When did gamers become such <insert expletive here>!?

[Venom20]

I thought this post was about the douches in online play when I read the title too.

As long as a game doesn't have cheap deaths, then I generally don't find an issue playing it. I will say that on occasion I will play a game on medium to enjoy the story the first time or just go randomly exploring to look at the graphics. But the second time around I crank that difficulty up.

 

[ImpulsE69]

LoL ok seriously guys?

"Started with the &#171;console's name&#187;"

How can a console start something, developers do, in their games, not consoles (huh, anyway). Have any of you ever played... say... Pilotwings? The SNES version? WHOA wait for a sec! Could it be... could it be... could it be possible that it even "started with the SNES"?!?! I THINK SO!

-_- ....

At least be specific, specific game titles, genres, they try to accomplish different things, they are for different play styles. If "games are easier than before" then which ones? Compared to... to what? There ARE many "easy" or "too easy" games, yes I DO agree (as I said in my previous post, and I did generalize, I'd still do), but please guys don't go about naming actual consoles and pretend it "started with" this or that one. The "pussyfication" exits since probably the Atari days... ah crap, I named a company, it must refer to the Atari 2600! Damn I just contradicted myself.


If you missed it I pointed out exactly the GAME I was referring to, but also pointed out it's contradiction (in terms of a console) in the next sentence. So before you get all high and mighty, read the whole post.

 

[ImpulsE69]

I thought this post was about the douches in online play when I read the title too.

As long as a game doesn't have cheap deaths, then I generally don't find an issue playing it. I will say that on occasion I will play a game on medium to enjoy the story the first time or just go randomly exploring to look at the graphics. But the second time around I crank that difficulty up.

It could be, but that really needs to be an entirely different post, plus I think it's been hashed out numerous times in the online specific game posts.

 

[shortylickens]

No way. SNES Pilotwings was a tough bastard. Actually they were smart, the first few levels were OK and got progressively harder just like a proper game should be.

Most of the SNES games were very challenging and could only be beat by lots of level grinding (FF2, 3) or repeating the same bullshit part over and over again (many platformers) but they did NOT gimp the difficulty on any games.

And the Wii wasnt the first either. I'm pretty sure both Xbox's had plenty of games with pussified play.
As for computer games, theres still plenty of challenging titles. Most RTS's and TBS's on the highest difficulty are ridiculous. But most of the shooters are direct ports from the 360 which makes them lame.

 

[smartpatrol]

Most of the SNES games were very challenging and could only be beat by lots of level grinding (FF2, 3) or repeating the same bullshit part over and over again (many platformers) but they did NOT gimp the difficulty on any games.

It's ironic that you mention FF2. We got the "EasyType" version of FF2 in the USA, where the difficulty was severely toned down over the original. And honestly, I don't remember ever being challenged in FF3, except maybe in a couple dungeons in the World of Ruin. Now that I think about it, I don't remember any of SquareSoft's games requiring excessive level grinding from the 16-bit days onward.

Dragon Quest, however, may be a different story.

 

[Maximilian]

Saw an image earlier that goes along with the OP perfectly.

lol

Although games in general are easier there's plenty of very difficult games out there like super meat boy and iwannabetheguy for the masochist gamers so its not all bad.

 

[JoshGuru7]

I think the biggest shift in game design has been that modern games try to teach the gamer what they should be doing before they die.

I can think of some older games (and I'm sure you all can as well) that required hundreds of deaths as part of the learning process. Think about those platformers with forced scrolling levels and paths that led to certain death. The user learns from each death (I guess I can't jump down there...) and with enough persistence finally can beat the game. Most of us probably spent 50+ hours on megaman 3, but at the end we could beat the entire game in about an hour. "Games were harder" was also another way of saying that "Games stretched their content out a lot more".

I've played many current generation games without dying or losing more than once or twice. The new Prince of Persia comes to mind, Civilization V, Heavy Rain, probably at least half a dozen more I can't think of. And I liked them, in a different way than Demon Souls perhaps, but they were definitely worth my time playing them despite the "easy mode".

 

[Imp]

I like the modern approach more than the old. The difficulty during the Sega/Nintendo days were stupid hard.

I remember crap like Mortal Kombat II was impossible for me without mad-l33t skills. Think my record is still making it to the 5th guy from the bottom in the tournament. Doom, also very hard, and I still remember the essential cheat codes: IDKFA and IDGOD.

And "lives", my god, who remembers "lives"? Five hours down the drain because I ran out of "lives" and it wouldn't let me continue. Great excuse to just stop playing the damn game. I'm looking at you Lethal Enforcer. How the hell do you defeat the boss helicopter at the end?

 

[Fenixgoon]

im finding TW2 to be fairly challenging on "normal" and i think i played TW1 on "hard"

just gotta try different strategies and find out what works best. i drank a bunch of potions and that made a HUGE difference in the battle.

 

[Jimmah]

Super Ghouls and Ghosts.

If you haven't played it you don't know hard.

 

[Zenoth]

LoL ok seriously guys?

"Started with the &#171;console's name&#187;"

How can a console start something, developers do, in their games, not consoles (huh, anyway). Have any of you ever played... say... Pilotwings? The SNES version? WHOA wait for a sec! Could it be... could it be... could it be possible that it even "started with the SNES"?!?! I THINK SO!

-_- ....

At least be specific, specific game titles, genres, they try to accomplish different things, they are for different play styles. If "games are easier than before" then which ones? Compared to... to what? There ARE many "easy" or "too easy" games, yes I DO agree (as I said in my previous post, and I did generalize, I'd still do), but please guys don't go about naming actual consoles and pretend it "started with" this or that one. The "pussyfication" exits since probably the Atari days... ah crap, I named a company, it must refer to the Atari 2600! Damn I just contradicted myself.


If you missed it I pointed out exactly the GAME I was referring to, but also pointed out it's contradiction (in terms of a console) in the next sentence. So before you get all high and mighty, read the whole post.

Wasn't pointing at you specifically kind sir.

I'm generally generalizing on general stuff.

 

[ImpulsE69]

Super Ghouls and Ghosts.

If you haven't played it you don't know hard.

HAHAHAH. I BEAT THIS GAME. Or at least I thought I did, FINALLY. Then instead of a "congratulations you won the most difficult game ever", I have to start from the beginning because I never found the chalace that is hidden SOMEWHERE in all those worlds. HIDDEN CHALACE? Fuck that. I quit.

But then again, I think the original Ghosts and Goblins might be harder, I never got anywhere in it...but my ultimate game I could never beat..Super Battletoads!!

 

[Jimmah]

HAHAHAH. I BEAT THIS GAME. Or at least I thought I did, FINALLY. Then instead of a "congratulations you won the most difficult game ever", I have to start from the beginning because I never found the chalace that is hidden SOMEWHERE in all those worlds. HIDDEN CHALACE? Fuck that. I quit.

But then again, I think the original Ghosts and Goblins might be harder, I never got anywhere in it...but my ultimate game I could never beat..Super Battletoads!!

You have to go through it again and open a chest with the upgraded armour and the bracelet dealy appears, then hang onto it until the final boss even though it is a terrible weapon.

I think whomever designed the G&G series could not have been human, no one is that evil.

 

[Pr0d1gy]

Gamers have always been pussies. You're a bunch of nerds so it's part of who you are. I would be too but I was born with a football player's body and a nerd brain, best of both worlds.

OH,you mean in video games? Well, most people just want everything handed to them and only some are really willing to work for the reward if you ask my Republican father. hahah In my opinion, people just don't think video games are worth wasting their entire day on anymore. They don't have that super new tech wow factor they used to have so people have less patience for them, honestly.

 

[HeXen]

So I just read an article about many people complaining about the first boss in Witcher 2 being too difficult and that it needs patched because it's just plain too hard. Now, from what I understand, this thing is a huge monster and is beatable, just pretty difficult. To me it would seem a huge monster should take some preparation and work to defeat.

What happened to liking a challenge? What happened to having to actually work at a section of a game and that sense of accomplishment you get from finally beating an area/boss after time and time of getting your ass handed to you?

They would have never survived the oldschool days when the games were only long because it took forever to beat them by trial and error ;P

Todays gamers are pussies.

Here I thought it was just in LoL

First off, why would you care? As an old Atari gamer, i sure as hell don't.
I grew up playing Contra...etc and i can't stand to play them now. why would i want to replay, replay, replay, replay, replay...till i get it right? i got a life to live ya know.

For challenge, i'll play a puzzle game or something that i can think about, not replay it till i puke...thats not a challenge, its a memorization...there is a difference.

 

[ssnake51]

Actually, my question is - when did PC gamers become such bitches? All you guys do is whine about everything. DRM, DLC, games are too easy, games are too mainstream, you'd probably kill yourself if you even looked at a controller, console kiddies are so stupid, etc etc.

It makes me ashamed to be a PC gamer.

You forgot to add the PC gamer that whines about other PC gamers whining.

 

[heymrdj]

Making games easier is an overreaction to the real problem of old games being too hard.

Old games were based on arcade games, which killed the player often and in unfair ways in order to extract more quarters from them. Stories weren't really important so beating a game wasn't seen as something that everyone had to be able to do.

Over time, games have gotten more complex, and they have stories that their designers want everyone to be able to see. So they're easier in order to let everyone beat them.

I think games can be too easy but I also think they can be too hard. A lot of people are way too far in one direction or the other - either they're wearing nostalgia goggles and think every game should be Mega Man, or they're a whiny baby who wants every game to hold their hand forever.

There are plenty of tough games out there and most games have adjustable difficulty. In most cases it works out just fine.

QFMT.

To me, what killed me about the older games, is to garner length they increased difficulty. To me, this is a piss poor way to go about it, though back then they also had technical contraints, be it floppy/cartridge size, download via dialup, ect ect. But I game for story line. The story line in games like Super Mario World, the original Wario Land, ect ect. One of my biggest gripes is games that rely on difficulty to make up for length. I want a game that's a challenge, but it has to have a story. And the only way that there's a story is by length and consistent progression. This is why I have no problems paying 60-100$ for a single game. If it's a good game, with at least 20-30 hours of original game play, I wouldn't hesitate to spend 100$ for that. Sadly many do.

 

[IEC]

It's true.. Try lending a copy of Demon's Souls to most "gamers" and they give it back the next day.

Can't wait for the sequel

 

[StinkyPinky]

Because PC Gamers and PC Games have grown up.

I have a wife and kids and I don't want to fight the same battle over 20 times in a row and waste an hour doing it. Especially when I only have an hour a night to play said game.

I play games for their story and atmosphere. To get lost in the world. Not to get pissed off. I love Mass Effect for the setting and the possible plot deviations...not because of fighting Generic Bad Boss #22 for 45 minutes

To each their own.

 

[ParadoxDenmark]

Scaling difficulty should depend on the type of game. For me, having played online games since Ultima Online, is too effecient at making builds for both RPG and strategy games, which means that it could potentially start out rough, but I'll eventually get so far ahead of the AI, that it just gets way too easy.

Other games like FPS, beat 'em up, where you don't have any, or very limited influence on your own strenght, is different. Can easily be challenging from start to finish

I think many companies could use more time on balancing their games.

 

[AyashiKaibutsu]

I like the modern approach more than the old. The difficulty during the Sega/Nintendo days were stupid hard.

I remember crap like Mortal Kombat II was impossible for me without mad-l33t skills. Think my record is still making it to the 5th guy from the bottom in the tournament. Doom, also very hard, and I still remember the essential cheat codes: IDKFA and IDGOD.

And "lives", my god, who remembers "lives"? Five hours down the drain because I ran out of "lives" and it wouldn't let me continue. Great excuse to just stop playing the damn game. I'm looking at you Lethal Enforcer. How the hell do you defeat the boss helicopter at the end?

MKII and Doom? Those weren't hard at all... There's plenty of games you could pick on, but those two were hardly difficult. I beat doom without ever even strafing when I was 11 or 12. MK2 only the last two bosses were stupid hard, and even then it just took a little practice.

 

[motsm]

I beat doom without ever even strafing when I was 11 or 12. MK2 only the last two bosses were stupid hard, and even then it just took a little practice.

Depends on the difficulty you were playing it on, as past games typically had a wider range of challenge is all. On easy they were often easy, and on the hardest, many were near impossible. There are a few games now a days that have challenging modes of play, but most of today's games on hard difficulty are more similar to what normal used to be.

 

[wuliheron]

Its just another indication of how primitive the technology is.

Doom was developed for about $200,000.oo, but the graphics were just barely good enough to be called 3D. If you squinted hard enough you could pretend the ultra low resolution blocky 2D sprites were monsters. You couldn't raise your head or do anything other then run and shoot leaving the level design and challenge of the game the only thing to keep your attention.

Now we've got better graphics and people keep buying the latest and greatest graphics with some games costing $100,000,000.oo. Once the technology matures and it isn't just the latest and greatest graphics that interest people then we might see a return to 3D games that are really challenging.

 

[Barfo]

Actually I never got frustrated with SMB. I often get angry at games, but not because they're hard. Because of poor controls, poor level design, or cheap deaths. The controls and level design in SMB are perfect. I went in knowing what to expect; a lot of trial and error, and a lot of challenge. That's what I got and it wasn't infuriating or disappointing.

If you get angry at a game because of those reasons then it's only a bad game.

 

[HeXen]

i play most all my games these days on easiest settings due to the simple fact of time. I just don't have the time to play every day, i'm lucky if i play once or twice within a week. If its really good, i may play 4-6hrs straight on a Sunday or something if i can, other than that i just cant continue that for months just for the challenge. i play more for the story and experience which with games being so realistic nowadays is probably what most kids play them for anyway.

If you get angry at a game because of those reasons then it's only a bad game.

but when you pay $$$, i could understand being mad. There really is not much excuse to have poor controls..etc in todays age when that kind of stuff should be remedial to most game designers. hell with todays engines and dx api to do half the work for them, they could at least concentrate on decent design, after 15 years of common 3d gaming, you'd think they would have that kind of stuff down to a science by now.