TTLG|Thief|Bioshock|System Shock|Deus Ex|Mobile
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 26 to 50 of 53

Thread: Difficulty: Whatīs your preference ?

  1. #26
    Member
    Registered: Jul 2002
    Location: Edmonton
    On the Diva setting it's definitely too hard, but I consider that more a bonus than the actual game.

  2. #27
    Member
    Registered: Jun 2000
    Location: Right over here, actually.
    I like games that are tough, but fair. Ikaruga and Ninja Gaiden (the remake) are great examples of this. Sure, you die a lot, but when you do, you generally know how you messed up (and it was you that messed up, the game wasn't cheating), so you can focus on improving that in your next attempt.

  3. #28
    Moderator
    Registered: Dec 1999
    Location: Everywhere
    Has anyone made a penis joke yet? If not

    I PREFER IT REALLY REALLY HARD

  4. #29
    Member
    Registered: Oct 2004
    I think I should be seriously punished for my mistakes, or for playing carelessly, but I hate when I die because of bad luck.

    Thief was great. If the player works hard, he will succeed even with the highest difficulty level; but if he just go forward without thinking, he'll lose.

    Vanilla Oblivion was bad because you don't have to think at all, as it is the world which adapt to you. Oblivion with OOO or games like MOHAA were bad because the gameplay is mostly based on luck, and not on thinking.


    Quote Originally Posted by CCCToad View Post
    I have enough stress in my life as it is, so my gaming has decreased in quantity and become more of a way to de-stress.
    I don't think it's possible to "de-stress" with an easy game. It's possible to stop thinking for a while, but when the game is over, you turn on your brain again and the "stress" just comes back. For me, running, biking and swimming is far more efficient to remove stress, but when I can't because of an injury, then a difficult game is the way to go. The rewarding feeling of success can remove accumulated stress.


    Quote Originally Posted by steo View Post
    would it really be that much more effort for the devs to put in a harder setting?
    When I really want something from someone, I won't hesitate to be an hypocrite and tell him his clever, strong, talented... I don't believe it for a second, but the guy I'm talking to do believe it and because of that he will be more willing to give me what I want. Developers want people to buy their games, and because of that they make sure the "hard" difficulty level is easy enough. It's the thing as when I say to an idiot that he's intelligent.


    Quote Originally Posted by Shadowcat View Post
    "Trackmania" is a good example of this for me
    Actually, after... oh, not that much, maybe 600 or 700 hours (mostly original TM as I bought United only a month ago and didn't play much with Sunrise), I think the gold medals are quite easy to obtain!

    BTW, the joke smiley is because I find playing with the same game for 600 hours, and still not be bored with it, kind of funny.

    Anyway, yes, Trackmania is among the best I saw for gameplay. With most games I can think of ways to make the gameplay better, but with Trackmania, I can only come up with details, and they are not about the core gameplay.

  5. #30
    is Best Pony
    Registered: Nov 2002
    Location: The magical land of Equestria
    I generally prefer my games easier than most people do - but then, that's what difficulty scaling is for.

  6. #31
    Member
    Registered: Aug 2007
    Thread title edited due to the fact that people donīt like to admit that they like it hard...

  7. #32
    Taking the Death Toll
    Registered: Aug 2004
    Location: ideally far away
    I like it reasonably soft, myself. I guess that makes me STRAIGHT.

  8. #33
    Member
    Registered: Apr 2006
    Location: <Insert witty statement here>
    Side-stepping the old "hard" jokes, I have to say I try to play it to the best of my ability, on the hardest settings, unless it's so hard, I just can't figured a damn way around it. For an FPS, there's a numerous number of ways to try a different tactic or just playing damn better. However after a while it gets tedious if upping the difficulty level basically means you can only play in this one manner, try anything else and you die, (I'm looking at YOU Crysis, maybe I don't want to just use stealth every damn time!) it just gets annoying. So yea, for the most part I'm playing it on normal, usually because though, I just can't figure out how to get past something on hard difficulty.

    To put in a an easier to understand terms: I like it hard, but I'd also like it to be gentle with me.

  9. #34
    Member
    Registered: Nov 2002
    Location: Sniper Hill, Quebec City
    I like it hard, but not so much it leaves a bad taste in the mouth.

  10. #35
    Thing What Kicks
    Registered: Apr 2004
    Location: London
    Most FPS games and console games I'll play on the hardest difficulty available, but I prefer my RTS games and games like Civ on medium.
    Some RTS games can be ridiculously difficult on hard, and when it's so hard it's no fun, well there's no point in playing.
    The CoD series when played on consoles are particularly guilty of cheap tricks to increase difficulty and they just become frustrating.

  11. #36
    Still Subjective
    Registered: Dec 1999
    Location: Idiocy will never die
    Nails.

    When I get somewhere, it's because I worked for it. Otherwise I find it boring.

  12. #37
    1937-2018
    Gone, but not forgotten

    Registered: Jan 2001
    Location: Seaside, Oregon
    Quote Originally Posted by Subjective Effect View Post
    Nails.

    When I get somewhere, it's because I worked for it. Otherwise I find it boring.
    Agreed. I also do not like games that reward you for "doing" a particular thing by upping your hitpoints or giving you the BFG. I much prefer games where the only rewards you get are finishing the game, and improving because you get better at thinking it out or manipulating "your" character.

  13. #38
    Member
    Registered: Sep 2001
    Location: Iacon
    Quote Originally Posted by Matthew View Post
    I generally prefer my games easier than most people do - but then, that's what difficulty scaling is for.
    Same here.

    Strategy games I normally run through on easy to get the hang of it, then maybe try again on medium. Everything else, medium, except for old favourites I'm familiar with like Thief. I normally have a stack of games to get through (curse those 3-for-Ģ10 and 2-for-Ģ15 selections!), and even if I have no life time is not unlimited. So with something like Total War I don't want to spend weeks upon weeks thrashing around on hard. And YOU WILL DO THIS OVER AND OVER UNTIL YOU GET IT RIGHT in say Half Life is immersion-breaking.
    Last edited by Chimpy Chompy; 23rd Jan 2008 at 11:40.

  14. #39
    Member
    Registered: Jul 2002
    Location: Edmonton
    I found the final sequence of Episode 2 to be far too difficult on normal. I nearly made it through on my first run, and was expecting that great 'barely-made-it' feel that Half Life is famous for, but then I died and then a few more times after that, and by the time I actually did make it, the excitement was gone and the effect of saving the outpost was dampened. Up to that point the difficulty was perfect. But when it ratchets up so quickly it really can wreck the immersion.

    I'd like to see a game that dynamically and covertly adjusts its difficulty so that the player is always on the verge of death. When System Shock 2 was like this, I loved it. But when I started dieing repeatedly, even the satisfaction of trying to improve my performance didn't save the game from tedium and loss of immersion.

  15. #40
    Member
    Registered: Dec 2006
    Location: Washington DC
    Quote Originally Posted by Aja View Post
    I'd like to see a game that dynamically and covertly adjusts its difficulty so that the player is always on the verge of death. When System Shock 2 was like this, I loved it. But when I started dieing repeatedly, even the satisfaction of trying to improve my performance didn't save the game from tedium and loss of immersion.
    If it keeps you from dying... That would be worse than vita-chambers. People would also abuse such a system by staying at low health to make enemies easier.

  16. #41
    Member
    Registered: Jun 2002
    Location: Girl with the Patreon Tattoo
    Mario Karts' cheating AI are always a great opportunity to swear at a game, a console, the TV set and the whole world while having an incredible amount of fun.

    I like most good first person games so that there is a fair balance between the stats for the main character and the AIs. Or at least a balance which seems consistent to the game universe : Half Life games, Crysis, Deus Ex, System Shock 2, Thief, AvP, Jedi Knight, Stalker,... on the hardest setting. However, there are a few games where I choose to reduce the level of difficulty, for example when hordes of enemies are thrown at you in unfair ways (Max Payne = good game but with far too many enemies hidden behind the door with a shotgun to play on hard). Halo ran like shit on my previous machine so I had to play on easy to avoid frustration (I liked the combat by the way). There's also a game I shouldn't have played on hard from the get go : Bioshock was frustrating as hell, especially since I refused to use Vita Chambers as well as to feel "cheating" by using decoy all the time. Towards the end of the game, emptying a full clip of tommygun in a splicer and seeing to my greatest dismay that they only lost half of their health = no, no, bad, bad. I just started playing it again and found it much more bearable on medium. Still as boring though.

    Whenever there is a choice for difficulty in RPGs, I usually keep it as intended by default unless it's blatantly unbalanced (Oblivion, your difficulty system sucks - Morrowind was much better).

    RTSes, usually on medium as well. Unless it's Warcraft or Starcraft, which I play on the easiest setting because I really can't manage to care enough for the strategy aspect of those games. I like to play them as isometric fragfests.

  17. #42
    Taking a break
    Registered: Dec 2002
    Generally I simply play on Normal. Of course there are some games which only get better on higher difficulty(I.e. Thief, Deus Ex, SS2, Audiosurf, Quake 2, etc.).

  18. #43
    With the exception of the Thief and Shock series most games really don't change much with the difficulty. It points out the lack of thought that goes into most games. The original System Shock had FOUR difficulty sliders. It could change the game completely. Thief's extra objectives for harder difficulties was brilliant. Why don't we see more of that. It can't be too hard, Can it ?

  19. #44
    Chakat sex pillow
    Registered: Sep 2006
    Location: not here
    It's simply easier to increase the enemy spawn count and hitpoint/weapon damage stats than make the game easier/harder by removing/adding more content per difficulty level.

    But anyway, the point's becoming moot these days because games are beginning to feature more and more achievements/unlockables which stand in for things like additional objectives and harder puzzles. For instance, that little 'puzzle' in HL2: Ep. 2 where you can get the RPG earlier in the game that also counts as an achievement.

  20. #45
    Member
    Registered: Oct 2004
    Quote Originally Posted by Aja View Post
    I'd like to see a game that dynamically and covertly adjusts its difficulty so that the player is always on the verge of death.
    Stop! Or I'll say stop again!

  21. #46
    Member
    Registered: May 2006
    Location: Idaho, U.S.A.
    I almost always play a game on the "Normal" setting the first time through. It just seems to me that that is the way a game is designed to be played.

    This is especially true of games which up the difficulty level by just giving the enemies 50 billion hit-points and/or making your kick-ass heavy machine gun do about as much damage as an air rifle. It just feels fake to me and breaks the immersion.

    However, I do like the option of being able to change the difficulty level while you are playing. It makes it so that instead of having to resort to cheat-codes, I can just temporarily (or permanently) change the difficulty level without having to restart a whole new game.

  22. #47
    Member
    Registered: Jan 2001
    Location: somewhere
    Quote Originally Posted by Sulphur View Post
    But anyway, the point's becoming moot these days because games are beginning to feature more and more achievements/unlockables which stand in for things like additional objectives and harder puzzles. For instance, that little 'puzzle' in HL2: Ep. 2 where you can get the RPG earlier in the game that also counts as an achievement.

    I could not figure out how on earth "solve" the puzzle, so I ended up dragging 2 barrels inside the building and creating a makeshift staircase to get up there. It was only after reading a walkthrough that I discovered the "real" way to solve the puzzle.

    That's one thing I really miss from newer games, the abilty to solve puzzles or kill bad guys multiple ways. Nowadays everything seems to be constantly scripted and if you don't go the exact way the developers intended you to go, you have no chance.

  23. #48
    Taking the Death Toll
    Registered: Aug 2004
    Location: ideally far away
    Quote Originally Posted by lunatic96 View Post
    I could not figure out how on earth "solve" the puzzle, so I ended up dragging 2 barrels inside the building and creating a makeshift staircase to get up there. It was only after reading a walkthrough that I discovered the "real" way to solve the puzzle.
    I had a similar situation in the Ravenholm mod for HL2. At some point, there's an old, small wooden building with multiple floors, but no real way to reach them from the floor below. I stacked up crates and climbed them, having to reuse crates to get from the second to the third floor. It wasn't until a subsequent playthrough that I realized the real way to get there is to do a tight-rope walk across a crane's suspended tracks which led into an opening in the side of the building, from which I could reach the third floor and just jump down to the bottom floor of the building on my way back.

  24. #49
    Member
    Registered: Aug 2006
    Location: Vienna, Austria
    depends on the game.
    most of the games have no thought put into its difficulty settings and WAY TOO FEW of them. good balance for difficulty are all Valve games and the old Quakes/dooms. But on the other hand Valve's HARD difficulty is just a joke.
    I don't call anyone having problems with easy or medium a bad gamer, but please, if you make a HARD difficulty setting I WANT IT HARD. HARD. punishing. Even MASTER on STALKER can be achieved with a little smarts. Since you can just avoid enemies, not like in scripted shooters.

    best examples of bad difficulty design are all of the COD games.
    they just ebb and flow inbetween the game and across difficulty settings is NO variation except the damage and suddenly godlike ability of the AI to exactly shoot where you are hiding (!)
    Valve acutally puts some logic progression into their challenges and enemies, they are just so fearful and panic that one of their focus testers could actually not finish that sequence (sniff, it makes me cry) that they tweak so long on HARD it seems that it aint got any teeth.

    so my preference is MANY difficulty settings to let ME decide what's hard and what's not. I hate this "everybody equally retarded or godlike" thinking of the devs.

  25. #50
    I wish more games were like Silent Hill 2 and 3, where you can set the combat difficulty separately from the puzzle difficulty.

    Combat "difficulty" usually just results in cursing and frenzied quickloading, while puzzle difficulty makes me use my brain more. =p

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •