Jump to content

The great "Difficulty in games" debate

Recommended Posts

  On 11/3/2020 at 12:26 AM, Psychotic Ninja said:

My stance is a simple one: Players should have the option to make a game as difficult, or easy, as they see fit. As long as it doesn't harm other people's experience or enjoyment (when it comes to online gaming), then let them. If Ross wants to use cheats to beat Dark Souls, then let him. If he decides, down the road, to go back, and beat it, this time without cheats, then good for him. If not, okay.

Expand  

 

I agree with this, the problem isn't difficultly levels, it's when the gameplay mechanics themselves get dumbed down or removed.

"I don't trust a man that doesn't have something strange going on about him, cause that means he's hiding it from you. If a man's wearing his pants on his head or if he says his words backwards from time to time, you know it's all laid out there for you. But if he's friendly to strangers and keeps his home spick-and-span, more often than not he's done something even his own ma couldn't forgive." -No-bark Noonan

Share this post


Link to post

responding to Psychotic Ninja:

  Reveal hidden contents

 

Edited by Arseniy Yavorśkyi (see edit history)

Share this post


Link to post

RaTcHeT302, will you chill out already? calm down. take deep breaths. it's like you're on acid or something.

 

the advice was to play the game without cheats. I wasn't talking about backseat gaming happening in the chat.

 

P.S. the reason I put the post under the spoiler was to reduce the space it takes up on the page.

Edited by Arseniy Yavorśkyi (see edit history)

Share this post


Link to post
  On 11/4/2020 at 4:07 PM, RaTcHeT302 said:

okay since this guy will just throw the "not logical" argument at me to hand wave all i'm saying away, here's an ACTUAL LOGICAL ARGUMENT

Expand  

you mixed up the meaning of what I said, I clarified it in my response. that's it. I did not hand wave away anything, and I also didn't say anything about your arguments not being logical. although, in hindsight, I probably should have.

  On 11/4/2020 at 4:07 PM, RaTcHeT302 said:

if you were given the option to cheat, and if you knew that you would never caught, knowing that you'd save 10 hours worth of time, would you not do it?

Expand  

no, because if the game is THAT bad it's simply not worth my time. the only exception is in case of a bug.

  On 11/4/2020 at 4:07 PM, RaTcHeT302 said:

i mean, morally, it doesn't matter, it's pure logic here

Expand  

I don't think morality of cheating is a concern in the single-player part of the game.

  On 11/4/2020 at 4:07 PM, RaTcHeT302 said:

a computer would always take the option to cheat, i mean, it's perfectly logical, i save 10 hours, it's a positive gain, it's always beneficial, why would i not do it?

Expand  

if your objective is to simply reach the end credits as soon as possible, then yeah. but that's not why most people play video games.

  On 11/4/2020 at 4:07 PM, RaTcHeT302 said:

none of what you are saying makes any sense to me, not only are your arguments just plain unreasonable, but they just don't make sense from even the most basic points of view

 

i mean i guess he'll say, "but he was livestreaming" and we'll just go on here forever

 

i just don't see the point, i'm getting nowhere here honestly

Expand  

you know, you're right. let's just leave that for the people to figure out. I think they can tell which one of us is a raving lunatic.

Share this post


Link to post
  On 11/5/2020 at 4:29 AM, centersolace said:

I play videogames to have fun. Not miserably failing to click the same 5 buttons over and over again.

 

I have a job for that.

Expand  

+1

Don't insult me. I have trained professionals to do that.

Share this post


Link to post

Who gets to define the "right" way to play a game? the "most optimized" way to play? How are these decisions decided? Does everyone have to follow these guidelines, especially on their first playthrough? What's to happen if someone doesn't? Are these answers universal? Should they be?

Edited by Psychotic Ninja (see edit history)
  Quote

"We don't call them loot boxes", they're 'surprise mechanics'" - EA

Expand  

 

Share this post


Link to post
  On 11/6/2020 at 4:38 AM, centersolace said:

If "getting gud" requires I give up my life it's not worth my time.

Expand  

have you ever seen a game with that sort of requirement? the only one that comes to my mind is Getting Over It.

  On 11/6/2020 at 10:08 AM, Psychotic Ninja said:

Who gets to define the "right" way to play a game? the "most optimized" way to play? How are these decisions decided? Does everyone have to follow these guidelines, especially on their first playthrough? What's to happen if someone doesn't? Are these answers universal? Should they be?

Expand  

when developers design a game, it's done with a certain expectation of what players will be doing. that's where 'intended experience' is derived from. when you buy a game, you expect to get what you paid for — what the developers created. it would therefore make sense to try to get this experience, instead of intentionally breaking the game in fundamental ways, at least on the first playthrough.

Share this post


Link to post
  On 11/6/2020 at 1:38 PM, Arseniy Yavorśkyi said:

when developers design a game, it's done with a certain expectation of what players will be doing. that's where 'intended experience' is derived from. when you buy a game, you expect to get what you paid for — what the developers created. it would therefore make sense to try to get this experience, instead of intentionally breaking the game in fundamental ways, at least on the first playthrough.

Expand  

And that's where we're at a disagreement. For I believe it's the player's decision as for the right/optimal way in playing a game. The Developers can intend all they want, but like with all art, it's up for interpretation.

  Quote

"We don't call them loot boxes", they're 'surprise mechanics'" - EA

Expand  

 

Share this post


Link to post
  On 11/6/2020 at 1:38 PM, Arseniy Yavorśkyi said:

have you ever seen a game with that sort of requirement? the only one that comes to my mind is Getting Over It.

when developers design a game, it's done with a certain expectation of what players will be doing. that's where 'intended experience' is derived from. when you buy a game, you expect to get what you paid for — what the developers created. it would therefore make sense to try to get this experience, instead of intentionally breaking the game in fundamental ways, at least on the first playthrough.

Expand  

Any game that advertizies itself as being "super duper hard" is one of those.

Share this post


Link to post
  On 11/7/2020 at 7:36 AM, centersolace said:

Any game that advertizies itself as being "super duper hard" is one of those.

Expand  

I wouldn't take marketing fluff at face value.

  On 11/6/2020 at 2:11 PM, kerdios said:

@Arseniy Yavorśkyi so did you get to watching the wisecrack video and what did you think about the three philosophies he demonstrated (maternity (not sure if correct term, but go with me), castration, desperation)?

Expand  

I'm sorry, I didn't know you were expecting me to watch it. I generally avoid videos where every other comment points out how this or that part of the video is factually incorrect. besides, the whole idea behind those philosophies seems ridiculous and far-fetch. I'll give you my take on Joseph Anderson's videos once I finish watching all the parts, however.

Share this post


Link to post

If games were designed in a way so that what the developers wanted you to do, and exactly how they wanted you to do, then the games would be extremely hand-holdy, with zero deviation from the plot or world, telling you exactly what to do, when and how to do it from start to finish. If you tried to deviate from the plot/story, you would get a game over.

Edited by Psychotic Ninja (see edit history)
  Quote

"We don't call them loot boxes", they're 'surprise mechanics'" - EA

Expand  

 

Share this post


Link to post
  On 11/7/2020 at 8:58 AM, Arseniy Yavorśkyi said:

I wouldn't take marketing fluff at face value.

I'm sorry, I didn't know you were expecting me to watch it. I generally avoid videos where every other comment points out how this or that part of the video is factually incorrect. besides, the whole idea behind those philosophies seems ridiculous and far-fetch. I'll give you my take on Joseph Anderson's videos once I finish watching all the parts, however.

Expand  

think nothing of it, the expectation was only there because you wrote you might watch it even despite the comments (or I misunderstood).

Share this post


Link to post
  On 11/7/2020 at 10:12 AM, Psychotic Ninja said:

If games were designed in a way so that what the developers wanted you to do, and exactly how they wanted you to do, then the games would be extremely hand-holdy, with zero deviation from the plot or world, telling you exactly what to do, when and how to do it from start to finish. If you tried to deviate from the plot/story, you would get a game over.

Expand  

no, that's literally how all games are made. it's just that some games are much better at hiding their limits than others, and some games are bad at enforcing said limits. in an RPG quest, for example, if you manage to break the expected chain of events in a way that wasn't accounted for by the devs, sometimes you don't just lose the game — it crashes, the quest gets stuck, you fall through the floor, etc. haven't you seen the Deus Ex episode of Game Dungeon?

Share this post


Link to post
  On 11/7/2020 at 4:21 PM, Arseniy Yavorśkyi said:

no, that's literally how all games are made. it's just that some games are much better at hiding their limits than others, and some games are bad at enforcing said limits. in an RPG quest, for example, if you manage to break the expected chain of events in a way that wasn't accounted for by the devs, sometimes you don't just lose the game — it crashes, the quest gets stuck, you fall through the floor, etc. haven't you seen the Deus Ex episode of Game Dungeon?

Expand  

giphy.gif

 

 

So, as a (former) speedrunner for Arkham Asylum, me throwing a remote batarang through a tiny gap in an invisible wall, to knock down the giant bell in the Manor, to skip a fairly big chunk of the game. You're telling me that's fully intentional by the devs, cause it didn't crash the game?!

 

 

 

 

 

I mean, I didn't lose the game. I can still beat it. I can still defeat Joker.

  Quote

"We don't call them loot boxes", they're 'surprise mechanics'" - EA

Expand  

 

Share this post


Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in the community.

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


×
×
  • Create New...

This website uses cookies, as do most websites since the 90s. By using this site, you consent to cookies. We have to say this or we get in trouble. Learn more.