Deleted

In game purchases to make it easier is the wrong fucking thing to do. Giving people more difficulty options is the right thing to do. What's so wrong with having an "easy" mode for those that either don't want to play on harder difficulties or just can't enjoy the game at those difficulties.

Thanks for Skyrim

Dark Souls is not for everyone. People look for different things in games. Some just want excitement or wish to unwind after a long day. Others want puzzles and challenge their brain. Yet an other group is looking for a challenge. The point is, different things drive people.
I have played Dark Souls 3 without playing any of the soulsgames before. The first area was hard... like really hard, I spent hours there. I got better eventually. But this harsh 'intro' phase was so long, that I imagine a lot of people just left, because they got bored or frustrated.

Difficulty is a big issue in games, and I feel like developers need a better way to figure out what the challenge level of a player is and create a more organic difficulty setting. A prompt in the beginning saying easy, medium and hard is just useless without context.
Resident Evil 4 for example removed enemies without telling you when you died too often in an area. Dark Souls 1 allows you to become a mage and shoot everyone down without a scratch. Spelunky had a great system for this as well.

Since I wouldn't describe myself as a great gamer, I usually prefer Easy or Normal mode. I'd like to be able to enjoy story and setting and due to my huge backlog I don't need to spend too much time on one title. However, I wouldn't write negative reviews just because I clearly fail at the game (game breaking bugs are something different),

I don't mind DLCs for speeding things up as long as the base game isn't made a grind to sell more DLCs. Some people have less time and if they can only enjoy it this way, let them pay. It's their money.

In case anyone doesnt realize, there is a hidden GA in this post. Highlight everything and then select "View Selection Source" on firefox and you will see the giveaway link near the middle paragraph.

People have always looked for different things in games. This generation had an influx of casual gamers mainly because of the massification of smartphones and family friendly consoles, such as the Wii. That is not a bad thing because it made the industry grow. If you don't like casual games just don't play them, likewise for people that don't like challenging gaming. Luckily I can appreciate both.

One of the many problems with triple A gaming is that they try to appeal to a "large audience" and, similarly to NC13 movies, follow a diluted, safe and tested formula. You should look elsewhere for innovation and difficulty.

You should also be aware that this is the generation of perma-death roguelikes, Dark Souls, and the revival of difficult platformers... things don't look so bad :)

PS. Sundered looks really great :)

`
impulse 9
enter
go rush 💓

This generation complain and whine about almost anything, so it's a bit unreasonable to expect them NOT to complain about games.

My least favourite day of the year, at work anyway, is spent interviewing new candidates - the expectations and entitlement are unreal.

Barely believable.

I agree completely. The developers are forced to make games easier and get a better ratings for their games. I am a big fan of JRPG games and people give positive ratings just because of the level of cuteness/sexiness in it. I never wanted too much of that in my games, I'd rather have a challenging one where story and gameplay is the main focus. Nowadays I am playing Tales of Berseria and astonished from how easy the game has become compared to old Tales Of games. People even complaining about Nier:Automata because in the beginning there is no save points for these kids.
Not only that I preferred Save Points at fixed location. I loved how in Prince of Persia games, the player can only save game at a fountain. Now I am pissed at the so much frequent Save indicator at the bottom of my screen.

Not really... only people are overreacting worse than ever... Its the "mimimi"... xD

Here we go!

Superbunnyhop's review of Sundered explains it well. The guy is incredibly professional and could be one of the best gaming journalist of these times.
I don't know much about this game, I like Metroid and Metroidvania games, but didn't find the premise quite enjoyable. That's why I didn't even buy it.
Maybe one of the most professional reviewers I know may help you understand why a lot of people didn't like the game.

On the other hand:
A lot of people of this generation complained about how Starcraft remastered was too hard. Blizzard stated that they just improved the graphic side of the game but difficulty settings remained untouched.
AAA games are usually quite easy, with difficulty spikes from time to time. Gamers are getting used to games easy but fun, while 2 decades ago they were consistently and progressively harder because programmers used to think "harder is funnier".
If a hard game gets popularized as just a fun game, then it's bound to get the negative reviews you are complaining about. If it's compared to a usually quite easy genre, it's even worse.
If a fun game gets popular for being hard, it will imply that if you don't like hard games, you should not buy the game in the first place. People will buy the game anyway and complain.

I think many games, and their fanbase have problems conveying a message why a game is good. Let's stay at the recent Cuphead, the eternal Dark Souls and let's say, Volgarr the Viking examples, so it's easier to relate.
What most people say about these games: they are haaaaarrrrdd. Period, end of the story. Maybe that you're only a true gamer if you like and play them, you fucking casuals, you.
But look at any random person who likes to play games - some like challenge, some likes to be challenged to the absolute fucking maximum (like S ranks on highest difficulty), while many would like to have fun. Enjoy their time, or find something they enjoy doing in their time. Not to be tortured and murdered every half minute. So it's not really surprising that many of them aren't interested in these games ; maybe they try it, but get bored because all they know that it's hard and they don't progress. It's a bit shallow, but at the same time relatable. Why spend time on something with the promise that if you get past this, there'll be other assholes trying to murder me, and that's the game?
Dark Souls started this fad, with the retarded "Prepare to Die" motto. DS is not a Harrrdd Game, it's a game about a world, with deep lore, interesting architecture, creepy, fucked up enemies, and a combat system that rewards being patient, getting to know your enemies and then overcome them, because it's doable. Yet the game is just treated as the etalon of hard games - instead of trying to get people interested in it, the communication focuses on the most exclusive elements of the game (that can be overcome, if someone has the time and a goal to motivate them.
Similarly, Volgarr the Viking just muurders you. I spent I think about 3 hours to get past the first level. But after finishing it and finding the optimal ways to fight enemies, I can finish it in 3-4 minutes without losing a life. The game is not hard by any stretch of imagination. It's fully scripted to the pixel accuracy, one could make a macro that flawlessly plays it. That's not a hard game. That's a game needs to be learnt, and needs patience.
I don't have Cuphead, but based on what I've seen, it's like Volgarr on steroids.
It's stupid to bash at people who find hard games hard, because what is the difficulty? I find some precision platformers relaxing, others would pay not to play them. How should one know upfront that the game that's called hard is in their level of expertise, how much time they need to invest to learn and/or what new skills they have to develop for it?
While I like challenging games, I think the widespread appearance of Roguelikes, the glorification of Dark Souls and similar "hard" games hurt the developer-consumer dialogue, because an abstract difficulty got way too big focus, while the gameplay, style, sometimes even genre got ignored just because everyone is busy focusing on difficulty. More people are willing to spend time on a difficult game if it's compelling for them, but for it they need more information than "the hardest platformer of 2017" and such. And people should be more aware of their genre preferations, and not jumping on unliked/unknown genres just because it has a new shiny game (especially if it's a difficult one)

I mean I can get both your point and theirs
longwinded midnight tangent approaching
People play games for different reasons and with different agenda
Some play it for the achievement of completing something difficult, others for fun and story

A main example I can think of is The Evil Within. The sequel has been recently released, and they addressed a lot of issues that the first game had, namely in terms of difficulty. It put a lot of people off, and made it very difficult for people to actually enjoy and be immersed into, because they were so irritated by the mechanics

In terms of saying that this generation of gamers suck is pretty unreasonable and unfair to a lot of decent players

The games by that dev, Jotun and Sundered, are a niche category like VN's and HO games. There are people who don't like it, it's something they genuinely can't enjoy, and they can't honestly recommend it to people. My primary method of discerning whether or not I should buy a game is based almost entirely on it's negative reviews, as they are the most honest and aren't going to just gloss over issues

My reason for that is, games are always going to have issues and it's going to needle certain people and rub them the wrong way, so I want to know the worst the game is going to give me. If the issues pointed out are personal problems, are small issues, or can be easily fixed by fiddling with files or downloading a patch/community mod/etc, then I'll likely still get it

Sundered, as good as it is, does have issues (I have only played the demo, so my memory is rusty and things might have changed) but I remember the layout being rather frustrating, as well as chugging to a glitchy stop when enemies started to spawn in, and the skill tree was both expansive and expensive (less of an issue for me, but it is a rather grindy mechanic)

Many of my favourite games are ones that have mixed reviews, namely Hellenica. I made my own judgement of whether I would enjoy it based on the games trailer, previews, and of course the reviews

I've read through some of those negative reviews, and quite a few of them have fair enough points. Most of the negative reviews begin with some form of "I really wanted to like this game but" all of them tend to have the common theme of it just not being fun, and they just don't want to play it and they're honestly upset that they can't like it

Why would you recommend a game you honestly can't stand to play to another person? That's just dishonest to yourself and to them

After playing Witcher 3 and Elex soon afterwards recently, I agree.

My explanation is, that the gaming industrie has grown insanely since 2000, and AAA game companies try to develope mainstream games, while indie devs try to fill the gap with hard games for the now "elderly gamers".
Point is, that there's kind of more young gamers, because they have more freetime obviously. That explains the mass of negative reviews for actually decent games imo.

In the end, I don't care too much, as long as there's developers like Piranha Bytes or Grinding Gear Games who make games for "making games" and not (just) making money, who make their games like they want (hard), not like people want to play them (easy/casual).

Other huge point that I don't want to discuss now; "there's too many multiplayer games, compared to singleplayer (OFFLINE!!) games.

People really thought Wonder Boy 3 remaster is too hard ?

The thing for which I hate all gamer (and not only this generation) is that to be a "good" gamer you have to be the best. I think it's totally wrong. A "good" gamer is someone interested in video game, and have a large culture about it. They'll play many things, for countless hours, and never be afraid to try something they just heard of, instead of browsing only the first page of a store.
Yeah I suck a Dark Souls, yeah I didn't finished Cuphead so far. Well, I'm still considering myself a "good" gamer.

you're right, Sundered is a great game. i loved it. but you're also wrong about a few things. the negative reviews don't all complain about difficulty. the game has some serious issues. as i said, i love it - but it could have been so much better. and the horde system is not for everyone. not only because of the difficulty spikes it produces. some people simply don't like the idea of hordes like in Sundered. also, the difficulty in Sundered is not very well balanced. while it is relatively hard in the first few hours, you are almost unbeatable later on (except for the bosses). it's not a perfect game. people also complained about other things, like the partially random level generation (which is not that well implemented). i wrote a review for Sundered. if you are interested in my thoughts about it, please read it and tell me what you think.

As Jimmy Jim Sterling really well said - if you are 'offering' a way to skip your games gameplay for real life money ( microtransactions,lootboxes etc to 'save players time' ) that means your gameplay is shit and why the fuck do you make games then if they are shit noone will want to play themselves. ?

I agree with the OP, this is a topic I feel very strongly about. Games should be challenging to be memorable.Take Rick Dangerous for instance. I haven't played it in years, but I can close my eyes and visualize every single area of the first level, and most of the second. Wonderboy in Monsterland, I can navigate the final labyrinth years after the last time I played, it's imprinted into my subconscious. Let's take a modern game, one that is even considered "difficult". Giana Sisters Twisted Dreams. I can't remember a single area. I loved almost everything about this game but... it had unlimited lives, so there were no stakes. I always knew if I failed, I'll just keep trying until I pass to the next area. The game became a chore, and soon enough I lost interest.

How do most games of today compensate for unlimited lives and an overabundance of checkpoints? They are made massive.... and hence massively repetitive. Massive, forgettable experiences. I understand the developers. I have a few projects in development and I struggle with the balance between what I would like and what is acceptable on the issue of difficulty. Players have been pampered. I've read articles by "specialists" and "advisors" in the field that claim "you never make the player feel bad", "you never anger the player", "people play games to feel like winners". I even remember a debate in which some players were claiming that since they bought the game they are entitled to all the content, so the developer shouldn't allow them to lose.

The sense of achievement comes from advancing a little further in the game, not by those ridiculous, artificial achievements that we are expected to incorporate into our creations today. It comes from the feeling of mastery. Jim Power was one of my favs on the amiga, I never knew before the internet, that people thought it was insanely difficult, I could finish it without losing a life back in the day. But it took effort, and for all the frustrations it might have caused me in the process, I loved the game to death. Of course, I played the first level so many times, I can still remember every area, every enemy, trap and power up. When I fire it up on an emulator these days, I'm greeted by a familiar world that I have revisited so many times. I am not making a case here for developers that would just make the game ridiculously hard (Shadow of the Beast I & II) of course.

Anyways, it saddens me that so many games that could have been great, end up being repetitive forgettable experiences in an effort not to anger a spoiled player base. There have been a few shiny exceptions, especially in the recent years. Double Dragon Neon got it exactly right imho; difficult enough when you start, very easy when you master it and not too long to overstay its welcome.

when I think about how they'd react to a "difficult" game I just feel for the developers that worked very hard on making something and then see people take a giant shit on it

Easy fix: just provide console commands or some other kind of cheat codes like all decent games used to do 👀
This generation of gamers isn't what it used to be, but so is this generation of game devs... 👽

View attached image.

A lot of great discussion here, when I saw the thread title I was sure this was going to be a train wreck, ha. Though it might sound cliché to add this, you have to keep in mind the relatively new ease of mass communication whenever making a "This Generation" comparison. None of these complaints are new, you're just seeing them more easily now.

There's a few retro game series I watch that have mention plenty of NES era titles that had the same complaints both now and at the time they were released. Some of these complaints were warranted for games like Silver Surfer and some of them weren't. Heck I remember reading a retro thread calling Fester's Quest ball bustingly hard and I'm just sitting here scratching my head. My mom and I both beat that when I was kid...Point is, difficulty complaints always have and always will exist simply due to the nature of gaming, if you can fail a game someone will and someone will complain about it.

It does suck to see good games review bombed over difficulty however and it's absolutely disgusting to see the micro transaction/pay 2 win trends of the last year or so that are directly tied difficulty. The market has expanded and changed so much since the NES/coin arcade days it's hard to fathom at times. Is the influx of gamers with expendable cash and limited patience balanced out by the those that refuse to open their wallets for loot boxes and write negative reviews based on difficulty? Despite the industries pandering to the former I'd say yes. Games like Dark Souls are still successful in spite of any upswing in casual players.

This generation sucks coz people are happy for dlc/season pass ... I just read reaction for xenoblade 2's dlcs annoucement and people enjoys like for Zelda ... And now some are agree to pay for a mod (thank you Bethesda ) .
It's my passion but now i don't know ... time to live like a hermit i guess ...