Forums - Gaming Discussion - Is it fair to criticise a game for being too hard/easy?

Is it fair to criticise a game for being too hard/easy?

Yes, for both 43 39.45%
 
No, for both 21 19.27%
 
Only for being too hard 4 3.67%
 
Only for being too easy 12 11.01%
 
Other / it depends... 26 23.85%
 
I don't play games, show me the results 3 2.75%
 
Total:109
AngryLittleAlchemist said:

Both your answers are quite odd to say the least. What makes platformers work is that they give the player a controlled environment in which they have to accomplish certain tasks. Souls games are constantly criticized for not having difficulty options because it's easy for people to imagine a difficulty slider making enemies take more damage or have less health - as that has been popularized by games since the 90's.

Your answer is quite odd to say the least. First you are asking how platformers could get an easy mode, then you ridicule any answer because platformer levels are perfectly balanced and don't need these options that would make a level easier.



Around the Network

By default it's better if a game is too easy rather than too hard. If it's too hard for you then you'd never complete the game (without a guide or looking online) or if you ever tried replaying it you might still not enjoy it that much. If it's too easy but the game has more facets to it and plenty of value in multiple areas then those games are fine. Also, it depends on all the parts of the difficulty. Dying too easily or not ever dying by itself isn't the end all be all of difficulty in a game. There's also puzzles and particularly in some RPGs other things you can do or focus on even in the battle system. Many layers.



Lube Me Up

If the difficulty level doesn't fit the game, sure.



AngryLittleAlchemist said:
Volterra_90 said:
I've always thought that almost any game should have a difficulty setting from the beginning, to adjust to anyone. I mean, if people want a more relaxed experience, go for easy. If they want a challenge, go for hard. That could pretty much work for almost any game.

How would you accomplish this in a platformer? Not Cuphead mind you - like a .... Mario 64?

The easiest way is to offer a rewind feature or put your own checkpoint anywhere. That's how I have been playing Donky Kong country with my wife on the snes mini. The game is fun, doing the same stuff over, or going back to the early levels to stock up on lives isn't.

The worst way to do it is how Mario on the WiiU did it. The watch the level being played and skipped is a terrible solution, as well as the invulnerability suit in the 3D version.

You could also make the game logic run slower or faster based on difficulty, larger jump or more forgiving button timing.

Difficult games should make sure restarting is fast and frustration free. A long load screen on death has me quickly lowering the difficulty if possible. My time is better spend than watching load screens. If the game resets instantly I don't mind trying again and again until I get it. As long as you don't have to do half the level over first. Which is the reason why I never bothered with the Dark souls bosses solo. Put a damn fire next to the boss then I'll try. The long load times have scared me off playing Bloodborne even though I have it.


Should games be criticized for being too hard. Depends on how they handle death, with long load times, yes they should be criticized.
Should games be critizized for being too easy. Perhaps it's not meant for you, leave some games for my kids to enjoy!



Conina said:
AngryLittleAlchemist said:

Both your answers are quite odd to say the least. What makes platformers work is that they give the player a controlled environment in which they have to accomplish certain tasks. Souls games are constantly criticized for not having difficulty options because it's easy for people to imagine a difficulty slider making enemies take more damage or have less health - as that has been popularized by games since the 90's.

Your answer is quite odd to say the least. First you are asking how platformers could get an easy mode, then you ridicule any answer because platformer levels are perfectly balanced and don't need these options that would make a level easier.

Ridicule? Why demonize a reply that was just meant to bring up counter points to a reply. It's not like im saying they are objectively wrong or that platformers can do no wrong, just that from my personal experience they all seem pretty balanced and the solitions listed like adding longer jumps or making checkpoints seemed odd. No need to make this seem ugly, the point of the reply was to see clarification on how these expand the games to better products. When someone asks a question they are not always looking for a one sided done deal answer, but rather discussion. 

 

Besides, I do think things could be done to make them easier in a good way. A life system for instance is pretty arbitrary in platformers



Around the Network

Depends on the game. A game like Animal Crossing is obviously going to be easy due to the fact there isn't any real "baddy". I personally would like Pokemon to be slightly more difficult. The older games by the third gym you were facing leaders with 6 Pokemon. Fast forward to today, we have Elite four members with only 4 Pokemon? Like what?! The best of the best of an entire region, yet they don't even have 6 pokemon?

When people praise Dark Souls difficulty, I think many people misunderstand what they mean. It's the fact that the game is built around dying being ok, and the lack of hand holding. They just plunge you into a universe, where you're free to explore as you see fit. It's not even that one factor that makes the game fun. It's multiple things. Lack of hand holding, fun boss fights, multiple different builds to try out, cool looking armor, the atmosphere etc. The game is more about learning the patterns of a boss, then once you understand it, you can beat it.

Looking at some other games, they'll literally PAUSE the game, with a menu popping up showing you the button configs. You're just like "YES I KNOW HOW TO MOVE THANK YOU!!!" That's absolutely unnecessary. It really takes away from the game, destroying immersion too >.



PSn - greencactaur
Nintendo Switch FC - SW - 5152 - 6393 - 5140 Please feel free to add me :)

For too easy, yes. For too hard, no. There is no "too hard". There's only "not skilled enough".



AlfredoTurkey said:

For too easy, yes. For too hard, no. There is no "too hard". There's only "not skilled enough".

But don't you think that "not skilled enough" people might want to play the game, and they're incapable of doing so because the devs only aim to the so-called hardcore gamers? And that an option to make it easy if you want it doesn't really affect anyone's enjoyment of the game? I mean, you can still play in ultra-hard mode or whatever is called in the game XD.



Yeah it's totally fine and sometimes merited.



Yeah, I think it could be considered fair for both sides. Some enjoyable can be lost if a game is just too easy to get through and vice versa. Although, in terms of a hard difficulty, it could be at times a result of poor game design that makes it not only harder, but seem unfair at times. As long as a game has different difficulties, I think that remedies the issue for the most part.



 

              

Dance my pretties!

The Official Art Thread      -      The Official Manga Thread      -      The Official Starbound Thread