Whether it’s regenerating health, an automatic jump function or even – in extreme cases – literally telling you how to proceed, some games just make it far too easy for the player to complete them. Of course letting the player complete the game is vital to give them some sense of accomplishment, but surely that feeling of worth is diminished when the player is simply playing an elaborate version of Simon Says? Games need to have smaller yet tougher goals throughout in order to maintain a constant level of achievement.
There are plenty of good examples of challenging (and scarily popular) games. For an example, take Trials HD on the 360. It’s not an easy game at all. In fact, it can be notoriously difficult to even complete a level, let alone complete it in some of the times set by the players. The game utilizes a physics system that, while unforgiving, encourages the player to correctly adjust the way they approach every obstacle in order to proceed. It has since become one of the most popular games on Xbox Live Arcade. The online leaderboard gives determined players even more reason to return to master the game. It’s a game where the word Achievement means something far more than an arbitrary badge on screen.
Downloadable PC game Spelunky is another difficult game that has proven a hit with gamers, so much so that it too is seeing an Arcade release later in the year. Death is a frequent occurrence within the game, whether it is from enemies or the environment. The randomly generated levels provide another layer of challenge, making the player unaware exactly what is coming next and forcing them to take a more careful, considered approach to their play style. It’s actually rare to hear of players that have managed to finish the entire game, yet that elusive nature of the end goal is what keeps people playing and gives those that have reached it a sense of immense pride at having done so.
Trials HD, Level 10, Attempt 4,127
The majority of games these days come with multiple difficulty levels available to the player. However, in reality the number of people who will actively return to a game once it is completed is very likely to be fairly low. In addition, most increased difficulty levels only really see rather superficial changes such as the amount of damage a player can give or receive. In general, once a gamer has seen the entire course of a game, they will no doubt be reluctant to go through the same rigmarole again without incentive which for the most part is not provided by simply making the same foes harder to beat.
An interesting take on the difficulty issue is found within a reverse of the accepted norm: the unlocking of easier difficulty modes. Some games take the player aside if they fail a level a set number of times and give them a chance to try again, but on an easier difficulty level. A commendable idea, but it’s a tricky balancing act between not patronising the player and still letting them feel as if they are achieving something.
Of course players want to achieve but at the same time they don’t want to feel as if they’ve been given their prize on a plate. But without giving the user many, many variables to customize their experience it’s nigh on impossible to please them all, and very few people are likely to be partial to configuring a lot of options before they are allowed to actually get into the game itself.
That said, I still think a key component to the longevity of a game is its difficulty. In an age where a game that can be completed in one or two sessions is becoming the norm and people grow ever impatient for new content, making the existing product last for as long as possible should be a primary concern for both developer and publisher. Day One DLC is all very well and good, but if even that extra content only makes the game last an extra hour it’s not enough to keep a gamer talking about the title until the expansion or for further DLC. It’s time developers stopped trying to make their games more accessible to people and give the player far more of a challenge to overcome. Only then will the rewards be even greater for both the player and the developers.
Ben Borthwick
[...] Some words on difficulty in games over at Citizen Game. [...]
I’m a bigger fan of one difficulty with a well planed difficulty curve as seen in most platform and adventure games. I rather only play through the game once but get really challenged near the later half. This obviously runs the risk of putting off people who aren’t that good at the game, so I’m very interested in seeing how the “Super Guide” works in new mario bros wii.
Also a great way of having different difficulty, intact probably the best would have to be resident evil 1. Jill being easy mode, Chris being hard, giving two totally different stories defiantly a way to get people playign through again.
From the point of developing games It can be very hard to get a difficulty curve just right, you will generally find that you might end up with level 10 being much harder than level 40, especially when you have little or no testing team.
Damn tower level in World of Goo
Difficulty in games can be a strange beast. I do usually like to play through on the medium setting in most games as I feel that it will usually offer enough challenge to walk the line between challenging and a nuisance. Although for some games such as Halo and Gears I went straight to the toughest setting, not for the legendary glory, but when running a well formed co-op game it can be the only way of getting a challenge out of it.
That said, some games such as GTA4 I’ve never felt offered much of a challenge and I’m good with that. I don’t think that having to start missions more often would give me a better experience with the game, frankly I’d be likely not to play it at all.
Someone needs to come up with a formula for satisfaction of challenge in relation to frequency and speed of loading checkpoints.
I am a huge advocate of starting most games on the hardest possible difficulty, to the point where I ridicule and condemn those around me that don’t
. I love a challenge. The only ones I won’t start this way are the guitar hero ones as I would like to actually finish songs. If the game proves too difficult then I will scale it back to the next highest. It needs to be very hard but possible. I find playing games this way extends their play-time and gives you a far greater sense of achievement on completing it.
Playing on lesser difficulties may enhance the “fun” sense slightly as you can run around and do nigh on anything without too much fear of being killed but it takes from the satisfaction of getting through the games. At least IMHO.
So I agree with the message of this piece. More difficult games!!
I also want less of these games that reward you for getting through them in less time. I think nothing takes from a game more than that. I remember Final Fantasy 9′s Excalibur II weapon. You could only get it if you got through to a certain point in the game in under 20hrs or something. These games are made to be enjoyed and played for up to and above 100hrs! You have to literally avoid every piece of side-quest or extra bit of game in order to get this thing. Simply ludicrous.
As hard as Trials is, you’ll find yourself doing the same level over and over and over again in endless, and ultimately fruitless quest for perfection.
The trick a game has to master is to not be too difficult too early on as to put the player off from even getting past the first level. For example Condemned 2 has no difficulty setting, it pretty much throws you in the deep end and I sunk quite quickly. It’s sufficient to say that it’s now collecting dust on the shelf as it was just too damn difficult with it’s new game dynamics in comparison to the first in the series.
The Legendary difficulty in Halo 3 is slightly different however. It does use a levelled difficulty system, but I find that I can’t even get past the first chapter before being carved up my some impetuous, pistol-toting grunt. To that effect I will never, ever complete that game on the hardest setting on my own, and therefore the achievement will always be out of reach.
Maybe I’m just shit.
Don’t even get me started on the multiplayer and how damn hard that can be where there’s always someone a million times better than you waiting to take you out.
Nice post though, which pretty much echoes what I think.
Great read. I remember years ago as a kid, having so much free time to plod through games no matter how hard. Nowadays I would never be able to tackle a seriously difficuly game with a linear structure. The difference with how I play hard games nowadays – such as TrialsHD, Canabalt, N+ and Geometry Wars – is how failure is so instant, and I don’t feel like I’m loosing as much each time I die.
In times past difficulty was used as a way of creating artificial longevity, and though I still think it’s important to be challanged, I prefer playing modern games that focus on new ideas rather than tougher levels.