I took Tuesday off work and started playing Stick of Truth on Monday with my buddy @7pm. Tuesday morning @5am we finished it. We played on hard (as we always do), and this became quite a topic during our playthrough.
A number of reviewers have stated that the game is too easy. I am quite a seasoned gamer and my buddy is a game dev that's been playing games since he could walk, so we're not too shabby at all. We didn't find the game too easy. In fact, it was clear that 'hard mode' was meant for the 'real gamers' that wanted to play SP, while the other modes are for those that just want to play through it.
In my opinion reviewers lose out on a major aspect of a game by playing through on normal or (god forbid) easy. A game is meant to be fun, and when things are too easy it's not fun (like Final Fantasy XIII which sucked balls). Only on harder difficulties do the nuances of a gameplay system become apparant. Otherwise you miss out on the game design since you are mindlessly mashing buttons and just focusing on the visuals/story.
Another example is God of War III. It NEEDS to be played at the higher difficulties. Otherwise the player will NEVER understand how Kratos can really move and how he needs to use various attacks to control the battlefield.
This thread makes the statement:
- Reviewers should state which difficulty they played the game on
- Reviewers should state their completion time
My opinion is that this will never happen of course. There are many gaming journos out there who aren't worth their salt and things usually slide towards the lowest common denominator.
For those that are wondering, SP:SoT is a brilliant 9/10 in my opinion. If it had multiplayer it would've been 10/10. I think they could've squeezed a co-op in. And also, more than 2 players in a party would've been bonkers. But as it stands it is a fantastic experience, and an absolute miracle in digital form for fans.