AWKWARD ZOMBIE

Isn't the over simplification of video games in general a huge problem right now to hardcore gamers?
I don't consider myself a gamer at all, but I hear this complaint a lot that games are being simplified so that they appeal to more casual people, and are more easily breaten so you can buy more games?
I guess I just don't understand why I see so many people pick on Zelda for this reason, other than they remember being the games being more difficult and challenging when they were kids.

And if you find Fi annoying, don't use her. She doesn't pop up while you're playing a whole lot, and she says like 3 lines and disappears.

Maybe more games should have an option available to turn tutorials off. Or different difficulty levels. Fire Emblem games give tutorials if you play on Easy mode, but when you graduate to the harder levels the tutorials vanish.

I agree with Kamak. The "super modes" are only there to assist you when you've given up on trying to beat a level. It's not like the game forces you to take the powerup or activate the super mode or whatever. It's just another option. For example, in Super Mario 3D Land, if you die 3 times a block appears near the checkpoint that has the Golden Tanooki Suit. You can just as easily run past it and go through the level like you would normally; I've done it countless times because I don't believe I should be using an invincibility powerup to beat a level. And even if you do take it, you can flub a jump and fall to your death. So it doesn't instantly win the game for you, you still have to make your jumps and avoid hazards. Admittedly the suit makes it 10 times easier, but you're still in control.

You say that gamers shouldn't need to use a crutch, and that they should learn through their failure? Going back to my 3D Land example, there are plenty of times where the golden suit was offered to me and I refused, going through the level and figuring out what I need to do on my own. It's a choice of the player whether or not to use the guides and super-power-ups. Some games do indeed have tutorials and hints forced on you, and that's a bit of a shame, but most of the time (at least on most games I've played) you can disable hints or skip through the tutorials. The issue is with gamers like yourself who cry out that games have gotten too simple instead of just playing the game. It's extremely easy to ignore all the super mode features and just play the way you want to play. And regarding tutorials, how else do you expect new gamers to get into a game? Sure it was different back in the old days, but it's not the old days anymore; technology has advanced to the point of being able to include a hands-on demonstration of how to play a game.

There's also the fact that, you know, Nintendo is marketing towards the younger generation who may have not played a game in their life.

If someone has to use an item that plays the game for then then quite honestly they have no business playing the game. They should get used to seeing the game over screen until they improve. Without a risk of failure then there's no joy in success.

It's not like Nintendo games are even hard these days.

Sol Reaper wrote:
There's also the fact that, you know, Nintendo is marketing towards the younger generation who may have not played a game in their life.

When they marketed their games for me when I was a child, I hadnt played a game in my life either. They were a challenge. Hard as hell. But you remembered them. And before you tell me to shut up and play the games, I have. Thats why Im complaining. There is no excuse. If this is what you want to raise your kids on, spoon-fed non difficulty, because your afraid you might offend someone, you will. Youll offend peoples intelligence, and while I know you can skip the tutorials and powerups, its the fact that theres now an OPTION that really bothers me. I didnt have an option back then. I had to play through it the hard way. And you know, I think I was all the better for it too.

Madican wrote:If someone has to use an item that plays the game for then then quite honestly they have no business playing the game. They should get used to seeing the game over screen until they improve. Without a risk of failure then there's no joy in success.

It is nice of you to tell others how to play and enjoy games.

I agree that challenging games are better and more rewarding, but I also think that easier options should be there for people that want them.

Cori wrote:Maybe more games should have an option available to turn tutorials off. Or different difficulty levels. Fire Emblem games give tutorials if you play on Easy mode, but when you graduate to the harder levels the tutorials vanish.

Yesss. But none of that bullshit where you have to beat the game to unlock hard mode. I just want to play hard mode.

Kitsune Dzelda wrote:

Sol Reaper wrote:
There's also the fact that, you know, Nintendo is marketing towards the younger generation who may have not played a game in their life.

When they marketed their games for me when I was a child, I hadnt played a game in my life either. They were a challenge. Hard as hell. But you remembered them. And before you tell me to shut up and play the games, I have. Thats why Im complaining. There is no excuse. If this is what you want to raise your kids on, spoon-fed non difficulty, because your afraid you might offend someone, you will. Youll offend peoples intelligence, and while I know you can skip the tutorials and powerups, its the fact that theres now an OPTION that really bothers me. I didnt have an option back then. I had to play through it the hard way. And you know, I think I was all the better for it too.

Games were harder because they required a bigger investment. Games used to be like putting down $100-$120 now, and that was for something that, nowadays, with an intimate knowledge of how to play them, you could beat a game in half an hour.

The games were designed to kill you, or punish you for things that you couldn't control. You ran too fast and hit a koopa, or you thought that gap was going to be short and it ended up being bigger because it wasn't entirely on the screen yet. The only way to beat them was trial and error and memorization.

And that's ignoring things like crappy hitboxes, bad design, or requirements for perfectly timed jumps because they didn't realize how snug everything that wanted to kill you was when the level was put together (Megaman was especially bad about this). High learning curves were common for games, if not because the game itself was hard, then because you had to teach yourself about the nuances of what did and didn't work with poorly programmed enemies.

At that point, gaming was still the same as it was in arcade cabinets, designed to eat time, send you back at the beginning, and keep you hooked to keep trying to get further than you did before. And hey, if there was a bug in the game that killed the player unfairly, that made the game last even longer. Some games began implementing password systems or save files to keep people from rage quitting when they lose their 10+ hours of progress, but mostly, games resisted this in order to preserve longevity.

I think gamers romanticize old school gaming a bit. The struggles were satisfying when things worked out, but it's easy to forget that some of those victories came up after hours of being lost or getting your booty handed to you by just not knowing what to expect. If some of these strategies came back in games, I'm certain many "hardcore gamers" would cry foul.

And you hate them putting an option in because you had no option? With as many games that had cheat codes (many that could be assessed without external hardware), passwords, and shortcuts, I'm calling BS on that. Mario had the world pipes and flutes, Pokemon games had the early trades that gave you a fast-growing Pokemon strong against the gym (in case you picked a starter that gave you a disadvantage), Zelda had fairies and the ability to buy hints on where to find items and where to go next, Megaman had Beat to save you from dying, and many games had obvious places to farm lives where the game was too challenging/shoddily designed and would eat up lives. Games ad options, and oftentimes, people used them without a second thought at the fact that they were taking the easy way out. After all, it still led to the end of the game, even if they only played through the first world of SMB3 and are now at World 8 through flutes.

The fact of the matter is, well-designed games have generally always had ways to help the players out and give them "the holy grail" of gaming. Some were more hidden than others, but they were there if the person wanted to use them.

And in that way, gaming hasn't changed.

All it comes down to is what sells. If people keep buying "easy" games, something about them must be working for the majority, and there /are/ still really difficult games for those that want them.

I often find that there are still ways to make "easy" games harder by adding in your own challenges. That's how the Nuzlocke challenge was born in Pokemon games, after all, and there's also proletariats for PC games. You don't always have that option, but its something. If you find fun in challenging yourself, which most people do in games, you'll find a way to do it.

It's not just about making them easier, it's about dumbing them down and simplyfying them. Them being easy can be solved with difficulty modes, but when devs start making all levels linear because idiots get confused, you're stuck with downright shitty games (this doesn't really happen with Nintendo games as far as I can tell though, so at least that's something).

One thing I will say in favour of the idea of the Super Guide (if not the implementation) is that if there is a system in place that allows players to skip over levels they have difficulty with, then the designers shouldn't need to make the levels really easy so that 'anyone can beat this'. Obviously there should be limits, and letting people skip over levels entirely can somewhat cheapen the sucess of those who completed them legitimately, though that then falls back into the territory of the previously discussed passwords and shortcuts. Personally, I feel if developers want to let less-skilled players still get a somewhat full experience of the game, they should focus on making an 'easy' mode and leave the challenge in the 'normal' mode.

Man I just killed that four armed skeleton boss dude in the triforce temple in skyward sword with a single heart left. Tensest battle ever since I walked in there with like 5.

Fuck, that battle scared the shit out of me because it came out of nowhere and that was the last thing I needed to do in that dungeon.

Didn't help that he had so many forms too.

Ya know, That temple was my favorite Final Dungeon in a Zelda game.
It was a good length, fairly challenging, and the whole Collecting the Triforce thing was interesting. It's kinda the same "Do the dungeons again" thing Zelda has been doing for a while now, but I feel like it pulled it off in an interesting way.

Finally finished Skyward Sword. Demise felt like a bit of a pushover at the end.