.com's Game Of The Year 2009, very deservingly so :

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YgYBivaVco8

---

Originally posted by mmosnark
elocke: I don't think I bashed WoW at all in that article. In fact, I think I was probably a bit harsh on EQ (1 and 2). I have a lot of respect for  the decisions Blizzard made during development of WoW. The point I did want to make is that WoW is definitely "easier" than most of its precedents ... and that it being easier is part of a slow 20-year trend.
However, the main reason I wanted to reply to your comment is that your animated banner is awesome. Thumbs up!

---

Fair enough and thanks! I guess I just knee jerk half the time these days when WoW is even mentioned. I'm not a crazy fanboi, haven't played it since December, but so many people tend to just use WoW as the epitome of bad gameplay when it is by far no where near that.