# Harder games they said?



## TransformerRobot (Oct 20, 2013)

According to this article, Nintendo says they're going to make there games harder like they were before.

What are your thoughts on this? Is this a good thing or a bad thing? Do you mind that they'd do this?

I wouldn't mind, since it would give me a bigger sense of satisfaction after killing a really difficult boss. Wouldn't be a problem for me either since I'm really good at most games I play.


----------



## Judge Spear (Oct 20, 2013)

Right. That's what they said about Skyward Sword. LOLOLOLOLOLOL
Good thing if they do, but I don't see it happening.


----------



## Runefox (Oct 20, 2013)

In an era of forced tutorials, on-screen prompts, and achievements for beating the first level of a game, "harder" is really very relative.


----------



## Distorted (Oct 20, 2013)

I wouldn't mind something like Super Mario World type of difficulty. Getting to that special world was cray cray.



Runefox said:


> In an era of forced tutorials, on-screen prompts, and achievements for beating the first level of a game, "harder" is really very relative.



Seriously, if I hear Omochao's voice one more time, I'm gonna toss my game through the window.


----------



## Judge Spear (Oct 20, 2013)

Hard games are largely looked down upon and given back to game stores anyway. Nintendo only cares about making money like every other corporation so they won't want that to happen.


----------



## TransformerRobot (Oct 20, 2013)

XoPachi said:


> Hard games are largely looked down upon and given back to game stores anyway. Nintendo only cares about making money like every other corporation so they won't want that to happen.



Name at least 10 of those games.


----------



## Distorted (Oct 20, 2013)

TransformerRobot said:


> Name at least 10 of those games.



Ninja Gaiden and........um, I think that's it.


----------



## Schwimmwagen (Oct 20, 2013)

Runefox said:


> In an era of forced tutorials, on-screen prompts, and achievements for beating the first level of a game, "harder" is really very relative.



I miss when the control map and trivia/infotidbits found a game's manual were all you were given before being thrown to the wolves.

I think the best games are the ones that are accessible and then challenging with a nice long learning curve plus some depth.



TransformerRobot said:


> Name at least 10 of those games.



Red Orchestra, ArmA, Monster Hunter, Killing Floor, Demons Souls, EVE Online, Dota 2, Dwarf Fortress, Super Meat Boy, Men of War, and countless roguelike-type games are examples of games I know that many people stopped playing because they were "too hard" or "too frustrating" or "too difficult to learn".


----------



## Judge Spear (Oct 20, 2013)

Demons Souls actually did pretty well selling almost 2 mil. But you've pretty much hit it spot on.



TransformerRobot said:


> Name at least 10 of those games.



You expect me to name ten games randomly off the top of my head released in last 13 years...even though the evidence of games getting easier is clear as day? :I

I can give a few that have been known to be avoided like WipEout HD due to it's extremely unforgiving learning curve and a multitude of arcade games for XBox 360 that people tend to avoid (though not exclusively for the difficulty mind you).


----------



## Alexxx-Returns (Oct 20, 2013)

XoPachi said:


> Hard games are largely looked down upon and given back to game stores anyway. Nintendo only cares about making money like every other corporation so they won't want that to happen.



That seems strange to me. I only returned one game to the store, about a week after I got it, and that was because I'd completed it twice in less than that time. It was very short and very easy. I would've thought that longer/harder games had more long term appeal.


----------



## Schwimmwagen (Oct 20, 2013)

Really I think that the problem is not because games are hard, but, you know, I can plug this again in here.

TL;DR the problem is that the skill ceiling is extremely low in mainstream games and players these days never had to really get good at the challenge aspects of games and as soon as you take the training wheels off, they fall and then cry and shit themselves and go back to the training wheels again.


----------



## Judge Spear (Oct 20, 2013)

It is almost exclusively niche games that are difficult as crap now. Hell in Nintendo games you have to UNLOCK or now BUY hard mode.


----------



## SirRob (Oct 20, 2013)

"Like they were before"

So. They're gonna take away our ability to save.


----------



## Judge Spear (Oct 20, 2013)

SirRob said:


> "Like they were before"
> 
> So. They're gonna take away our ability to save.



Whaaaat? You never been through Zelda without saving?


----------



## Arshes Nei (Oct 20, 2013)

Final Fantasy isn't about RPGs but exploratory FMVs now.


----------



## SirRob (Oct 20, 2013)

XoPachi said:


> Whaaaat? You never been through Zelda without saving?


I don't think I could ever beat Zelda NES without saving. That blasted 6th dungeon!!!

Okay, so reading the article, I found this little gem: "Personally, I'd prefer they drop the person who keeps screwing up the art design for their game like...Fire Emblem: Awakening"

What.

*WHAT.*

%&*#@$!&!!!


----------



## TransformerRobot (Oct 20, 2013)

SirRob said:


> I don't think I could ever beat Zelda NES without saving. That blasted 6th dungeon!!!
> 
> Okay, so reading the article, I found this little gem: "Personally, I'd prefer they drop the person who keeps screwing up the art design for their game like...Fire Emblem: Awakening"
> 
> ...



I didn't understand that either.

And rather than take away our ability to save, why not just have more enemies coming at us at once? I'm sure it'd be a bigger challenge if Mario started off World 1-1 small, and with 12 Goombas coming at him at once. Furthermore, the Goombas could be more aggressive, and actually chase after Mario trying to kill him.


----------



## Judge Spear (Oct 20, 2013)

SirRob said:


> I don't think I could ever beat Zelda NES without saving. That blasted 6th dungeon!!!
> 
> Okay, so reading the article, I found this little gem: "Personally, I'd prefer they drop the person who keeps screwing up the art design for their game like...Fire Emblem: Awakening"
> 
> ...



Now I'm no FE fan, but it's got some solid art direction. WTF?

And It takes time, but any game can be done in one shot. I'm not trying it for the second quest though. God... o-o


----------



## TransformerRobot (Oct 20, 2013)

XoPachi said:


> Now I'm no FE fan, but it's got some solid art direction. WTF?
> 
> And It takes time, but any game can be done in one shot. I'm not trying it for the second quest though. God... o-o



Agreed, even games like Metal Slug...As long as you have enough quarters.

What's a pathetically easy Nintendo game that you want to be made harder? I'd like some harder Kirby games.


----------



## SirRob (Oct 20, 2013)

TransformerRobot said:


> And rather than take away our ability to save, why not just have more enemies coming at us at once? I'm sure it'd be a bigger challenge if Mario started off World 1-1 small, and with 12 Goombas coming at him at once. Furthermore, the Goombas could be more aggressive, and actually chase after Mario trying to kill him.


That's not really the reason why NES games were hard, though. It was bad controls (relative to today) and the inability to save/sparse checkpoints.


TransformerRobot said:


> What's a pathetically easy Nintendo game that you want to be made harder? I'd like some harder Kirby games.


Subspace Emissary on Intense is a hard Kirby game.


----------



## Judge Spear (Oct 20, 2013)

TransformerRobot said:


> Agreed, even games like Metal Slug...As long as you have enough quarters.
> 
> What's a pathetically easy Nintendo game that you want to be made harder? I'd like some harder Kirby games.



Everything. The only consistently hard game from Nintendo was killed off. So everything else, long running franchises anyway, are all that's left. And they've allll either never been too tough in the first place or lost their challenge bit by bit.

Also, I believe Rob was talking about longer games like Metroid and Zelda. A Metal Slug 1CC is the intent of the game, but something 30 hours (100%) like Zelda? mmmm Not likely. Not the first time.


----------



## TransformerRobot (Oct 20, 2013)

XoPachi said:


> Everything. The only consistently hard game from Nintendo was killed off. So everything else, long running franchises anyway, are all that's left. And they've allll either never been too tough in the first place or lost their challenge bit by bit.



Which one are you talking about that was consistently hard?


----------



## Alastair Snowpaw (Oct 20, 2013)

TransformerRobot said:


> Name at least 10 of those games.



street fighter, skullgirlls, Injustice: gods amoung us,ultimate marvel versus capcom 3, King of fighters 13, and most any other fighting game. I do believe that fighting games are the hardest genre out there since there will always be someone better than you and if you're the best someone will always come around and beat you eventually. also it's constantly changing difficulty.


----------



## Arshes Nei (Oct 20, 2013)

Super Meat Boy


----------



## Judge Spear (Oct 20, 2013)

TransformerRobot said:


> Which one are you talking about that was consistently hard?



F-Zero. 
GX was hailed as the 4th hardest game ever made at one point by IGN. Many people returned the game for it's difficulty despite many critics calling it the greatest racer ever made. But it was always extremely difficult from Super Nintendo to GBA.

I remember how hard it was to get all the medals in Starfox 64 as a kid too. lol


----------



## Infestissumam (Oct 20, 2013)

Games were more difficult in the NES was probably partially because the only game before home consoles were arcade machines, and arcade games were difficult in the name of you throwing more quarters into the machine.

My issues with a lot today's games are they are essentially either A: One huge fucking tutorial, or B: Following a waypoint the whole game. I think the era of SNES/N64 difficulty had the difficulty curve perfect. Rather than having lines upon lines of dialogue and loads of tutorials when attaining a new item or ability, you got to learn by inference. There was a sense of achievement in learning how something worked.

After being told for the millionth time how a red potion worked in Skyward Sword, I was pretty much done with the game. It was literally hand-holding the whole fucking time.


----------



## Judge Spear (Oct 20, 2013)

Infestissumam said:


> After being told for the millionth time how a red potion worked in Skyward Sword, I was pretty much done with the game. It was literally hand-holding the whole fucking time.



I this'd then unthis'd and this'd again about 3 times. I'm still not satisfied.


----------



## Alexxx-Returns (Oct 20, 2013)

I found most games to be remotely challenging when I was younger, before we got internet and I found walkthroughs. I don't really need new games to be harder, I just need to experience it for myself. When I was a kid, some games didn't get finished for years just because I couldn't figure it out. And when I did, man that was the most awesome feeling.


----------



## SirRob (Oct 20, 2013)

Infestissumam said:


> Games were more difficult in the NES was probably partially because the only game before home consoles were arcade machines, and arcade games were difficult in the name of you throwing more quarters into the machine.
> 
> My issues with a lot today's games are they are essentially either A: One huge fucking tutorial, or B: Following a waypoint the whole game. I think the era of SNES/N64 difficulty had the difficulty curve perfect. Rather than having lines upon lines of dialogue and loads of tutorials when attaining a new item or ability, you got to learn by inference. There was a sense of achievement in learning how something worked.
> 
> After being told for the millionth time how a red potion worked in Skyward Sword, I was pretty much done with the game. It was literally hand-holding the whole fucking time.


The SNES era was great for that. 
But the way a game teaches its controls doesn't really say anything about its difficulty.


----------



## Digitalpotato (Oct 20, 2013)

^ Indeed. Chrono Trigger certainly didn't tell you anything about how to play teh game beyond "Hey! I hear these guys can use magic! Test it out on me." and that game was quite easy. 



Infestissumam said:


> Games were more difficult in the NES was probably partially because the only game before home consoles were arcade machines, and arcade games were difficult in the name of you throwing more quarters into the machine.



Not only that, but they wanted you to call some hotline to get a game hint, or buy the official game guide. (Which may have been half completed because it was based off of a beta.) Nowadays the game guide is basically an art book with some extras. 

Then again though, every time I see someone complaining about the game treating the like a retard and getting bent out of shape over a tutorial mode, I think back to those online games where you're getting cussed out by other players for not knowing things the game never actually told you. If only we had games that did that: Not tell you how to play, and start punishing you for not knowing details the game never told you.

...oh wait a second. That's called "Dark Souls".


It's important to note that one key to making a good game is to make it approachable. You know... don't suddenly dump enough material to constitute an eight weeks correspondence course on your viewer's lap and say "Btw, study hard - test over chapters 1- 12 is in two hours." Some games aren't actually hard - they just look hard because they dump shit-tons of stuff in your lap at once. And some games that're very easy to pick up can be quite challenging. 
And one thing I actually do kind of like? When they give the really hard challenges out to people who LOOK or it, rather than just clubbing you over the head and say "here you go."


----------



## Judge Spear (Oct 20, 2013)

Chrono Trigger fucking owned.


----------



## Arshes Nei (Oct 20, 2013)

One of the reasons I got irritated with Okami was too long of a monologue that damn flea talked to fucking much. I know he had to teach me the mechanics of the game but it got irritating in the first part of the game.

Then you have gameplay that gives me mixed feelings like Shadow Hearts. That fucking spin the Judgement Wheel could be fun but it took away from the gameplay in my opinion. 

One of the funny things in FF is that in 7 you pretty much had to fight in the first part of the game, later they gave you a tutorial on basics to get better but I rather have that and it's an option where the story is a monologue on how to use the game. Something that later RPGs did and annoyed me.

3D Dot Game heroes is easy enough to figure out.


----------



## Saga (Oct 20, 2013)

Blazing lazers for the turbo-grafx was hard as hell, so was silent debuggers. To this day I haven't beaten either :/


----------



## TransformerRobot (Oct 20, 2013)

XoPachi said:


> F-Zero.
> GX was hailed as the 4th hardest game ever made at one point by IGN. Many people returned the game for it's difficulty despite many critics calling it the greatest racer ever made. But it was always extremely difficult from Super Nintendo to GBA.
> 
> I remember how hard it was to get all the medals in Starfox 64 as a kid too. lol



Harder than the Super NES version, are you kidding me? The Super NES version is nightmarish by comparison!! Only 1 turbo boost per lap and slower pit areas!!


----------



## Stratelier (Oct 20, 2013)

Infestissumam said:


> Games were more difficult in the NES was probably partially because the only game before home consoles were arcade machines, and arcade games were difficult in the name of you throwing more quarters into the machine.


Exactly.  The more often a machine goes from "Insert Coin" to "Game Over" during a fixed time interval, the more profit it makes for the arcade owner.



XoPachi said:


> Right. That's what they said about Skyward Sword. LOLOLOLOLOLOL


Skyward Sword did have some real difficulty, but much of it revolved around making sure YOU were swinging the Remote at the right angle to get past your opponent's defenses / parrying.  Like those four-armed Stalfos Knights....


----------



## Sioras F. Nightfire (Oct 20, 2013)

Distorted said:


> *I wouldn't mind something like Super Mario World type of difficulty. Getting to that special world was cray cray.*
> 
> 
> 
> Seriously, if I hear Omochao's voice one more time, I'm gonna toss my game through the window.



Didn't have much trouble getting to the Special World. Getting _through_ it was a different story. I've had my copy of SMW since 1993, mastered the game in '97, and I still have shit fits getting through Tubular.


----------



## Saga (Oct 20, 2013)

cat mario

/thread


----------



## Judge Spear (Oct 20, 2013)

Stratadrake said:


> Skyward Sword did have some real difficulty, but much of it revolved around making sure YOU were swinging the Remote at the right angle to get past your opponent's defenses / parrying. Like those four-armed Stalfos Knights....



Wasn't hard. Got old fast. I found flailing like mad got quicker results. The "dynamic" swordplay was nothing more than your typical Wii waggle game. Frankly, Raving Rabbids did it better.



Saga said:


> EZ Suit
> 
> /thread



.



TransformerRobot said:


> Harder than the Super NES version, are you kidding me? The Super NES version is nightmarish by comparison!! Only 1 turbo boost per lap and slower pit areas!!



Actually PLAY F-Zero GX and get back to me. o-o


----------



## Digitalpotato (Oct 20, 2013)

...you guys thought Super Mario World was hard? ; Even when I was younger I walked through the games - that was also before I had enough practice to more or less know every single trick that the game was throwing at me. (Gamers don't take their own experience into account - my uncle who's never played mario games before said Super Mario Galaxy was hard, yet everyone I hear bitches that it's too easy.)


----------



## Saga (Oct 20, 2013)

XoPachi said:


> .


gimme link


----------



## Judge Spear (Oct 20, 2013)

TransformerRobot...

[video=youtube;bTIStwdS5fU]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bTIStwdS5fU[/video]



Saga said:


> gimme link











Digitalpotato said:


> ...you guys thought Super Mario World was hard? ; Even when I was younger I walked through the games - that was also before I had enough practice to more or less know every single trick that the game was throwing at me. (Gamers don't take their own experience into account - my uncle who's never played mario games before said Super Mario Galaxy was hard, yet everyone I hear bitches that it's too easy.)



Mario 3 was way harder. World was challenging, but it was the special world that really shit on you.
And Galaxy was easy. Though for someone who doesn't play games, it may be tough.


----------



## Stratelier (Oct 20, 2013)

Most memorable level from Super Mario 3 was -- I think it was one of those pirahna stages from World 7 where you have to grab the Starman powerup and then RUN ACROSS AN ENDLESS FIELD OF PIRAHNA PLANTS looking for the next Starman before your invincibility wears off and you die.  Then the very mazelike fortress in the Valley of Bowser which (iirc) required you to locate a hidden P-switch door to get to the boss room....  yeah, some of those Mario 3 levels were brutal.


----------



## Judge Spear (Oct 20, 2013)

Stratadrake said:


> Most memorable level from Super Mario 3 was -- I think it was one of those pirahna stages from World 7 where you have to grab the Starman powerup and then RUN ACROSS AN ENDLESS FIELD OF PIRAHNA PLANTS looking for the next Starman before your invincibility wears off and you die.  Then the very mazelike fortress in the Valley of Bowser which (iirc) required you to locate a hidden P-switch door to get to the boss room....  yeah, some of those Mario 3 levels were brutal.



I honestly can't decide which Nintendo game is harder. 
Mario 3, GX, or Metroid 1.


----------



## Digitalpotato (Oct 20, 2013)

Stratadrake said:


> Most memorable level from Super Mario 3 was -- I think it was one of those pirahna stages from World 7 where you have to grab the Starman powerup and then RUN ACROSS AN ENDLESS FIELD OF PIRAHNA PLANTS looking for the next Starman before your invincibility wears off and you die.  Then the very mazelike fortress in the Valley of Bowser which (iirc) required you to locate a hidden P-switch door to get to the boss room....  yeah, some of those Mario 3 levels were brutal.



Yeah, I found Mario 3 to be the harder one until I started getting to the bonus levels in 3D land.


----------



## Judge Spear (Oct 20, 2013)

Mario 3 was so sadistic. lol
Took me years before I beat it. Then again, I was a kid so that probably didn't help.


----------



## SirRob (Oct 20, 2013)

Saga said:


> cat mario
> 
> /thread


Cat Mario's not hard, it just makes you rethink conventions.

Kaizo Mario's hard... if you don't use save states.

What do you guys define as hard? When I think of hard, I think of it as, 'the game doesn't want you to beat it', like arcade games. Stuff like time trials are hard too, like what Pachi does with F-Zero GX...

Also, more relevant to the topic, games that are hard imo are also games that try to draw out its playtime through its difficulty using conventions like having no check points, save features and having to start over from the beginning of the game if you get a game over.


----------



## Judge Spear (Oct 20, 2013)

SirRob said:


> Cat Mario's not hard, it just makes you rethink conventions.
> 
> Kaizo Mario's hard... if you don't use save states.
> 
> What do you guys define as hard? When I think of hard, I think of it as, 'the game doesn't want you to beat it', like arcade games.



Pretty much. Shit like Ikaruga. 50 minute 5 level game. Took me a year before seeing stage 4, another before I beat it, and 4 years before beating it on 1 life. I will *NEVER* see S++ rank. I can only get B rank...on level one. QnQ 

Alastair made a point earlier about how someone will always be better than you in fighters. Though while he thinks fighters are the hardest (not about to belittle his opinion), that logic actually extends to nearly every genre. I guarantee, I could never beat Helio...Helio what the fuck is his new name? SALIVA in anything made by Id software. And those people in Counter Strike? Fuck. THAT!

Close to home, I'd never beat CGN or Iowa's times in GX. Just not happening. So there is the competitive aspect, but it gets real ambiguous. So I usually just define a game's difficulty by what the devs intended it to be. 

And Kaizo Mario is...diabolical. I watched my friend's brother speed run it. I needed a rope, stool, and tree branch. What the fuck...


----------



## Digitalpotato (Oct 20, 2013)

SirRob said:


> Also, more relevant to the topic, games that are hard imo are also games that try to draw out its playtime through its difficulty using conventions like having no check points, save features and having to start over from the beginning of the game if you get a game over.



You're absolutely correct.

Many arcade games were actually really short games - in fact, you wouldn't be able to sell a game like that today because people bitch that a 15 hour game is too short. You'd only be able to sell it or like... $0.99 on the iOS or Android market.


----------



## Judge Spear (Oct 20, 2013)

Digitalpotato said:


> You're absolutely correct.
> 
> Many arcade games were actually really short games - in fact, you wouldn't be able to sell a game like that today because people bitch that a 15 hour game is too short. You'd only be able to sell it or like... $0.99 on the iOS or Android market.



This game was $20...new.

Reviewers called it a ripoff. lol


----------



## TransformerRobot (Oct 21, 2013)

XoPachi said:


> This game was $20...new.
> 
> Reviewers called it a ripoff. lol



Ripoff they say. Really? -_-

Yes, I can't stand when people say "Only 15 hours long?! Too short, waah!!". Well if you want a longer game than do what I do and go back to Pokemon!!


----------



## DarrylWolf (Oct 21, 2013)

No, if you're going to invest heavily in a game's plot than you have to make it easy enough for someone to see it through- but still hard enough to feel like an accomplishment. Nintendo games are perfect right now in terms of toughness.


----------



## TransformerRobot (Oct 21, 2013)

DarrylWolf said:


> No, if you're going to invest heavily in a game's plot than you have to make it easy enough for someone to see it through- but still hard enough to feel like an accomplishment. Nintendo games are perfect right now in terms of toughness.



Are you sure your not thinking of only Donkey Kong Country Returns? That's their hardest game in a while.


----------



## RTDragon (Oct 21, 2013)

Arshes Nei said:


> Final Fantasy isn't about RPGs but exploratory FMVs now.



True though FFIV DS is hard in a whole new way. (Especially since most things you leaned from the SNES, GB, and PS1 Versions don't apply in the DS version)


----------



## Arshes Nei (Oct 21, 2013)

Wasn't the latest DMC really short?
Remember Me was only about 12 hours?
I remember quite a few games being pretty short asking for much more than $20


----------



## Digitalpotato (Oct 21, 2013)

RTDragon said:


> True though FFIV DS is hard in a whole new way. (Especially since most things you leaned from the SNES, GB, and PS1 Versions don't apply in the DS version)



I didn't think it was that hard.


----------



## RTDragon (Oct 21, 2013)

@Digitalpotato You did have to think outside the box though with battles especially boss ones.


----------



## Stratelier (Oct 21, 2013)

RTDragon said:


> True though FFIV DS is hard in a whole new way. (Especially since most things you leaned from the SNES, GB, and PS1 Versions don't apply in the DS version)


Because the US release of FF4 was actually the original game's "easy mode".  In FF4 DS, they totally rebuilt the difficulty curve to be more like the original Japanese release, and some of the boss battles (especially with improved enemy AI scripts) really SHOW it -- even if you put a Slow on them at turn 1 you're still in for a righteous fight.


----------



## Digitalpotato (Oct 21, 2013)

RTDragon said:


> @Digitalpotato You did have to think outside the box though with battles especially boss ones.



Well rather than just attack attack attack curaja, it was more "Debuff them, buff yourself, attack attack attack, DEFEND." It at least helped that Edward was much more useful in the DS version. 

I didn't even augment my characters and I didn't find it too hard at all. (Or rather, I only used augments for trash mobs.)


----------



## Sarcastic Coffeecup (Oct 21, 2013)

Hard games. HA!
You can't make a hard game that a lot of people will want to play. Kids are too dumb for that nowadays. You have to achieve or unlock something every other minute or else they'll stop playing it.
I tried playing CoDBlOps II when it was in free weekends on steam. You unlocked or leveled up EVERY MP GAME.
And that is the nr1 selling shooter franchise. Come the fuck on. I WANT players to notice this and support games like RO2.

Not to mention SP. They are walks in a park with blind grandmas shooting a peashooter your way. They MAKE the AI run at you and shoot the air so you can have an easy shot, or then they make them peek at you from cover a thousand times exposing their whole body for you to shoot and this grinds my gears very badly. It also feels like every game has to be a tour de grande across a thousand different sceneries and countries, always going more exotic. I am waiting for my Hawaiji-siberia-underwater-Sahara-London-Space game.
Also worth mentioning how it is so often the standard Russians or Middle-Easterners who are the bad guys who have nukes are about to blow up the States or something. 

Four simple steps to improve fps games by a mile:
1: Give the guns fucking recoil and make aiming harder
2: A story that does not involve nukes and USA's political enemies.
3: UNLOCKING/ACHIEVING stuff rather than GETTING it on a silver platter.
4: AI that does not have a deathwish


----------



## Judge Spear (Oct 21, 2013)

...No.
Don't make aiming harder. Quake, Tribes, and Serious Sam were hard enough without ludicrous realism. I struggle enough trying to make a build that eliminates recoil in shooters.


----------



## Arshes Nei (Oct 21, 2013)

Need some old school Kid Icarus.


----------



## Schwimmwagen (Oct 21, 2013)

XoPachi said:


> ...No.
> Don't make aiming harder. Quake, Tribes, and Serious Sam were hard enough without ludicrous realism. I struggle enough trying to make a build that eliminates recoil in shooters.



Playing RO2 and aiming your Mosin by resting it on the rim of a trench while arty shells fall and bullets land near your face and then *just* getting that fatal shot accross the no-mans land is really, really satisfying. I struggle to have the same satisfaction when I run, jump, and score a headshot, as cool as that is.

It's like actually aiming a gun at another soldier in a battlefield who happens to have the upper hand and can kill you incredibly easily, as opposed to the feeling of roving around and clicking a moving desktop icon repeatedly.

RO2 is a very, very different sort of game when compared to classic shooters like Quake and even more different to garbage shooters like CoD.

Quake tests your twitch skills, accuracy, and manuevering. RO2 tests you by playing with your fleshy fragile mortal self's vulnerability and shortcomings.

They're both good difficult games, but they present their difficulty in very different ways and emphasise on different points and ideas.

And what I believe coffee was referring to in terms of guns was how they behave. They recoil, they have a much bigger report, they smoke, they make a lot of noise, they respond to 3D objects in the game world, you use the range dialling, you lead targets, you compensate for drop, you even manually bolt the rifles, and they feel like they _really fuck shit up_. I play the Serious Sam games, and as much as I like them, I feel that the gunplay would be infinitely more interesting if they were a little more than a visual representation of farting damage at enemies along a straight line. Killing Floor uses more or less the same "rules" as any other ordinary shooter, but the gunplay is hugely improved with the quality of sound and animations.


----------



## Judge Spear (Oct 21, 2013)

I just don't think games need that amount of realism. Not ALL games. If Serious Sam was realistic, it'd be unplayable and completely lose it's charm. At least at the higher difficulties.



Arshes Nei said:


> Need some old school Kid Icarus.



That game was a pain in the ass. ;w;
Ninja Gaiden was worse though...


----------



## Schwimmwagen (Oct 21, 2013)

XoPachi said:


> I just don't think games need that amount of realism. Not ALL games. If Serious Sam was realistic, it'd be unplayable and completely lose it's charm. At least at the higher difficulties.



No, I know, different games are to be played in different ways but the point is that I think more FPS games should put more emphasis on the weapons used in the game.

The weapon is in front of you for the entire game, so why not treat it like an important character rather than a secondary game object?

This isn't a gameplay choice, but an aesthetic one.


----------



## Kosdu (Oct 21, 2013)

If you thinking adding more enemies or making enemies harder is a good way to balance a game, it is being done wrong.

What I like seeing is realistic damage and intelligent A.I., even Far Cry 3 on max difficulty is a bit tame.

My two cents(ances).


----------



## Sarcastic Coffeecup (Oct 22, 2013)

Gibby said:


> They're both good difficult games, but they present their difficulty in very different ways and emphasise on different points and ideas.
> 
> And what I believe coffee was referring to in terms of guns was how they behave. They recoil, they have a much bigger report, they smoke, they make a lot of noise, they respond to 3D objects in the game world, you use the range dialling, you lead targets, you compensate for drop, you even manually bolt the rifles, and they feel like they _really fuck shit up_. I play the Serious Sam games, and as much as I like them, I feel that the gunplay would be infinitely more interesting if they were a little more than a visual representation of farting damage at enemies along a straight line. Killing Floor uses more or less the same "rules" as any other ordinary shooter, but the gunplay is hugely improved with the quality of sound and animations.


More or less this.

The current trend for games is to make guns so easy to use it's stupid.
CoD games have absolutely no recoil. Neither does Blacklight: Retribution or many of the newer games. 
Compare that to the punishing AK kick on KF when you're lvl 0-3.
 If CoD adopted that recoil it'd make things a lot better. Now you can simply press down a button and the game handles the gun's recoil itself. 
If however you wouldn't have the game pull the gun down for you, it'd make prolonged bursts more challenging and you'd lose spamming.


----------

