Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sat 29th Jun 2013 20:18 UTC
Games "In recent years, an odd consensus has arisen where many believe that games are easier than they used to be. In many cases it's true, and it isn't surprising, as extreme competition between titles has created the need for games to be immediately entertaining as soon as you press the start button. As a consequence, many older - and potentially newer - players consider these games of yesteryear much more difficult. The immense challenge Wii U owners have experienced with virtual console games is evidence of that. Are these newer adventures really easier? Or has the design philosophy for video games improved instead?" Interesting take. I will tell you this, though - take a game like Dragon Age (the only one that matters, so the first one). It's immediately accessible to newcomers at the easy and normal setting, but try stepping it up to nightmare mode, and you're suddenly back in old-fashioned hardcore territory where you'll need to apply every little bit there is to know about the game to be able to finish it (tip for DA fanatics: finish the game without a single character going down in combat, on nightmare. I did it. It's hell). My point is: sometimes, you have to up the difficulty or create your own challenges to find the rewarding difficulty of gaming yore.
Permalink for comment 565933
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: They are easier, because money
by Doc Pain on Sat 29th Jun 2013 23:42 UTC in reply to "They are easier, because money"
Doc Pain
Member since:

IMO. this is the best take on this question so far "If Quake was done today"

ALDI SÜD!!! :-)

I think that the games are easier today because it makes them accessible to a greater number of players, which in turn increases business prospects for the game studios.

In my (limited) experience, games offer more help for the player, more explanations, less "try and find out". I've started my "career" in ego shooters with things like "Wolfenstein 3-D", later DooM (successors and extensions), and then the original Quake. All of them were DOS games, played on a real DOS system. Then I encountered Quake II and found it easier because you did not have to remember certain things (what to pick up, where to go, what to do, and so on). With RTCW, telling a story inside the game (something the previous mentioned ones didn't really do), I noticed that gaming became easier. But with the "integrated story", they also became more interesting. I did not just explore all the level design, textures and enemies, but did also follow the story with the "What's next?" question in mind. This continued with games like "Jedi Knight". I've always started playing such games in the hardest mode from the beginning, and it really felt easier the newer the games got. Recently, I tried "DooM 3" and "Quake 4" (demo only), and regarding game play, they felt much easier and also much slower. Sure, better graphics, artificial intelligence and all, yes, but also more complex. Can I say "more complicated"? Not really. But the more complex a game gets, the more it tends to help you, usually without request (in order not to scare novice players who might feel lost and quit the game). This makes them appear easier because the player gets "pre-chewed" game content for a "more fluent" gaming experience.

(I'm far away from being a hardcore gamer, and my experience is very limited (genre and titles), so this is just a very individual statement.)

Reply Parent Score: 6