How modern gaming has made us into wimpy gamers

[Bolivar]

I, for the most part, disagree.

People are pansies to begin with.

lol, this post wins.

Two points I want to make about difficulty in the "good" old days - Alot of games were difficult back in the day due to poor game design - watch any Angry Video Game Nerd video for proof of that. Wolf Kanno also brings up a great point - that it was the capitalism factors of the game industry that made games difficult to begin with back then, just as those factors are making games too easy right now.

As far as my opinion on the matter, I'm the first one to say that games that get too difficult, or require too much time in order to master a technique to beat a final boss are NOT fun. I'd rather pick up something else. However, I still have to wholeheartedly agree with the article that it's been taken to the other extreme.

Dreddz brings up a good point:

Microsoft said recently that they want to make sure that a casual player can always beat a game because it means they are more encouraged to get its sequel. Makes sense but I still think its wrong.

And it's appropriate that Microsoft's ONLY 2 notable exclusive console franchises were BOTH brought up in the article. I don't just blame them - I blame the further capitalization and Americanization of the gaming industry. The earlier problem is illuminated by the rampant stagnation that's going on now - even EA admits that games are looking like the ones from last year, which look like the ones from the year before. When a Spore or a Portal come out, it's all "OMG WTF!!!!" when in reality there should be more competitors on that level.

As far as the second problem, I leave you with a quote from the opening of the final season of the Sopranos:

"No one ever went broke underestimating the taste of the American people."

[Roto13]

Guitar Hero: World Tour lacks a 'No Fail' option - Joystiq

Read this article and the comments and weep for the state of gamers these days.

[Vermachtnis]

Guitar Hero: World Tour lacks a 'No Fail' option - Joystiq

Read this article and the comments and weep for the state of gamers these days.

Wow, complaining about difficulty is one thing. In fact it's kind of amusing. But complaining when they take away a safety net (I think that's what No Fail means. I haven't played Rock Band ) is a little pathetic. I mean what's the point of playing a game right when you can just mash "Green" and still win.

[Roto13]

I think there's actually a mode in GH IV that only uses one fret button. People are complaining that they can lose at that. It's so sad.

[Momiji]

Modern gaming has made some people become hopelessly stupid when it comes to showing off.

For example, this moron claims that DoDonPachi is an 'IMPOSSIBLE JAPAN VIDEOGAME', and says that he plays a perfect level (according to him, no deaths, no bombs). Not only does a perfect round consist of perfectly chaining the stage for full scoring potential, he uses a bomb against the boss, does little to no chaining whatsoever, he tries to make himself look good by saying it's 'Impossible' when the first stage of DoDonPachi is laughably easy. (Later stages are really tough, though.) The really sad thing is, some of the people in the comments are amazed at what this guy does and how hard the game looks, let alone on the simple first stage. I left my own comment in there saying that anyone who thinks it's impossible needs to be shot.

But seriously, 'modern gamers' fall apart when a game looks harder than it really is or doesn't have an 'easy' setting.

EDIT: For future reference, here is an example of someone doing it right. That's the final boss. Looks much harder than the first stage, doesn't it? So much for 'impossible'.

[Elskidor]

I tend to agree that most modern games make for weak gamers. The cry that FFIV for DS made me laugh. I remember a few old school Nintindo games being nearly impossible to beat, but nowadays everything is a sinch.

[LunarWeaver]

I don't see a difference between people whining a game should be nearly impossible to lose and people whining it should be nearly impossible to win.

Difficulty settings make everyone happy, so I don't see the big deal. That guy acts like because Gears of War has a regenerative health system you can saunter about, sipping lemonade and occasionally paying attention to what's happening. Play it on Insane and tell me how easy regenerative health makes it. It takes the fact there is no life bar into account in its mechanics.

RE4 was pretty tough, I guess, and it had no difficulty setting, and while I didn't really care, I... I don't see why they wouldn't just put it in -shrug- If someone wants an auto-win button, then I couldn't give a less as long as there's harder options for me.

[Bolivar]

Guitar Hero: World Tour lacks a 'No Fail' option - Joystiq

Read this article and the comments and weep for the state of gamers these days.

It is a little sad, especially some of the comments, but at the same time I wanna give RB a pass (actually one comment iterated this) because you're inevitably going to get people who don't understand video games nor music that are going to want to play and not be all "hardcore".

Actually, I've been thinking, I never really heard the term "hardcore" gamer used in the current connotation until the last 1-3 years. Today's "hardcore" gamer is like yesterday's "casual" gamer. Hardcore used to mean 11 hours of gaming a day, grinding to max level on MMORPG's. I think the changing demographics of the gaming community is also a big part of the story.

[Moon Rabbits]

I too long for the days when gaming was frustrating and irksome.

[Yar]

This is one of the reasons I like simulation games so much. While games these days seem to become more idiot proof, simulation games strive for realism, rather than ease of difficulty.

Sim City 4 was one of the most complicated games I've ever played. I still play the hell out of that game, because of its realism and resistance to forgiving gameplay.

[Moon Rabbits]

Oh yeah, I'd also like to point out that indie games win again - some of them are smurfing stupid hard:

rRootage
Bonesaw
Rescue: The Beagles!

All of these games are pretty decently difficult, but not to the point of frustration. Except maybe rRootage. smurf that noise.

[Momiji]

All of these games are pretty decently difficult, but not to the point of frustration. Except maybe rRootage. smurf that noise.

Many doujin shmups are ridiculously hard.

[Wolf Kanno]

Its not so much I want to see games become ridiculously hard, I just want a bit of a challenge. I just feel that many games nowadays lack the ability to give you a real sense of accomplishment like they did in the past. I remember even playing RPGs from the 16/32-bit era that made me feel good about myself cause I beat a difficult boss or solved a difficult puzzle. Sure it took a little effort but is utilizing effort so bad?

"Modern" society has become too fixed on instant gratification and the idea of putting effort into things is apparently too troublesome for today's people.

As for difficulty setting, I see a few problems with this:

1) Balance. What's the difference between Normal mode and Proud mode in Kingdom Hearts? Not much if you ask me. Slight statistical differences that do nothing more than prolong the inevitable. The enemies can take more abuse but they are still smurfing retarded. CC had a similar problem. Course there's the other side of this. DMC1's Normal mode is challenging but jumping up to Hard mode throws you into a world of massive frustration. Rhythm games like DDR and Guitar Hero suffer from similar problems with the jump in difficulty being so great that some people never move past the most simple and basic modes. Nowadays, Normal means Very Easy and Hard means Extreme Hardcore for some developers. Developers need to find a happy balance.

2) Defining Challenge. Going back to KH's difficulty modes, what went wrong? If the enemies have greater health and you take more damage from hits, should the game be fairly more difficult? In theory yes, in practice no. The problem is that if the AI is stupid, buffing stats doesn't alter difficulty you're just making battles more tedious. If you have an enemy that is designed to be killed in one hit and runs straight at you with decent speed, he's not too difficult, now in hard more it takes two hits to kill him instead but he still foolishly charges into your attacks. Is he harder? Not really. DMC3 is a game with a good example of difficulty settings, the AI actually gets smarter rather than relying on simple stat buffing.

3) Not All Genres are Created Equally. AI improvements can help an action game but what about RPGs and strategy games? Games that generally focus on thoughtful planning rather than quick wits and reflexes. Stat modding seems to be the easy way out but it falls into the problem I mentioned above. You're just making battles tedious, not challenging. Some genres are more difficult to design for in the challenging department.

Personally, I feel stat modding can work but instead of raising defense or HP, it should be weaknesses and strengths. In normal mode the dragon boss is weak to ice and resists fire; in Hard mode he should be weak to lightening and resist fire ice and physical. Perhaps he counters with a devastating attack if you don't hit him with the correct weakness. Basically, you need to switch up strategy and punish the player a little more for making mistakes but of course we need to keep point 1 in mind as well so the game stays fun...

I feel one of the real problems though, is that while I feel developers would want to implement these kind of settings, in a genre where everything is becoming more and more "shovel-ware" and the majority of buyers are extremely casual gamers. Its difficult to see a reason to support a group (normal gamers) who make up a small minority of the profit pie. My only real fear is that the gaming industry is getting closer to repeating the gaming industry crash from the early 80's. I sometimes wonder if this "extreme casual" crowd only see's gaming as a fad and will move on when its over? I only wonder, cause it just doesn't feel like the industry is doing its best to convert these former non-gamers into "gaming investors".

Just some food for thought...

[Apocalypse.Origin]

I agree on the boss section of the article the most. Its been far to long since I've fought a boss that actualy seemed like a boss. I almost never treat a boss any different then any other enemy in the game. maybe more time consuming do to needs a few more hits to go down, but thats not really a bit deal. Will its nice to sit back and play something easy once and a while, I want a bit more of a challenge in the games I play. I want to be accomplishing something, not just easily pushing a few buttons watching the story play out has I glide along. I'm not saying we need to make them crazy hard, but a lot of the games I've played recently need to give us more of a challenge then they are now. They can do that and still be fun. We don't need a smoot ride through something just to enjoy it. At least most people, anyway. I should not be able to go on 'insane mode' in a game and fine out that 'insane' really means 'insanely easy'.

I know they're trying to reach more people, but you can't please everyone with one thing. It just doesn't work. Make the game how it should be... if you worry more about trying to make the game for has many people has possable then at some point its just not the same game. The game should be what its ment to be, and if someone whants to play it enough they'll get better and manage it. It may sound wrong to cut people off from playing it cause they're not good enough at that type of game, but its just has wrong to ruin what it was, and to ruin it for the people who could have played it has that.

[Roto13]

There are a couple of dumb things in that article, though. Like what's wrong with tutorials? Yeah, they should be skipable, but the article is written as though tutorials make the game too easy (because that's what the article is about) and they don't.

What's wrong with correctly timed button presses in cutscenes doing extra damage to a boss as long as they're not too easy to pull off? Either way, you're pressing buttons to do damage. Either by aiming and shooting or reacting fast enough to a command on screen.

Checkpoints aren't bad if they're used correctly. They're used to break up long levels. Besides, they've been around since, like, the dawn of video games.