Printable View
Do you like to do things in games that aren't really part of the game, just for an extra challenge? Make your character use terrible gear on purpose? Four White Mages? :p That sort of thing?
I like to do this sometimes. Especially in, uh, WoW :redface: I'll try to solo stuff and the like.
How about you?
I tried the Nuzlocke Challenge for Pokemon Ruby. Didn't go very far with that, and I was pretty much. "smurf it, I'll just play like a normal person the rest of the game."
All Druids on Might & Magic VI. Was not fun.
Get blackout drunk. Beat Mega Man 2.
I have done this more times that I am willing to admit.
All the time. Probably in every game I play :freak:Quote:
Originally Posted by Pike
I typically spend a ridiculous amount of time trying to get a "perfect" game in most RPGs. I even tried a time attack on SotN with no armor, once. I got about four hours in and got my ass handed to me by Galamoth several times because I didn't have the Shield Rod :( I would have had to backtrack too much to get it and didn't want to start over so I gave up and I'm disappointed in myself about it.
I Nuzlocked Emerald and Crystal. They were enjoyable. Much more so than a regular game, because it makes it slightly challenging, whereas playing normally isn't difficult at all :|Quote:
Originally Posted by Agent Proto
I also tried using the randomizer mods (they change the Pokemon that appear in every area and the Pokemon that trainers have) and those were very interesting.
...NOPE.jpgQuote:
Originally Posted by Laddy
I play most Mega Man games better when drunk. Except for Megaman Legends, which is actually a complete mind-smurfing, rage-inducing experience when you're barely coherent.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sephex
I rarely do, as I am too much of a completionist/perfectionist to restrict myself on most games.
One of the few I have done, though, and easily one of my most awesome gaming achievements ever, was beating Margaret in Persona 3 Portable with a party that consisted of just the main character. It took me ages, but it was worth it. That was one awesome and epic fight.
And I haven't found anyone else who has done it successfully, and of the few people who've tried it, none have used the strategy I built and honed for it. I'm very proud of it.
Maybe not necessarily challenges, but I have some weird OCD quirks that inhibit me when I play games:
I always try to keep my loadouts in Call of Duty with an equal distribution of the perks, weapon classes, and equipment in the games. It's great for experiencing the insane variety the games always have, but it means I'm only playing with my best personal playstyle only 1/5 of the time.
In Final Fantasy XII I've tried to stick close to some idea of jobs that I have in my head, some of the time at the expense of better configurations.
On one playthrough of pokemon I tried to generally keep all pokemon at the same level as I went... horrible idea.
I've always wanted to do a 'Fork & Knife Only' challenge in Metal Gear Solid 3, but never really got around to it.
I do it from time to time. I even try some of the built in challenges like Luck Mode in SotN (much harder than it sounds...) and I like to screw around a lot.
I've done no power-ups on Mario games, no boss weapons/special weapons on Mega Man games, I've played WRPGs with the intent of making my character like characters from other media such as my Venture Bros. Fallout 3 file.
Like Bolivar to some degree, I tend to stick to roles in my RPGs, I find making everyone into Red Mages sucks the fun out of games so I've become pretty obsessive about giving every character a purpose in games where I can make anyone into anything. It's usually more fun and makes the game more challenging.
I've also begun to play some of the MGS games with a strict "no tranquilizer/low kill" rule set where I try to get through the game without killing anyone that I don't have to but not use the game breaking tranquilizer gun. You get more creative this way and I feel you start to really utilize the intricacies of the games engine to get results.
I'm constantly doing this when re-playing games. Usually it starts with something simple like placing a restriction against the staple moves I normally base myself around and then every subsequent playthrough I tack another rule on.
You know, when I got hardcore into MGS playthroughs and going for 0 kill/0 alert games, I really began to question why they put the Tranquilizer Gun in the game, and I really can't understand why they did.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wolf Kanno
^ To make it more accessible for new players. I did like how MGS3 made the Silencer eventually break but I was annoyed that MGS4 kind of went back and made it permanent on the weapon and gave you a means of having infinite ammo with the Drebin system. :roll2
I feel the games work better without it.
I can't say I get very creative with challenges in games. I like to play through as perfectly as I can with as little wasted time as possible (except I am a fan of levelling up, so that in itself is a huge time-waster).
I've tried to play in Hardcore mode in New Vegas and God Mode on Silent Hill and both were massive failures.
My last play through of Skyrim I tried to sleep everynight and no fast travel. I got sick of walking everywhere then GW2 came out :p
I generally don't give self-imposed challenges. Most of the modern games that I enjoy playing are for the story and general gameplay rather than difficulty (mostly JRPGs), so I wouldn't get a whole lot out of arbitrarily increasing the difficulty. For other games where it might be fun, I generally don't have the time or inclination to play through it more than once, rendering any challenges moot.
Ditto the statement on no-kill MGS: I've played 1-3 without spilling any unnecessary blood. It's actually easier to stam-drain Vulcan Raven than it is to blow him away with Stingers. The encounter with The Sorrow is admittedly boring as all hell that way though.
I flipped my monitor display upside-down and played Mario 3 like that once. That was smurfin' hard!
I only play pokemon in nuzlockes now. Normal play-throughs are way too damn easy.
If I make a light-weight character on dark souls, he never uses a shield... period
in FF12 I pick jobs for my characters and restrict their equipment use to reflect it.
In ratchet and clank 2 and 3 I don't use armor anymore, I also don't use the quack-o-blitzer or rynos anymore. Makes it too easy.
I can't remember many other challenge runs I've done
this is NIGH IMPOSSIBLE to do in the first game on Hard mode (one of my self imposed challenges).Quote:
Originally Posted by Bolivar
I've done quite a few low level/starting equipment/crappy equipment runs in some of the older RPGs in my collection. I haven't really done anything like that in a while though.
I've considered doing the 3 heart challenge on OoT. Not sure how much of a challenge it'd be, though, as I hardly ever die in that game.
when playing ffx-2 last time i gave myself a RULE to live by. I had to always wear the dressphere with lowest percentage complete. Stipulation: all three girls can't wear the same dressphere.
that was mostly to keep everyone from being songstresses at the same time. I'm indecisive so it was nice letting the game mechanics choose which dresspheres to wear.
Try 3 Heart Master Quest. Enemies do double damage. So try not to get hit.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tifa's Boobs
Oh man that sounds brutal!Quote:
Originally Posted by SkybladeTry 3 Heart Master Quest. Enemies do double damage. So try not to get hit.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tifa's Boobs
I may eventually have to do this for TP down the road, WEARING ONLY ZORA ARMOR!
I finished Skyrim on level 1 but that was more due to intesne indecisiveness rather than desire for challenge
Not too long ago, I did a version of the solo-pidgey challenge on Pokemon Crystal. I really like self-imposed challenges because I feel a greater sense of accomplishment when I complete the challenge than I would completing the normal in-game challenges.
Another thing I like to do in all my FF games and other RPG games is to grind until I've maxed out all my chacters' experience and max out my gil/money, among many other things. It makes me feel like I've completed the game to greater degree than just finishing the storyline.
In online shooter, like Halo, I like to use the weakest weapons possible during casual matches or sometimes go for all assassination kills.
By the way, has any tried the "Uber Challange" on OoT? I haven't tried it, but I'd really like to if I can get an N64 sometimes in the future.
The uber challenge doesn't even look fun at all. It just looks terribly frustrating. ._.Quote:
Originally Posted by MTKO
I mean, I love me some restrictions, but looking through the rules it'd be faster just to list what you CAN do.
I like the idea of a LoZ challenge run because it forces you to strategically use your giant arsenal of weapons and gadgets to survive. The uber challenge on the other hand is just so... masochistic.
Just googled what Nuzlocking Pokemon meant. It seems fun! I agree with Bolivar though, call me pedantic, but I always try to get my pokemon within 2-3 levels of each other, which does include relatively useless pokemon, like Bidoof. I just like having all my pokemon available, rather than have a core team of six and having the rest rot in the PC.
Is the Uber Challenge WITHOUT some sort of cheating even possible?
Some of the things mentioned on the list are things that have to happen story-wise for you to even progress.
Some extremely difficult to perform in game glitches have to be used throughout the game in order to follow the uber challenge. Essentially, the point of the uber challenge is to not only to make the gameplay as difficult as possible, but also make the progression of the story a taxing procedure. There are some videos on youtube of people completing the challenge.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tifa's Boobs
I used to play through games with certain self-imposed challenges if I enjoy the battle system.
Nowadays, I turn to the community of a game to give me Gameshark codes or other game editing codes to turn the game into more of a challenge. For example, preventing EXP gain except from bosses for Final Fantasy VII. That game is easy enough that you can still have a good time and see a lot more challenge from the bosses.
I've been known to do this from time to time with D&D. Someone once invited me to join a random game just to screw around, so I made a commoner who was specced and geared to have something like a +40 bonus to Use Magic Device checks involving scrolls. (I don't remember exactly what level he was, but he certainly shouldn't have been casting 9th-level spells)
I hope to use him again in another not-so-serious game, as I rather enjoyed playing a fake wizard.
Once you go nuzlocke you never go back.Quote:
Originally Posted by Formalhaut
I recommend doing it with the hoenn region (preferably emerald), it's easy enough to give you a feel for it, but the gyms are so damn difficult that it makes it memorable and intense. It's the most balanced of the nuzlockes I've played.
Good god that is amazing. :lol:Quote:
Originally Posted by Værn
I like to see how high a level an enemy I can kill with my level 50 crafter jobs set in FFXIV, if that counts. :p
Who does? :pQuote:
Originally Posted by Tifa's Boobs
Also, that Uber Challenge just sounds ridiculous.
I can't really make myself stick to self imposed challenges. Figuring out the most efficient way to win within a ruleset is just a thing that comes very natural to me :p. It's kind of a mental fight between me and the game designers. Can s/he create a set of rules that I can't easily break to pieces or not? If I can, I usually end up doing it.
In this regard, I usually do not count programming errors, but design errors. Such as giving me access to aqualung before the gold saucer, and making the enemy casting it weak enough for me to survive its attacks at that point with no grinding.
Ooh, I forgot my other challenge.
I bought my second copy of Golden Sun, The Lost Age used, and it still had a save file on it. The previous owner had apparently given up after being frustrated by the Star Magician to the point that he sold the game. Without grinding, just rearranging his Djinn and party, I took on the Star Magician and won. Just to prove I could. Heck of a battle, he wasn't as geared or leveled as I usually am, and he had missed some Djinn (probably not an import save), but I did it.
The crafter jobs can fight? Can you explain that a bit more, then?Quote:
Originally Posted by Loony BoB
You throw rocks at them for terrible damage.
I just read the rules for the uber challenge for OoT. That sounds like a very frustrating way to play the game. I don't think my controller would have remained in one piece had I attempted it!
I'm not really the sort of person to do self-imposed challenges per se. Sometimes I'll give myself tasks to do like sequence breaking in Metroid games though. The one challenge of sorts I do insist on is allowing no character deaths when I play a Fire Emblem game, irrespective of how useless a particular character may be!
I played a solo game of Baldur's Gate II once, as a Kensai/Mage on harder difficulties. It's not really a challenge though if you abuse rerolls and know what you're doing. There's a lot of relatively easy quests in the beginning so you should get some really badass spells early on as you gain spell levels.
Now, by this, do you restart whenever a character dies? Because if so... that's not really a challenge run, that's basically playing the game on easy mode.Quote:
Originally Posted by Heath
Try playing it to where your characters actually CAN die, now that's exciting.
It's something I do more for the sake of completeness than to make the game easier. I mentioned it as a bit of a challenge because it annoys me even if a character I never use dies (the exception being Lyndis' story in FE7 when I don't really mind) and will go to some lengths to keep characters alive. I tend to be a bit more liberal with their deaths on subsequent playthroughs though.Quote:
Originally Posted by TrollHunterNow, by this, do you restart whenever a character dies? Because if so... that's not really a challenge run, that's basically playing the game on easy mode.Quote:
Originally Posted by Heath
Try playing it to where your characters actually CAN die, now that's exciting.
Having said that, I think you're probably right about it being easy mode. I was more thinking of it in terms of 'I keep the weakling characters I never bother with alive,' but the opposite ('I don't want to face a future without my best characters') probably also applies!
I say it's easier because I used to play the exact same way in fire emblem. Even if a character I hated and was RNG screwed to the abyss died I'd still restart.Quote:
Originally Posted by HeathIt's something I do more for the sake of completeness than to make the game easier. I mentioned it as a bit of a challenge because it annoys me even if a character I never use dies (the exception being Lyndis' story in FE7 when I don't really mind) and will go to some lengths to keep characters alive. I tend to be a bit more liberal with their deaths on subsequent playthroughs though.Quote:
Originally Posted by TrollHunterNow, by this, do you restart whenever a character dies? Because if so... that's not really a challenge run, that's basically playing the game on easy mode.Quote:
Originally Posted by Heath
Try playing it to where your characters actually CAN die, now that's exciting.
Having said that, I think you're probably right about it being easy mode. I was more thinking of it in terms of 'I keep the weakling characters I never bother with alive,' but the opposite ('I don't want to face a future without my best characters') probably also applies!
To be honest I've only allowed deaths on sacred stones, by far the EASIEST FE ever made, but it was so fun I'll probably do blazing sword next that way.
Comparing the two kindof ways I played the game I think letting characters die not only makes it more fun, it puts far more at stake (I think twice before moving characters now... and with the braindead AI of FE I used to never do that), and makes every battle memorable.
And, because you're letting guys die, you don't get frustrated with a level due to having to restart it over and over and over again if you keep screwing up.
Now, this is just my preference mind you. Though I am basically a walking encyclopedia of infinite wisdom, You may not enjoy playing FE this way. Especially if you like the characters, it can be easy to get attached to some of your favorite units and watch them die due to an unlucky crit or miss (true story, I was leveling up an underleveled Artur on some weaker enemies to see if he'd turn out decent, and a pegasus knight landed a critical with a 1% chance. I would've been mad, but it was so improbable I found it hilarious). For me, that chance makes it all the more exciting.
Enemy criticals are a nightmare. The part I used to hate more was when you'd have blocked an enemy path with one of your characters. You've put them them more to slow the enemy than to cut them down. Your unit then proceeds to do a critical, allowing another enemy to attack that character, killing them. So, so frustrating.Quote:
Originally Posted by TrollHunter
I think the game is more fun when you don't become so protective of your characters. Like you said, you're no longer restarting every level when some random character like Renault dies. I originally felt keeping them alive was a self-imposed challenge probably because the real challenge was not giving up in frustration ;)
I would agree if crits were ever a real threat. The enemies have such low luck they can NEVER crit, and it's not a question of if you will crit them by endgame, but when. I could write a rant about the problems with criticals on this game. I may do so if you want.Quote:
Enemy criticals are a nightmare.
And yes, I know very well about that situation of blocking units. It only ever happens when I'm training units... it knows.Quote:
The part I used to hate more was when you'd have blocked an enemy path with one of your characters. You've put them them more to slow the enemy than to cut them down. Your unit then proceeds to do a critical, allowing another enemy to attack that character, killing them. So, so frustrating.
Exactly, you're forced to learn from your mistakes and move on, and there's a chance that even if you do everything right the game will just decide you aren't worthy and the RNG will destroy you. Now, typically I HATE that in strategy games, but it's nice to go back to a luck-reliant strategy game, because you never know what's going to happen. I have to learn and adapt to the situation the RNG throws at me, and I like how it mixes it up. Now, is it a good idea mechanically? I think not, but it can be fun and exciting and sometimes I prefer that.Quote:
I think the game is more fun when you don't become so protective of your characters. Like you said, you're no longer restarting every level when some random character like Renault dies. I originally felt keeping them alive was a self-imposed challenge probably because the real challenge was not giving up in frustration ;)