Is hard better?

[Quindiana Jones]

Easy tiger. :jokey:

FFI was and is really hard, especially compared to, say, FFIX (relevant only because I am currently playing it xD). And it's not just FFI. Early era gaming was notorious for its difficulty.

Are we worse gamers now? Are we lazy? Current generation games are almost never anywhere near as challenging as older games, so what changed?

[Shauna]

I don't mind games being difficult. As long as it is a balanced difficulty that you can chalk up to a mistake that you made. If it's just unfair then it's no fun.

Although, I'm pretty sure old games were only difficult because it made the game longer if it was made too difficult. More game time if you keep dying!

[Fynn]

If you look at Atlus, you can still make a challenging RPG that is not that unfair. Unless we're talking about old school MegaTen, cause those games were just evil.

But yeah, I do prefer a challenge, but if the game has a gripping enough story/world exploration, I can forgive it being easy. Case in point: Xenoblade Chronicles is damn near perfect in my eyes, despite being relatively easy.

[Spooniest]

I think I gravitate towards easier games, but I did play an awful lot of Ninja Gaiden when I was a kid. Man, the rotten curses that exploded from my mouth at that game!

I think the Mega Man series has always had particularly well-balanced difficulty curves, provided you know the right moves to beat at least one boss, and which other boss to use that boss' weapon on.

RPGs are not hard in the same way. Twitch action is all about reflexes...an RPG is supposed to test your mental preparation. Planning is emphasized over obstacle course-style gameplay.

For that reason, in theory, an RPG shouldn't be hard unless you have not planned properly...

[Mirage]

Depends entirely on how you're making it hard. Putting level 70 enemies in FF7's train graveyard would certainly make it harder, but I doubt it would be fun, even as a challenge.

And RPGs can easily include twitch gameplay. They're called action RPGs.

[Psychotic]

Games are a lot more story driven now. What's the ending of FFI? Great job, you knocked Garland down and the world is saved! Yet in newer games I'm more invested in the story and what happens to characters and so I'm less likely to put up with frustrating BS because I need to know what happens next. Of course, you can just do a Dwarf Fortress and be really hard but the frustrating BS is the story and it's great.

[zackk]

I like them hard, my games that is. While it may be tedious and exasperating (not to mention, it drives out your inner demons), when I finish a task, it sure feels like a big accomplishment.

[Spooniest]

I cannot overstate how thoroughly Ninja Gaiden taught me to curse.

Contra's pretty difficult too.

However, Final Fantasy VII, while not the hardest game there is by any stretch of the imagination, is revered as a classic.

Difficulty isn't everything.

[Fynn]

Bracely Default made me swear like a drunken sailor.

And I enjoyed every second of it.

[Karifean]

It simply depends. If I like the gameplay system of a game and very much enjoy playing it, I'll be looking for a good challenge. If I don't particularly care for it, however, a high difficulty level can be extremely off-putting.

Though that being said there have only been very few games where I cringe at the thought of added challenge.

[Pete for President]

Hard is better when it strengthens the concept of the game. If the game is about struggle, desperation, survival, scratching by then yes, difficult is better as long as it's implemented in a fair way.

Some games just add a hard mode for the heck of it but don't really think about the right way to make things hard. For example Ace Combat games just cut the number of missiles you can carry on your aircraft. Makes the game hard, but in a stupid way. I'd much rather see improved AI that are way better at dodging while I have the same amount of missiles as on normal, but now I gotta line up my shots better. That would actually force me to get better, making the hard mode rewarding.

[Del Murder]

Back in the day, games were very limited in the variety of content or emotional stimulation that they could provide through gameplay, visuals, story, etc. To compensate for that and ensure their games would get a certain number of hours, developers made them difficult. Another contributing factor was that controls were not as tight or precise as they can be today and that lended itself to increased difficulty.

Modern games have a whole lot more options than they used to and as such don't need to rely on difficulty to create a memorable experience. The focus now is on the overall gameplay experience and not as much on it being 'hard', and difficulty is now used as an option for those who want it or as an intended draw of the particular game.

For me, there are so many games I want to play that I'm not really interested in spending a whole lot of time trying to figure out a particularly hard game. I like a challenge in the sense that I want to be able to use my brain to get through it, but nothing to the extremes of older games that may require you to attempt a particular section many times to complete it. I also like constant saving in games so that you aren't repeating elements you've already mastered just to get to that one difficult part. Man that pissed me off so much in old games.

[Dr Unne]

Some games are more fun because they're hard. Take Etrian Odyssey for example. Being unable to save in the dungeon is a key aspect of the gameplay. It makes the dungeons dangerous and exciting. It makes the FOEs and bosses seem horrifying, because you might lose an hour or more of progress if you get party-wiped. It makes you pay close attention and try very hard not to make a mistake. It makes it very rewarding when you make it out of the dungeon loaded down with loot, having mapped out a new floor. Being hard makes the game engaging and emotional. Without the danger, it would be a boring game.

If I want a story, I'll usually read a book or watch a movie. Games are meant to be interacted with. Games are a thing you can win or lose; winning only has value if losing is possible. If I finish a game without having died a bunch of times, I feel like I've accomplished very little.

Not every game has to be hard. There's room in the world for all kinds. I like easy games too. Sometimes I want to relax and enjoy the sights and sounds. But usually I want to be challenged. I like when I finish a game and feel like I've improved in some way. Suum cuique.

[Denmark]

GWhat's the ending of FFI? Great job, you knocked Garland down and the world is saved!

excuse me you forgot the most important time loop plotline in the whole final fantasy series

i enjoy challenge but not frustration. games that reward you when you do something hard or tricky (especially if it's a puzzle and not just an irritating boss) are the best kind. in my opinion.

[maybee]

This may sound stupid, but medium is best. You don't want Nintendo hard, but you don't want things to be too easy that it holds your hand and treats you like a toddler either.

Goldilocks level.

[Mirage]

but one person's goldilocks is another person's hard

[maybee]

but one person's goldilocks is another person's hard

I was thinking more the lines of Final Fantasy VII/ Final Fantasy IX.


Yes, it could add some challenges for somebody but overall everything is pretty medium. While something like FF 3 where the final dungeon has heavy bosses and monsters and no save points, is pretty unforgivable to the player. In FF VII/ IX If you got stuck on a boss, it's still fair towards experts and novice players, while something like FF3 is like " You don't understand everything yet, suck at the job system or struggle with this game " ? " Tough ducking moogle trout, toughen up and drink your nails instead of milk " !

[Mirage]

Well, in the case of FF7 and 9, one person's goldilocks is another person's easy :p

[Fynn]

Well, in the case of FF7 and 9, one person's goldilocks is another person's easy :p

True. I found them a bit too easy, personally. Don't get me wrong, I love both games, but they're mostly just good as a wholesome experience - the story, art, music, etc. The gameplay isn't really the selling point and to me, that doesn't make then too replay able.

I'll mention Atlus again and say that I think it's awesome that they let you always pick a difficulty level nowadays. So if someone wants to experience Persona 3 just for its magnificent story, they can do that, or they can go and play the super hard face-rape old school Atlus hard mode for a classic MegaTen experience.

[Bolivar]

As the target demographic for the gaming industry has gotten older, we don't have as much free time anymore to plow through difficult single player experiences. Developers have had to find that sweet spot which simulates getting better but doesn't drive us away either. I'd say they've been more or less successful.

Two trends have emerged which get around the time sink usually needed by hard games. One is the indie library which I can pick up and put down at any time on my Vita, first choosong a level, then going for any number of challenges or just one more run. Games like OlliOlli, Hotline Miami 2, Rogue Legacy or Velocity 2x.

The other is the MOBA genre- games with skill curves which span thousands of hours but generally match you against players with similar experience. It's awesome that challenge and skill can surpass the level memorization and twitchiness which action games and platforms used to demand and now go to deep game knowledge and mastery, comparable to chess or football.

[theundeadhero]

I didn't mind how hard Nintendo games were, but it's not something I especially look for. Contra and Ninja Gaiden though- those games were hard? I could beat them in elementary school without dying once.

[NeoCracker]

Well, in the case of FF7 and 9, one person's goldilocks is another person's easy :p

True. I found them a bit too easy, personally. Don't get me wrong, I love both games, but they're mostly just good as a wholesome experience - the story, art, music, etc. The gameplay isn't really the selling point and to me, that doesn't make then too replay able.

I'll mention Atlus again and say that I think it's awesome that they let you always pick a difficulty level nowadays. So if someone wants to experience Persona 3 just for its magnificent story, they can do that, or they can go and play the super hard face-rape old school Atlus hard mode for a classic MegaTen experience.

I don't think Persona is a good card to play here, as even Easy on Persona 3/4 is harder then most Turn based RPG's out there. :p

That said I love that some games are starting to do that, at least for Indie RPG's, letting you adjust the difficulty. I love a good challange, though other times I don't mind playing an easier title.

I love that I have games like Shin Megami Tensai and the souls series to press my abilities, as well as smaller simple releases like Dragon Quest IX (YEah, strange it's as easy as it is.) and Crystal Story 2.

Of course, some games I never enjoyed on higher difficulties, like Skyrim, New Vegas, Infamous, and other such titles. So yeah on them for including difficulty modes as well.

[Fynn]

Well, in the case of FF7 and 9, one person's goldilocks is another person's easy :p

True. I found them a bit too easy, personally. Don't get me wrong, I love both games, but they're mostly just good as a wholesome experience - the story, art, music, etc. The gameplay isn't really the selling point and to me, that doesn't make then too replay able.

I'll mention Atlus again and say that I think it's awesome that they let you always pick a difficulty level nowadays. So if someone wants to experience Persona 3 just for its magnificent story, they can do that, or they can go and play the super hard face-rape old school Atlus hard mode for a classic MegaTen experience.

I don't think Persona is a good card to play here, as even Easy on Persona 3/4 is harder then most Turn based RPG's out there. :p

That said I love that some games are starting to do that, at least for Indie RPG's, letting you adjust the difficulty. I love a good challange, though other times I don't mind playing an easier title.

I love that I have games like Shin Megami Tensai and the souls series to press my abilities, as well as smaller simple releases like Dragon Quest IX (YEah, strange it's as easy as it is.) and Crystal Story 2.

Of course, some games I never enjoyed on higher difficulties, like Skyrim, New Vegas, Infamous, and other such titles. So yeah on them for including difficulty modes as well.


If you play Persona 4 Golden on the lowest difficulty, you can easily beat the grim reaper on level 9, since when you lose you get to restart the battle at full health, while the enemy's HP remains at the level you brought it down to. If that isn't baby mode, I don't know what is :colbert:

[NeoCracker]

Well, in the case of FF7 and 9, one person's goldilocks is another person's easy :p

True. I found them a bit too easy, personally. Don't get me wrong, I love both games, but they're mostly just good as a wholesome experience - the story, art, music, etc. The gameplay isn't really the selling point and to me, that doesn't make then too replay able.

I'll mention Atlus again and say that I think it's awesome that they let you always pick a difficulty level nowadays. So if someone wants to experience Persona 3 just for its magnificent story, they can do that, or they can go and play the super hard face-rape old school Atlus hard mode for a classic MegaTen experience.

I don't think Persona is a good card to play here, as even Easy on Persona 3/4 is harder then most Turn based RPG's out there. :p

That said I love that some games are starting to do that, at least for Indie RPG's, letting you adjust the difficulty. I love a good challange, though other times I don't mind playing an easier title.

I love that I have games like Shin Megami Tensai and the souls series to press my abilities, as well as smaller simple releases like Dragon Quest IX (YEah, strange it's as easy as it is.) and Crystal Story 2.

Of course, some games I never enjoyed on higher difficulties, like Skyrim, New Vegas, Infamous, and other such titles. So yeah on them for including difficulty modes as well.


If you play Persona 4 Golden on the lowest difficulty, you can easily beat the grim reaper on level 9, since when you lose you get to restart the battle at full health, while the enemy's HP remains at the level you brought it down to. If that isn't baby mode, I don't know what is :colbert:

There's an even lower difficulty in P4 Golden Version? Did not know that. :p

[Mirage]

Sounds like the P3 easymode. You get an item that revives your party and graints full hp/sp up to ten times whenever the main character dies.



Well, in the case of FF7 and 9, one person's goldilocks is another person's easy :p

True. I found them a bit too easy, personally. Don't get me wrong, I love both games, but they're mostly just good as a wholesome experience - the story, art, music, etc. The gameplay isn't really the selling point and to me, that doesn't make then too replay able.

I'll mention Atlus again and say that I think it's awesome that they let you always pick a difficulty level nowadays. So if someone wants to experience Persona 3 just for its magnificent story, they can do that, or they can go and play the super hard face-rape old school Atlus hard mode for a classic MegaTen experience.
You know, atlus should call "hard mode" "classic mode".

[Bubba]

For my response, see Del's entire post.

[Ayen]

Depends how much of a challenge you want. For me? I like to have fun. I'm not having fun if I'm constantly dying over stupid trout. And when I finally get past said challenging part the only thing on my mind is, "I'm not doing that again." And I don't. Not worth the headache.

[Mirage]

It's no problem to die frequently if dying isn't a big deal. For example, Hotline Miami.

[Ayen]

It's no problem to die frequently if dying isn't a big deal. For example, Hotline Miami.

Well, yeah. I didn't mind dying so many times on Rush because the explosions are cool.

[Vermachtnis]

Depends how much of a challenge you want. For me? I like to have fun. I'm not having fun if I'm constantly dying over stupid trout. And when I finally get past said challenging part the only thing on my mind is, "I'm not doing that again." And I don't. Not worth the headache.

That's how I feel. I don't mind a challenge, but I can't stand it when I don't make any progress. And since it keeps getting brought up, Ninja Gaiden isn't hard. It's unfair. A surprise Eagle over a pit that sends you back two screens is just dumb and getting to the final boss which when you die to, well send you all the way back to the start of 6-1 is especially dumb when those eagles only send you back to 6-3. Castlevania on the other hand was hard hard. Everything was placed in way to give you a challenge to get over, but it never felt unfair. Even the Medusa Head and Axe Knight hallway wasn't unfair. I mean, it was brutal and one little slip up most likely meant death, but it was your fault.

I love MegaTen, but it's difficulty leans towards the Ninja Gaiden side of the scale. If you enter a new dungeon, at full health and get ambushed and die before you can make a turn, which MegaTen is famous for, than that's dumb. They've got some good fights that do require some thinking, but it's still a turn based RPG and as long as your numbers are bigger than their numbers you'll win.

Sure that's not always true, for their games or turn-based games in general. Take the final boss of Disgaea D2 for example. It has a passive that punishes you for having bigger numbers and this is Disgaea, a game famous for absurd numbers. He was Lv84 and my team was in the early hundreds, statistically speaking it should have been a breeze, but that little thing turn it into one hell of fight and it was awesome. I got my ass handed to me my first attempt, but it was my fault. I didn't look at what he could do or observe the battlefield, I just sent Laharl up there to poke him.

And I guess that's what I'm trying to get at. I don't like RNG-type difficulty that is out of the players hand like eagles with pushback or ambushes followed by four Megidos. I like difficulty that I can overcome. If it's too much of the former, I'll just lower the difficulty. I have a job and bills and I don't want to spend 30+ hours just to make a 1% of progress.

[LunarWeaver]

I don't have patience for that crap anymore. I welcome the gentle handholding of one million checkpoints, smurf it.

[Mirage]

And I guess that's what I'm trying to get at. I don't like RNG-type difficulty that is out of the players hand like eagles with pushback or ambushes followed by four Megidos. I like difficulty that I can overcome. If it's too much of the former, I'll just lower the difficulty. I have a job and bills and I don't want to spend 30+ hours just to make a 1% of progress.

#casual called, they want their hashtag back

[escobert]

It depends on the game for me. DayZ + hard = frustrating fun. DayZ + easy = boring running simulator. Civ + Hard = f u computer I hate you! Civ + Medium = fun

[Scotty_ffgamer]

It really depends on the game for me. For instance, Batman on the NES was a game I thought was pretty hard, but it wasn't really frustratingly so for me if I remember right. Everything played really well, and getting past each level felt like a huge accomplishment. It also helped that the music in that game is fantastic.

With RPGs, I feel like I often prefer easier games. If games are too difficult, it's going to mess with the pacing of a story. The fun thing with a lot of Final Fantasy games is that I can kind of control the difficulty should I want. A lot of them are easy to break, but you can do fun challenges to up the difficulty should you choose. Then there are games like Shin Megami Tensei where the story isn't as much of a focus as just general atmosphere and gameplay. I've only played a bit of Nocturne on the main series, but the difficulty never felt like an issue because the story didn't really catch me to begin with. I've played Persona 3 and 4 as well, but I never really thought those games were that hard for the most part.

Long story short, it just depends on the game and kind of experience I'm looking for in the moment.

[zackk]

And another thing, the introduction of lets plays and faqs on sites such as gamefaqs,super cheats have significantly made games easier to play if you follow the lets plays and faqs. Let's say that you have no clue where to find a certain key or where to go next, instead of further inspecting, the answer is just one click or tap away. The two have their perks tho, esp. the lets plays, it'll help you think twice about buying a game.

[Richard]

Easy tiger. :jokey:

FFI was and is really hard, especially compared to, say, FFIX (relevant only because I am currently playing it xD). And it's not just FFI. Early era gaming was notorious for its difficulty.

Are we worse gamers now? Are we lazy? Current generation games are almost never anywhere near as challenging as older games, so what changed?

Games should be played at your own pace. It's honestly what you want. I could go either way. Easy, Normal, Hard...Impossible. I don't care.

[BlackFire]

It really depends on the game you are playing. If normal mode is a severe pain in the ass, then yea avoid hard mode. :p
There is easy mode if you need it, sometimes there is not.

I always start a game on normal when it is my first time playing it. If easy is recommended and available then I play on easy.

[MissH]

Hard is always better.

Ahem.

No really, Danny and I played this new free game *pregnancy brain has made me forget the name* and we decided to try it on the easy level first. It was so hard!!! God knows what the hard level would be like!

[BlackFire]

Hard is always better.

Ahem.

No really, Danny and I played this new free game *pregnancy brain has made me forget the name* and we decided to try it on the easy level first. It was so hard!!! God knows what the hard level would be like!

LOL! Hard and sore the next morning?
:)