502f4d No.15640984
Does a game's low difficulty affect your opinion on it's quality?
4bb35b No.15640989
6154d8 No.15640994
502f4d No.15640999
>>15640994
>>15640989
There's only one question to answer assholes
ad52cb No.15641011
Kill me jesus take me off this earth God I cant take life anymore. Kirby you are God now kill me
2cfed1 No.15641014
7199b8 No.15641091
>>15640999
I'm pretty sure they're saying it can go either way depending on the game/genre.
09bde8 No.15641098
If a game's target demographics is little kids like Kirby games, then no. Preteens and under aren't known for their gaming prowess, so easier challenges are expected. Said easy games get a pass from me.
7858e3 No.15641139
It depends entirely on what the game wishes to accomplish.
Kirby are well made wholesome platforms, the entire point of the series is to be babbys first game.
While this makes me somewhat sad I don't think well see something more akin to Kirby 64 again, I cant fault the series for accomplishing its primary goal.
You cant even die in The secret of monkeys island, because you dont need to. No part of the game really relies or depnds on that, its a game which removed death for the point of encouraging experimentation and that works very well for it.
Its when a game which doesnt have rooted identities like these attempt to follow the path.
The new Kings Quest for example is an absolute disgrace, painfully easy with a story-book formula to it. In the original kings quest it required heavy creative thinking and problem solving. It was a bit tasking, yes, but if you didnt save constantly you were at a disadvantage due to the sheer ease the game scraps players of progress with ruthless deaths.
Likewise there are games like pokemon, which have never been deep on the difficulty end no sir
but with the newer installments seemingly throwing any resemblance of challenge out the window when Heart Gold and Emerald, the battle frontier for gen 4, all did very well in regards to knowing when and where to push the difficulty just a bit high up.
Its quite disappointing seeing the game lose that, granted it seems like its not nearly as bad as it was with X/Y and ORAS now.
its all a matter on how games hold themselves and expectations they should meet
f50bcd No.15641147
>>15640984
Yes, Kirby's Extra Mode is far more fun than the standard gameplay.
f42e65 No.15641166
Really depends on the game.
If I play Kirby, it's usually to wind down after a hard day or just when I'm not doing too well. I want a bit of challenge but relaxing is my main goal. On the other hand, most more serious games, something like Deus Ex, I always play on the hardest difficulty because I want a fun challenging time with something like that, and I want to actually earn the story progress, assuming the game has one.
554e65 No.15641179
>>15640999 (very checked)
Oh hey Natas, how's life?
e0cf42 No.15641203
I get bored easily if a game doesn't offer a challenge, so yeah. Unless it has something special to offer, like a world that is actually fun to explore, I'll get to the point where I'm not even trying, die because I've given up trying to play the game, then turn it off.
53e2f2 No.15641320
Difficulty != Fun
I love both Dark Souls and Dynasty Warriors equally.
badedd No.15641348
>>15640984
Usually yes. If there's no risk of death (including the game being so easy that dying is uncommon/rare) the game lacks any sort of thrill.
Obviously this doesn't apply to shit like Harvest Moon.
1bbf7d No.15641410
Redout sold itself as a F-Zero type racing game but when I actually played it, it was so retardedly easy I got bored and turned it off after half an hour of getting endless gold medals after gold medals. And I'm not just being a faggot trying to brag– I'm not particularly good at racing games. Redout really was just so pathetically unchallenging without any noticeable rise in difficulty over a dozen races.
Games that sell themself on being a challenge should be bloody well challenging.
bbc2c7 No.15641508
Lego star wars II is pretty easy but it's still a great game.
0fd741 No.15641526
>>15640984
If the game is boring then the game is boring, regardless of difficulty
This may be an unpopular opinion, but I actually would rather have an easy game than a game with a difficulty setting. In fact I lose respect for devs who implement difficulty sliders/settings because all it shows me is that you don't have the fucking balls to deliver a hard game as the standard and want to allow the players to pussy out and/or you're too incompetent to create an engaging level of difficulty as the standard so you implement a setting if the player feels normal setting is too easy because you had no fucking idea what you were doing
3af552 No.15641602
>>15641139
The same could be said for a game such as Super Mario RPG: Legend of the Seven Stars. Square made the game at the height of the Final Fantasy/RPG craze for the Super Nintendo, and while it isn't strictly as difficult or complex as Final Fantasy 4, 5, or 6, it's still a good game. It's intentionally designed to be Babby's First RPG, and it shows, but that doesn't mean that they skimped on any of the details.
A lot of things are just plain simpler; the interface is simplified to make it much easier to understand, a lot of numbers are crunched to make things faster to track, there are fewer visible stats to worry about, damage numbers are lower, you're practically given free experience and items all throughout the game… If you win a fight with dead characters, they're revived with 1 HP automatically, and numerous secrets and special shops give you tons of special powers Kerokerocola and Red Essence.
At the same time, there is still some measure of strategy beyond "whack the damn thing and it dies". There are multiple fun minigames throughout the game, there are tons of secrets and side quests, numerous optional bosses (true to Square's style, in fact), and lots of random bullshit to find.
The characters are also well-developed, even many of the enemies are colorful, diverse, and funny in their own way while keeping with the theme. Bowser's first appearance as a clutzy, hard-headed goof with unimaginable power is SMRPG, I believe, and Nintendo decided to stick with it because it provided him with a much needed level of personification and character development. The plot is unique and fun, and Square did an excellent job in keeping with the "weapons" theme with all the bad guys.
10cd6b No.15641659
When a well designed game is easy it is a waste of potential. You never need to understand its mechanics despite them being fun and well designed. You'll likely never realize how much it could have offered and it'll be over too soon.
When a poorly designed game is difficult it makes it worse. A poorly made game that isn't total shit can still be fun if you go through it quickly, but the fun stops when you need to wrestle with broken gameplay or repeat sections that were no better than passably interesting the first time.
85e3a1 No.15641666
>>15641410
It gets harder later on, by a lot. It's just got the slow nu-game learning curve pacing to get over.
69ff40 No.15641739
>>15640984
>>15641602
>>15641139
There's nothing inherently wrong with a game's difficulty, if it's a core tenet of its design. Kirby isn't meant to be fuckoff hard, but it has to give a tiny bit of challenge. I view difficulty the same way I view texture in food, in that the texture complements the overall flavor, and sometimes it's that which you crave. Sometimes I'm in the mood for Demon's Souls and Exanima, other times I'm in the mood for something pillowy-soft and sweet, like Kirby.
It's only a problem if you don't diversify your gaming palette and refuse to play one game over the other, because difficulty is just as much a part of a game's appeal as the lack thereof.
3f3f00 No.15641805
When the difficulty so low that there is literally no satisfaction to be found in overcoming anything, then yes it does. Pic related is a pile of trash.
c46d0f No.15641824
Only when a game gives you a bunch of mechanics but never gives you a chance to utilize then to their full potential.
7858e3 No.15641934
>>15641739
Well put, I agree.
I have good memories of actually getting stuck on the last level of Kirbys adventure as a kid, really pushing myself to try and beat it. It had just enough push to challenge and satisfy a newcomer to video games.
Even going to my previous example, the challenge in monkeys island is there, just not in an inherent difficulty, the difficulty lies in the witty and fun problem solving/creative thinking, its a challenge of a different flavor
For a game to be satisfying to play, it needs something to overcome.
>>15641824
This is also a good point.
The 'New' super mario bros games I think are a good example
Most of the game is extremely easy, with the difficulty getting kicked in during the later levels but never truly testing you.
However the star levels in these games are in my opinion phenomenal.
Absolutely thrilling fast paced platforming, real entertaining and push you to your limit gameplay (for what its worth, at least)
The only problem is theres only a handful of star levels and they require 100% completion to get to.
The only time I felt the game was truly realizing its potential was contrasted by the entire rest of the game feeling much more hallow in comparison.
15b3f4 No.15641938
Not inherently, but I'll have a much harder time enjoying a game if the challenge is low. I love Kirby games, but sometimes it does make me wish it had the special worlds like New Super Mario World, and at least a challenging back quarter. Some games aren't challenging at all and are still fun, like Animal Crossing. It depends if the game style demands difficulty. Kirby really feels like it occasionally should.
15b3f4 No.15641964
>>15641805
Really depends what else the game has to offer. Wario Land 2 and 3 don't really have much, if any, difficulty, and they are still satisfying and fun.
617697 No.15641981
Sometimes, yeah. One of the Monolith Middle Earth games had difficulty settings that were
>babyshit
>babyshit
>babyshit
>babyshit but you get two hit while enemies need 80 hits or something
>somewhat difficult with AI reacting to you quicker in stealth, being more present in larger groups, and you getting two hit while enemies need 10 or so hits
Guess which difficulty made the game a blast to play and justified half of the game's mechanics?
f6c275 No.15642011
>>15641981
>>babyshit but you get two hit while enemies need 80 hits or something
This one?
617697 No.15642036
>>15642011
Yeah because I really love tanky enemies especially in games where you only really have two non special attacks.
6a4507 No.15642043
Depends on the game, but I generally prefer more difficult games, because if a game is so easy my brain goes to autopilot I get bored extremely quickly and probably forget about the game altogether. As long as the difficulty isn't because of utter bullshit, though.
f6c275 No.15642045
>>15642036
I knew the right answer I just wanted to choose the wrong one
Was this Shadows of Mordor or War?
617697 No.15642059
>>15642045
It's the second one, the one with the brunette milf.
e84eda No.15642060
Not really, they just aren’t games for me. Some people can have fun with easy games and they can be technically well developed and interesting, but I require challenge from my games personally.
1c8c33 No.15642065
>>15640984
>Does a game's low difficulty affect your opinion on it's quality?
No, there's "enjoyable hard" and there's grinding. Grinding of any form is not enjoyable once you grow up. Conversely, a game can be fun just for letting you do fun stuff.
561dde No.15642214
>>15642073
Not gonna lie the game was 5/10 but the orcs usually found a way to make me smile.
561dde No.15642219
>>15642214
Uruks*
I will repent, Tolkeinfags, I swear on it, 'twas but a small mistake on my part
6154d8 No.15642223
>>15642065
Grinding tricks little kids and idiots in to thinking they're actually doing something.
617697 No.15642249
>>15642214
>>15642219
>First game
>Normal savage uruk behavior
>pretty unremarkable
>Second game
>uruks are now warhammer ork boyz
>Uruks are pretty much the best thing in the game
Hopefully there's a third game where you just play the Ork boyz pre war of the ring. Fuck Talion, fuck the elves, especially fuck the not-batman ripoff nigger, just let me play the damned Deff Squad.
dbb7ab No.15642634
>>15642065
Opinion: grinding is fun for kids because repetition builds up object permanence in the human's brain.
ed26dd No.15642643
>>15640984
As long as it has other elements to make up for the easy gameplay (graphics, fun-factor, story, etc.) then no not really. It also depends on the game genre as well, I would rather have a low difficulty platformer or action game than a low difficulty puzzle or rhythm game.
b98421 No.15642647
>>15641139
>The new Kings Quest for example is an absolute disgrace
>t. someone's who's still shittershattered over the game being paid with money rightfully taken from (((Andrew Hussie)))
Stay mad, homeshit.
aeb963 No.15642671
Usually no, I don't care if a game is easy. EXCEPT in two situations.
1) It's so easy there's no challenge at all. Shit like TellTale where you almost can't fail ever, or any game with no fail state (unless no failure state is a trait inherent to the genre).
2) It's easy because it holds your fucking hand when it shouldn't. Games that just get rid of challenge that was there by plastering over it with a guiding force. Puzzles with solutions shoved in your face, shooters where it assists (or takes over) your aim, constant reminders or instructions on exactly where to go or where to find something. Shit like that is just annoying.
7f297f No.15642768
I rate games based on how they make me feel. If I'm upset or frustrated too much, then it's a bad game. Games that kick my ass are shit by design. There is no flaw in my logic.
f50bcd No.15644114
>>15643999 (checked)
I don't even like Smash but now I want Adeleine in the game.
7858e3 No.15644304
>>15642647
I have no idea who that is, and I didn't even know a new game was being made till episode one was almost released.
I am just upset my creative problem solving cool fantasy point and click game got regurgitated into a shitty cant-fail telltale episodic formula.
The hand painted environments is the only remotely interesting thing about it.
953ca5 No.15644391
What was that Elmo game for gbc?
302029 No.15644437
difficulty usually doesn't color my opinion of a game once I play it, but it does affect which games I seek out.
43e673 No.15644521
all TES games starting from morrowind are piss easy with the right build, yet the collecting and looting never gets old. Must be my autism
52c13c No.15644587
nope, it's why I still like Pokémon
a84716 No.15644718
There's an appropriate difficulty for everything, and it's hard to pin down exactly. Kirby's difficulty has always been just right for the kind of game Kirby is attempting to be. Other games would feel annoying if they were that easy.
a6c93a No.15660388
a335a8 No.15660646
If it's too easy and shallow I start suspecting it's a endorphin triggering machine even if the game wasn't monetizing based on lootboxes or drop rates.
6d1f69 No.15660683
>>15640984
if a game is not made for children and it does not provide a challenge it is a glorified movie, see half-life 2
if a game does not offer a challenge it fails to be a video game because there is minimal interactivity between the player and the game, it becomes a completely vapid experience with no value
4f433f No.15660778
>>15641139
>You cant die in The Secret of Monkey Island
Can't you fail the part where you're trapped underwater?
4f433f No.15660798
>>15641526
It's very doable to design other difficulty levels, you just need to put some effort into it instead of changing a few numbers. Difficulty increase should either change enemies to a different type which exist elsewhere in the game (or are still otherwise well designed enemies) or increase the number of enemies, not affect your stats or their stats. Game changing modifiers should be reserved for very easy and the hardest difficulty. That's why Ultra-Violence is the "preferred" way to play Doom; it spawns all the enemies without game changing modifiers.
b8e3fe No.15660933
>>15642768
Games that frustrate you and then you're able to over come are rewarding. A hard boss that requires you up your game that takes a few tries is a good way to balance a game.
A good action game works like this. You fight easy monsters until you hit a boss. This boss requires you to learn to fight a little better. From then on the designers know you're at (lets say) skill level 2. The next boss boss is designed to see if you're at skill level 3. The enemies between the two locations can be skill level 2.0-2.9 and you should get up to skill level 3 as you approach the point of needing it. This is what good game design is because you as the creator get to control what the player can be exposed to up until that point. But if you just have that long slow progression you end up with a poorly paced game. You need some dips and some highs to balance out the pace a player will feel. A hard boss is followed by an easy segment after, then when it gets harder again you have had the time to relax. The highs feel higher, the lows feel lower and a good balance leads to a more wholesome experience.
Being frustrated by a boss is also part of that balancing act. You want players to come away from your game with something to talk about, a war story so to speak. Putting in a boss that's hard does a good job of that. It shouldn't be cheating but it should tip things slightly in the bosses favour more than normal.
b8e3fe No.15660935
>>15660683
Half life 2 provides a decent challenge for it's time. A lot of what it did was new and fresh but is now standard so it seems small time.
>>15660798
A lot of modern games do this but they do it hidden behind the scenes. If you die 10 times enemies are weaker. If you breeze through a part with no damage they're harder.
737adb No.15660955
>>15640984
It depends. I require the game to occupy my attention, or else I get bored pretty fast. I have trouble replaying The Messenger, because on one hand it's a pretty good game, but on the other, I have become too good to enjoy just exploring the world I already know, and similarly bosses are also pretty easy, since I know what to do. There's no difficulty setting or new game plus or anything. Maybe I have to just wait long enough time to forget.
6d3f15 No.15660956
>>15660778
They give you ten minutes to solve an obvious puzzle. Kind of hard to die without explicitly meaning to do so. I think it's a fun joke.
Two other games come to mind that only have one place where you can die. Wario Land 3, with the final boss, and Neverhood. The one in Wario Land 3 is of no real consequence, but it's an interesting inclusion, I guess.
Neverhood's death involves you doing something you're told not to do. Maybe you're hoping it'll give you another screen where you get a closer look, or maybe it's a ploy to get you to look away from where you need to go, or maybe you just double-clicked on accident. WebM related.
Hope you've saved at some point in the game at all before doing this and don't have to start from the beginning and to the end of that goddamned corridor and back again. I know I didn't.
6d3f15 No.15660958
>>15660956
You being told not to do the thing.
f74187 No.15661035
not really, I mean I prefer harder games but sometimes there is a fine line between actual difficulty and fake difficulty, and I don't think you can judge everything based on how hard it is, like for chrono trigger, its an easy as hell game but its incredible, especially for its time.
On the flip side 7th saga is a hard as hell game and everyone hates it and think its one of the worst games ever made despite having one of the few time travel stories with a stable time loop, and arguably the difficulty of the localized version is what gave the game its character, because the japanese version is much easier and much more forgettable in comparison.
4f433f No.15661140
>>15660956
Ah yes, I forgot about that. They mention earlier in the game that Guybrush is useless and has no skills except that he can hold his breath for ten minutes straight.
95938a No.15661164
There's a difference between a fuckoff easy game that is designed for children (because children can't really play Dark Souls just yet) and a game that is dumbed down and made easy for casuals.
Typically, MMORPGs find themselves slowly going down the line of becoming more casual, where formally challenging content that was designed for groups becomes doable with just one person. Any sense of co-operation in the game gets thrown out the window.
That's what made those types of games challenging at times though, you were filling a role, helping out a team and ensuring that people worked together to get through tougher content.
For single player games, a decently made system to change the difficulty of the game should be in place. Not just a basic system that makes enemies hit harder or just serves to make the player weaker for a false sense of difficulty.
If a game is too easy on the setting that is intended to be the correct balance in the game (Skyrim comes to mind) then you have to think what made the game that easy? Dumbed down mechanics? Retarded AI? Ways to cheese the challenge in the game in a way the developers didn't intend?
These things are the fault of the developers for the most part and not a fault of the game being intentionally too easy or too hard.
312c78 No.15661199
I like when a game's campaign is relatively easy so anyone can play it, but your reward for beating it is balls-to-the-wall hard bonus content to test how good you really are.
b8e3fe No.15661354
>>15661164
>There's a difference between a fuckoff easy game that is designed for children (because children can't really play Dark Souls just yet) and a game that is dumbed down and made easy for casuals.
This is bullshit psychology from the kikes. In the 70s and 80s kids played extremely hard games and were better at them than the adults. Kids don't need hand holding as much as you think they do. Dark soul's infinite lives and stat boosting grinds is nothing compared to some of the early arcade games or home console games. If Dark souls gave you 3 lives and no continues it might come close to how difficult contra or bullet hell games are.
3cfa99 No.15661555
>>15661354
Those games weren't as long though. An NES game was easily playable to the end in a single sitting if you've gotten good at the game. Dark Souls is short so I suppose it could work, but most games aren't as short.
f832c4 No.15661933
>Does a game's low difficulty affect your opinion on it's quality?
No, whether the gameplay is engaging affects my opinion. Difficulty is just one piece of the puzzle.
85cd2c No.15661984
I used to think Kirby is a boy.
918463 No.15661987
>>15640984
depends, really
sometimes it's actually better
for example, when I come home after a hard day's work I don't want to burn the candle down further with a difficult game, I want to just relax and play something that's fun and easy
e74a68 No.15662023
Yikes, the elitist bro gamer brigade is here.
b8e3fe No.15662094
>>15661555
Oh really? try looking at computer games at the time instead of nintendo's shite. Tell me Lemmings isn't long.
85cd2c No.15662159
>>15661354
>In the 70s and 80s kids played extremely hard games
Like?
a84716 No.15662363
>>15662159
Almost anything in the arcades or on consoles, by today's standards. Kid's used to play Ninja Gaiden.
9cba18 No.15662405
No. Silent Hill 2 could be considered one of the easiest games ever created but it's also one of the best ever made.
33f2ee No.15662450
>>15641098
This just raises weak casual gamers. When I was little I had nothing but hard games. I didn't beat very many of them at the time, but I got better. If I started out with easy shit I probably would never have gotten better and would think anything hard was bad and unbeatable. The same attitude started popping up around the 16 bit era because of all the easier games little kids were starting out on. It only got worse each generation as the majority of games got easier and easier to cater to the weak.
a335a8 No.15662507
>>15662450
>This just raises weak casual gamers.
Gen one and two Pokemon was the near entirety of my childhood gaming and afterwards my parents wouldn't buy me games, but I turned out fine.
864065 No.15662542
>>15641410
Nigger, when you get into the volcano-zone it gets stupidly hard. It's just that the game has a really slow learning curve.
67cb43 No.15662614
>>15640984
Yes. Games that are just too easy aren't any fun as they don't pose any challenge. They can have many clever mechanics, but why bother using any if you can just spam LMB to win? The only exceptions I can think of are sandbox building games, where the challenge comes out of you trying to be creative rather than the game itself
3dcde1 No.15662652
>>15662606
I actually think most Mario games (including Odyssey) do a good job on difficulty: it's piss easy to simply win the game, but there are a lot of extra challenges there for those who want them. 3D World did this even better with the post-game stages.
33f2ee No.15662654
>>15662507
Turned out fine by what standard? What is the hardest game you have beaten?
a335a8 No.15662694
>>15662654
I recently beat Divinity Original Sin 2 on Tactician mode and as a standard benchmark I beat Dark Souls PC using a keyboard. Zero-K is my online competitive game.
33f2ee No.15662699
>>15662694
None of those are hard.
a335a8 No.15662708
>>15662699
They're not easy either.
e87387 No.15662893
>>15641320
HEY dynasty warriors can be hard
690b23 No.15662938
>>15662699
Shut the fuck up.
3cfa99 No.15663384
>>15662094
Lemmings is a mission based game. That's hardly a legitimate comparison.
3cfa99 No.15663401
>>15663384
>>15662094
Lemmings also came out in 91, and your original criteria was 70s and 80s. So nice goalpost shift, I guess.
709c39 No.15664623
>>15641139
The later Pokemon games problem seems to be Game Freak's worry that if the (young) player gets stuck, they give up and stop playing the game and never buy another Pokemon game again. While at the same time not offering up an difficulty choice for older players outside of which starter you pick (which I think doesn't even matter any more).
On a similar not it always seemed puzzling why Nintendo shut down Miiverse (and offering no replacement) considering it could basically act like a child friendly GameFAQ's for any young player who got stuck in a game.
>>15641805
The difficulty of Epic Yarn isn't getting to the end of level which is easy to do, simply because you can't die. Getting hurt by an enemy or hazard results in some of your collected gems being knocked out of the player but still allows you to collect them back quickly. In levels near the end of the game there are more pits of death that make you lose gems and not be able to collect them.
The games difficulty is collecting the gems and not getting hurt which then gives you more gems at the end of the level as a "streak" bonus and a higher gem tally grants the reward of a better end of level medal.