Are games getting just a little too easy?

[Sputnik]

Ok sure, not Souls games.

But many games seem pretty hard to lose at these days. Game-play seems to be trending away from simulation towards more user-friendly arcade styles - esp. within some of the 1st person franchises (e.g. Far Cry, Subnautica, Wolfenstein) and stealth mechanics seem to have become way overpowered (Elderscrolls, Fall Out).

Or maybe I've just become a curmudgeon

[SMIFFY]

Squatting behind a wall to regain full health sure as hell makes games too easy.

[anrkyuk]

I can't recall off hand any game I managed to 100% on a Spectrum, Atari 520 STE or Megadrive (Genesis), the first time I can genuinely recall 100%'ing a game, doing and seeing everything there was to see in a game was probably on the PS2, now look at my Steam profile, I've earned 100% achievements in over 300 games in the last 5 years... and that's only games with achievements. Ergo, are games getting a little too easy... Yes, they are.

[d7602002]

I like to play for the entertainment value and not the challenge, so they are perfect for me. All games should have difficulty levels so people can pick what they want. Easy, you rarely get killed, everything is a walk in the park. Basically the game tells you what to do. Normal, it's played the way the developers think is best for all you still have map icons to guide you, but you still have to figure some stuff out....Hard, it's difficult, you don't get map icons, or help and people are harder to kill..you are on your own.

[Baosas]

In some cases, they're easier if you choose to, and you don't even get to make them harder in others. I maintain that purposefully obscuring basics of the game isn't an ideal way to increase a game's difficulty, however.

[Sowchan]

maybe you're getting too good

[Tito Shivan]

It might have to do with the gaming crowd becoming older and having diminished gaming time. Which cuts into the 'Git gud' philosophy harder games have. And since AAA games have to appeal at the widest range of customers they might consider people out there might want to pay for the game 'just for the story'

I tend to stay really away of 'hardcore gaming' because accounting the reduced play time avaiable for me, spending it 'getting gud' to learn beat a single boss feels like a chore and a waste of time.
Also sometimes I just want to play to wind out and feel like a rampage machine mowing down enemies. Hence I value a lot games that offer difficulty settings to suit my gaming needs.

Buying a game and not being able to finish it can feel to a lot of people like they've 'wasted money' on it. Like paying for a full meal but not being able to make it to the desserts.

That's the thing with entertainment: Not everyone has fun the same way.

Originally posted by anrkyuk:

I can't recall off hand any game I managed to 100% on a Spectrum, Atari 520 STE or Megadrive (Genesis)

There's a thing with old games people usually understand the other way around.
Back then the systems these games ran in had very tight hardware limits, which meant lengthening the game playtime through more content meant more cost. So the cheapest route to 'make a game last longer' was through increased difficulty.

Sometimes is not 'Games before were harder' but 'Devs made games harder to make them last more'... Nowadays there's plenty of other ways to make a game 'last more'

[Esoteric]

Yeah, just look at Fable II and III, where it's literally impossible to die.

[The nameless Gamer]

Try "Minoria", "Cuphead" or "Indivisible", if you want a non-souls difficult game.

[Radene]

No, why?

[Triple G]

I don´t think it´s just the games getting easier. Most games are very similar. If You played one shooter - the other will be not that different. Or any other genre. Games in general lack some complexity - for better access. You don´t have that many games in which You really have to think that much - or solve some riddles. In the end that wouldn´t make the game harder, because anyone has access to every question, solution or walkthrough via the internet. Also games won´t utilize the PC layout that much anymore, because they have to work with a gamepad.

But those games which You can´t win - those are almost not present any more. In mean those games which just went faster and faster every new level or minute. Or games which just threw more at You constantly. It was not so much about beating the game - but getting the highest score. So yes - it´s a mix between both. Experience and easier games. But i don´t agree on the difficulty settings. They changed. Usually "normal" provides some challenge. Nowadays it´s easy mode, because people should still be able to beat the game in "Ultra hardcore You can´t beat me" mode, because there´s an achievement - and it just sounds cooler. And in some games even that mode is relatively easy.

[Xero_Daxter]

We need hardcore modes. For example.... Skyrim but if you die then you'll have to start all over from the beginning. ;P

[Cyrix]

The only reason games are so "easy" is because of the difficulty settings. Everyone mostly picks the easiest or near easiest difficulty, never the "veteran" or "nightmare" setting. If you want a game that can break your sanity that isn't Dark Souls, I heavily prefer you choose Dying Light 2 when it comes out. The original kicked my rear end on the normal difficulty more than it should have, and the sequel might be no different.

[Kargor]

Personally, if I had to spend forever to get past some stupid boss, I'd probably have stopped playing long ago.

Likewise, the only games that publishers can sell to me are the ones that aren't excessively difficult, or have a setting for that. Anyone who doesn't do that has no chance to sell me anything.

Granted, I was considering getting the Calamity-difficulty achievement on a recent game that I played -- but only because I saw a chance that doing this on the 3rd playthrough without Infinity-Mode (which puts monsters at level 60+) might make me so overlevelled that Calamity would still be a breeze. In the end, I decided it's not going to give me anything new, beyond the last 2 achievements, so I didn't do it.

[HarleyIsntReal]

They feel a lot easier to me. Most of 'em do, anyways.

[Radene]

Originally posted by Ghandi Wargamer:

But those games which You can´t win - those are almost not present any more. In mean those games which just went faster and faster every new level or minute. Or games which just threw more at You constantly. It was not so much about beating the game - but getting the highest score. So yes - it´s a mix between both. Experience and easier games. But i don´t agree on the difficulty settings. They changed. Usually "normal" provides some challenge. Nowadays it´s easy mode, because people should still be able to beat the game in "Ultra hardcore You can´t beat me" mode, because there´s an achievement - and it just sounds cooler. And in some games even that mode is relatively easy.

Because the industry came a long way when it comes to coaxing quarters out of people's pockets. No need for endless unwinnable games to make people keep paying.