Game Difficulty - What's [Hard] to you?

K

Kahnvex

2[H]4U
Joined
Sep 5, 2001
Messages
3,297
Reading another thread, I became curious:

What do we define as difficulty in games? What's YOUR benchmark for a "Hard" difficulty?

Where's the breakdown between bullshit, and good old ball busting till you get better at it?

A lot of folks bitch about difficulty in games lately. "Games are too easy" "Designed for console kiddies" "insert random complaint of the day here" etc.

So looking at the past and the present, let's hear some opinions on what game difficulty is or isn't


Where's the line?
 
I'd say CoD on Veteran takes things a bit too far to the point of not being enjoyable. I finished CoD 1 - 4 on Veteran but it's just too excessive and frustrating for me. Hardened is a nice challenge without being bombarded by bullshit at the start of a mission.

I just played The Witcher on Hard and I thoroughly enjoyed the experience. I like that it doesn't necessarily make things more difficult but forces you to actually utilize parts of the game like alchemy/potions.
 
If single player games had good AI, and difficulty only changed how intelligently enemies behave, then it's good. Unfortunately, most AI isn't up to the task and moving difficulty simply means padding enemy stats or weakening yours.

The [H] way is to go multiplayer. Nothing like fellow human beings showing you what you've got. There's a danger you'll crack, lose all your self confidence, and start hacking to win though, you see it all the time.
 
single player games provide very little difficulty these days thanks to instant saves. MMO's are another story, but most difficulty in MMO PVE stems from working together as a group and not from the complexity of the encounters themselves.

to me the only difficulty in video games comes from the skill of the human opponents you are facing. i am much less interested in complex AI and puzzle features as i am in game balancing.
 
Theres no other satisfaction when you out smart another human being. :p
 
Most console games tend toward "bullshit" hard I've found. As far as PC gaming go, I like a good challenge for multiplayer because you end up being frustrated around other people (and that somehow makes it alright), but overly-difficult single player games are pointlessly painful.
 
It really varies from person to person. For example, I never found any CoD games on Veteran to be remotely difficult, but I guess for other people they can be.

I guess for me, the only difficulty I don't like is if they're cheap, like many older games.

Wizardry 4 is an example of an older game which is near impossible to beat (and it's an RPG!), but that's mainly due to being extremely cheap. Yeah, you can survive longer with skill, but sooner or later an opponent will instant kill you and your party, and there's nothing you could do about it.

SNK games, along with many fighting games, are also notorious for being cheap. The bosses base their moves off of your input, and have higher priority than all your moves, so outside of exploiting the game, there's very little you can do to win.

Rhythm games such as Rock Band or DDR though are just hard. SHMUPs I would also put as hard. Skill can make you a better player and there are no cop-outs to just frustrate you.
 
While it isn't a PC game and I wouldn't say it was hard per say but required knowing how to use your character and skills I found Demons Souls to be a great balance. Enemies were challenging but you never felt like you died cheaply cause you knew why you died. You really had to learn how to use your classes abilities and time things correctly.

Each time I died in it, while I would be angry I died, it was never towards the game and towards myself cause I knew what I did wrong. That is the best challenge imo when it rest on you and not towards just making the enemies retardedly powerful and have perfect aim.
 
1. When I only have X lives left and Y continues to go.
2. When I actually have to conserve the items I find.
3. When I to restart a map/level/round because I keep telling myself that I have to be 100% perfect with all the moves I make.
 
I hate multiplayer games unless I know, personally, the group of people I'm playing with.

I also think developers need to be working more on the AI of a game than the graphics. AI to the level of FEAR (1st one) should be the minimum allowed with a current release, but we keep buying shit so we keep getting shit.

That said, the most fun I've had lately is F1 2010, racing the clock to get the pole position, or getting pit strategy perfect and actually winning a race is awesome. I was jumping up and down when I took the pole and won in Montreal
 
Hard was my first real FPS (around 2002), which was serious sam:second edition on easy. I would play until I ragequit, and then start back 5 minutes later. some sections literally took me days to get through. damn I loved it. :)

but nowadays lots of stuff annoys me if it is just the developer not having any good ideas and they are being a dick. as an example, I hate "puzzle" monsters that you cannot kill, no matter how good you are. Then later you meet them and they are regular monsters. I also hate spawn triggers, especially when the monsters get put behind you. just cheap there.
 
I don't know if I can give a specific criteria for what I consider to be cheap or challenging. It mostly depends on how the game is designed. Something like the modern Ninja Gaiden games I would call cheap, while the older ones I'd label as more of a challenge. I think for me it comes down to how the game throws the difficulty at you. If its cheap enemies with cheap moves, a piss poor camera, insane numbers of said cheap enemies, and the game expecting you not to learn from your actions but instead to essentially button mash until you get lucky its not a true challenge, its a test of frustration. It simply isn't fun.

When games are truly a challenge they expect you to think and react. Sometimes they'll put limitations on your lives and continues (loved how Steel Battalion did it), but even when they don't they don't just throw cheap crap at you. Fallout 1 and 2 were truly challenging games at times. They could also be frustrating as well.
 
COD2 on Veteran was one of the hardest single player FPS I've played.
Grenade and RPG spam to the max. It takes a lot of luck to clear some of the areas.
Haven't played a FPS that hard since. Racing and fighting games on hard always gives a challenge.
 
Classic X-Com: UFO Defense... [Hard] even on normal. Had to friggin cheat and hex edit my saves to level the playing field. Also, internet wasn't really 'in' back then, so you're really on your own regarding strategy. But, God, I loved that game to death... I even remember that the game itself being around 5mb, and the saves would reach 50mb, and 50mb was kinda a big deal back then, lol...
 
cod on veteran is more luck than anything, but i do it for every game.

it has me raging by the end, but it's always so worth it... in a twisted way.
 
I like the variety of opinions on display. I think that compared to Doom on Nightmare, yeah maybe games nowadays on Normal might be easier, but I think the harder difficulties are right up there on new games when it comes to the tougher difficulties.

A couple examples I can think of, and totally agree with: CoD on Veteran. I've done it on all of them since 2. Number 3 and WaW, I can't finish on Veteran, had to drop to Hardened. In the 3rd one, you can't hardly get over the wall in the first real combat level without getting killed. Treyarch takes the cheating-ass to a whole new level when it comes to that stuff.

In CoD2, speaking of grenade spam, there was a part late in the game when you were assaulting bunkers. Literally, LITERALLY, on one portion, the grenades would come from beyond the tree line, bounce in the door, and land at your feet. No enemies in sight, just grenade spawn from nothing. Cheating-ass at it's finest there. The missile bunker level in Cod4:MW also brings to mind rage and pain. Timer based checkpoints on Veteran: Awesome

Anybody remember the expansion packs for the C&C games? Those were ALL way tougher than the regular games they accompanied, but passable. Trial and Error all the way.

I know Halo is taboo on the PC forums, and I don't want to get everybody riled up, but I do like what Bungie does with their difficulties. The enemy AI comes to get you. You hide, it rushes. You rush, it runs and flanks. It gives the game a give and take that's missing in some of the cover based pop-n-shoots. Reach however, borders on the ridiculous, and is extremely difficult by yourself on Legendary. Almost like a farewell fuck you to the die-hards. With 4 people, it gets even worse.

A recent PC/Console game I can think of that I feel did the harder difficulty to a T was Batman: Arkham Asylum. Your abilities and health weren't nerfed, your skills were intact, but you had to counter the enemy based on their animations and wind up. The stealth sections were entirely beatable, but you had to pre-plan, and execute clean. I loved it personally. Anytime you died, it was basically your fault. Do it again, but better.

Even the latest Splinter Cell I had a blast with, sneaking around and setting traps. Loved it on the hardest.

I agree that too many console games rely on player nerfing and god-enemy accuracy and damage. FPS's are by far the worst offenders. I still trudge through a lot of the BS ones, but the "why" gets lost on me when I'm on my 40th death.
 
jad0083 said:
Classic X-Com: UFO Defense... [Hard] even on normal. Had to friggin cheat and hex edit my saves to level the playing field. Also, internet wasn't really 'in' back then, so you're really on your own regarding strategy. But, God, I loved that game to death... I even remember that the game itself being around 5mb, and the saves would reach 50mb, and 50mb was kinda a big deal back then, lol...
Click to expand...

That game was a perfect example of hard without being ridiculous, sorta. With some really bad luck you'd get wiped, with some really good luck you'd faceroll. But for the most part strategy and tactics are played an important roll. I always hated those alien cheapshots out of doors though...

Would love a remake of this done with nicer graphics, still turn-based, add in more guns/options. (ie; checking doors, fiber optic cameras, flashbangs, etc).


Another good example of difficulty is in some of the older RPGs. Your party was weaker than the enemy, but with the right tactics, teamwork and spells you could win out. Mistakes were punished hard, and tough fights took numerous tries to beat. More modern RPGs are easy enough to win with fireball first, ask later.
(Though the first troll-boss in the tower in Dragon Age is a good example of difficult without being impossible I find).
 
I got the "HD" versions of Serious Sam and I thought parts of it weren't human;y possible (The 2 billion horse-sekeleton-things galloping on top of you). I had to play it over and over and over to get through.... damn near kilt me.

Other than that, back in the day.... Contra and Ghouls 'n' Ghosts (the end boss) on the Super NES were really hard!

Yes, and like the OP said, COD on Veteran is a real ball buster. Especially the Special Ops mod (MWF2) and the "Mile High Club" in MWF(1).
 
Crysis and Demon's Souls are some recent examples of hard difficulty done right.

Most developers just lower your health by 50% and call it a day.
 
Very old games tended to require memory of the specific levels and movements through them to progress so weren't so much difficult but required a lot of replay to get correct.

Then games moved away from that a lot and tend to chuck more dynamic situations at the player which reward thinking on your feet and actual skill, which I prefer.

Unfortunately that appears to be on the downturn, there is a lot of dumbing down difficulty in PC gaming because of multi-platform development with consoles, we naturally find aiming and moving with mice and keyboards much easier than with gamepads so the difficulty doesn't translate well.

Fast forward to modern day, there are way too many console features leaking through to the PC versions which are making games really easy, regenerating health, grenade indicators etc. Back in the original HL you didn't get regenerating health or stupid grenade indicators, you were expected to use your eyes and brain to spot hazards and avoid them.

It's killed competitive play a lot, we have no modern equivalents of things like counter-strike and unreal tournament that take extreme amounts of dexterity and quick reflexes to play.
 
Agreed with Demon's Souls being one of the best recent games in terms of difficulty. It felt like an accomplishment every time a boss died - the one time I didn't mind that the game gives achievements for killing a boss.

Recently I've been replaying Descent 1 / 2 on insane difficulty, cold starting every level (new game between every level so only two lives and no weapon carryover). The game is actually amazingly balanced when played that way yet very challenging too. It really forces you to explore every level fully and find all of the secrets instead of just blasting through it with a huge ordinance stockpile. Inching your score towards 50,000 pts to gain that extra life feels like an achievement as well.

Kind of a shame that very few games use a respawn based system in singleplayer anymore. I suppose Demon Soul's is close in that respect since your souls fall on the ground (although it could do without the complete enemy respawn). Respawning with a set certain number of lives is much more tense than regenerative health on a single life.
 
Being more of a multi-player person, I usually just play on the Normal setting to experience the story.
 
New Vegas, apparently, has a hardcore mode - but unfortunately, it looks like you have to drink and eat, pretty much constantly, to keep your health up, and that for me is more annoying than it is fun. You have to sleep as well, nor do stimpacks heal immediately - I can deal with these last two, but this business of having to drink all the time turns the game into an ongoing Quest For Water.

I might try out Hardcore mode after I've finished playing on Fun mode though.
 
WabeWalker said:
New Vegas, apparently, has a hardcore mode - but unfortunately, it looks like you have to drink and eat, pretty much constantly, to keep your health up, and that for me is more annoying than it is fun. You have to sleep as well, nor do stimpacks heal immediately - I can deal with these last two, but this business of having to drink all the time turns the game into an ongoing Quest For Water.

I might try out Hardcore mode after I've finished playing on Fun mode though.
Click to expand...

This is what worries me about New Vegas's hardcore mode as well. It sounds like a really good idea on the drawing board to ramp up difficulty but piss poor in actual game play. Perhaps they will tweak it some in patches but I won't be playing it in hardcore mode.
 
Crysis on it's hardest difficulty setting, with my suit power halved and regen times doubled by editing diff_bauer.cfg.
 
In all honesty, i play games on easy/normal. I don't like to be frustrated because anymore they are just games to me, way more serious things in life to worry about.
 
I usually play games on easy. I'm more interested in exploration/storyline than I am in being frustrated or having my feeble dexterity challenged.

That being said, usually after I beat a game on an easier setting, I'll usually ramp up the difficulty to hard/very hard and see how far I can get playing through it again... So I guess I do enjoy a nice challenge.

I just remember playing Nintendo Hard games back in the day, and actually enjoy hammering on a game until I beat it.. Now that I'm pushing 40, I'm afraid all that cursing and screaming at a game is going to give me a heart attack. I guess I should have kept myself in better shape! :D
 
i think its quite interesting to see the difference in what people consider difficult. wow is a perfect example. the difference in DPS output between 2 people playing the same class, with the same gear/skills/talent trees can be astronomical.

i remember when need for speed: underground first came out. i was playing the game and my dad was watching me. after a few races he asked if he could try. it was amazing how bad he was. he had to glance at the arrow keys every couple of seconds to make sure he was pressing the correct buttons. just the concept of controlling right and left with his pointer and ring finger was completely foreign to him and he crashed every few seconds. the controls actually completely turned him off from wanting to play the game anymore. the same thing happened a couple years ago when he tried to play my xbox 360, he just didnt get the controller and after a few minutes he wanted to stop because he couldnt control the game effectively.

i wonder how many people feel this way about video games, they cant get into them because they cannot interact with the game effectively. this would make the game extremely difficult even on the lowest difficulty settings. i think that this might be more common with older generations. i guess this is why nintendo is doing so well with the Wii, you dont need to understand how to play games to play it and have fun (well i guess the Wii is fun to some people).
 
Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles on the NES. Thats the staple of my "Hard O Meter" FUCK YOU ELECTRIC PLANTS!.
 
Last edited:
I found Ninja Gaiden on the original Xbox to be the perfect difficulty in a game. Haven't played the newer ones so I can't comment on them. But you want a game to be hard enough that you die a couple of times each level and that you need to take a couple of shots at a boss to bring them down. Otherwise you might as well be watching a movie :p Likewise you dont usually want to die 30 or 40 times to get past a stage otherwise it just gets boring.
 
Superfly3176 said:
In all honesty, i play games on easy/normal. I don't like to be frustrated because anymore they are just games to me, way more serious things in life to worry about.
Click to expand...

I actually started playing a lot of my singleplayer games on easy despite being an adept gamer, the reason is that I find games more cinematic now a days and when you constantly die over and over at some part in the game where the developers have unreasonably spiked the difficulty then it just pulls me out of the immersion and completely ruins the experience for me.

Playing on easy I can usually fly through single players without losing/dying and it really helps support the cinematic movie feel of the game. Plus I hate having to repeat sections I've already completed, and without quicksave in a lot of games making it easier reduces that.

If I want a challenge I'll play online :)
 
Some of the Starcraft 2 Achievements were pretty challenging in a fun way. When I first got the game, I started on brutal, and only moved on to the next mission after I completed all 3 achievements per level. I'm a long time SC player, so I never found any challenge to be impossible, but a few took a number of tries.

When I got to the last mission on brutal, it's like everything before was kiddie play. I was saving almost every 3 minutes as check points, and many times I had to start completely over. After months of playing in the plat/diamond leagues, I recently I started the campaign again on brutal and it was all ez-cake until I got to the last mission again. This time I decided to take out the nydus reinforcements and take the mind control zerg upgrade. It was just as hard as the first time I completed it.


The experience of a "difficult" game loses its flare when you read up about it. I enjoy a variety of difficulties depending on the game, but some games, that first play though experience when using only your knowledge (no interwebs) is unrepeatable. I fell in love with X-Com:Apocalypse and hardly used the internet my first time through. It wasn't even the hardest difficulty. Now I can play that game in a day on superhuman without losing a unit (still saved a lot though). I vowed to beat Demons Souls without reading a guide, and man was that fun. I got it the day before halloween and playing online turned all the worlds to black (hardest difficulty). I didnt know it at the time, but man that was tough. I learned each level on my own without any guides.

Then there are games that mask "difficulty" by not telling you anything. I think theres a fine line between letting you learn things on your own, and keeping you in the dark about mechanics you'd never know without going online and reading about it. Those badly designed games make you spend more time reading about the game then actually playing the game.
 
F-Zero GX has been the most challenging thing I've played in the past 6-7 years?
Quite a satisfying moment beating that game..
 
I played Borderlands on easiest with all guns/ammo and god mode on, and still kept getting my ass handed to me.

Three hours in, I couldn't figure out how to defeat someone, and gave up!

(Games are just getting too damn difficult if god/all ammo/all etc just isn't enough!)
 
Tolyngee said:
I played Borderlands on easiest with all guns/ammo and god mode on, and still kept getting my ass handed to me.
Click to expand...

How?


Three hours in, I couldn't figure out how to defeat someone, and gave up!

(Games are just getting too damn difficult if god/all ammo/all etc just isn't enough!)
Click to expand...

No offense man but I hope this is a joke post.
 
PrincessFrosty said:
I actually started playing a lot of my singleplayer games on easy despite being an adept gamer, the reason is that I find games more cinematic now a days and when you constantly die over and over at some part in the game where the developers have unreasonably spiked the difficulty then it just pulls me out of the immersion and completely ruins the experience for me.

Playing on easy I can usually fly through single players without losing/dying and it really helps support the cinematic movie feel of the game. Plus I hate having to repeat sections I've already completed, and without quicksave in a lot of games making it easier reduces that.

If I want a challenge I'll play online :)
Click to expand...

I do the same. Mostly in FPS because on harder difficulties the AI tends to have perfect aim and lightening response time and sometimes it becomes more of an act of remember where the AI is then aiming correctly
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top