One aspect of gaming that I suspect will always challenge designers - and sometimes gamers, ironically enough, is properly tuning the game difficulty.
Not all games should be easy, not all games should be hard. And not all games should be held to the same standard; different types of games demand different design.
Two recent games on opposite ends of the spectrum but well-tuned all the same: Mega Man 9 and Prince of Persia.
MM9 is one of the most punishing games in recent memory. The difficulty IS the game. There's nothing else to it, and that's what makes it so replayable. The game, like the best platformers, is very well thought out. No fat to cut off, just a hardcore, 2D platformer. The fun of the game is making it through a given level with nothing but your skill, and the spectre of death has to loom at all times for that to work.
Prince of Persia, on the other hand, makes it impossible to die. Instead of seeing "YOU DIED" pop up on the screen, you get a short scene of Elika reaching down to save you and putting you back at the last checkpoint. The flow and the story are more important than inserting some unnecessary interruptions posing as challenge.
On the other hand, some games appear to just be broken. Whether or not I am victorious in Valkyria Chronicles, for example, can sometimes seem to be left up to whether my incredibly inaccurate snipers can hit the broadside of a barn at point-blank range. (Protip: They can't.) Another problem that Valkyria Chronicles exemplifies rather well is the Trial and Error theory of game design. In a puzzle-style game, there's going to be a lot of that by its very nature. In VC though, you'll often get halfway through a battle to find something you couldn't have planned for and end up thoroughly trounced. That's the way of war, I guess! So you restart the battle with a slightly different lineup and move a couple guys around differently and you go from a pitiful loss to a total victory. The fact that my skill doesn't get a chance to make up for my lack of knowledge/foresight is frustrating - I have to go back and do it again due to circumstances that I was not allowed to plan for and unable to react to.
Another case is the third Katamari game, Beautiful Katamari. Previous incarnations had been rather relaxed for the most part, while offering greater challenges to those who sought them. This one though, made it difficult to accomplish even the simplest of tasks without extreme frustration.
I think a good general rule of thumb when looking at game difficulty is that often, the amount of story dictates the difficulty. Games that make heavy use of voice-acting, cutscenes, and exciting set-pieces are going to, at the very least, let you pick your difficulty, because they want you to see whole game and check out their hard work; if they don't let you choose, they're typically going to make it an easier game. In something like Xbox360's Geometry Wars, again, the difficulty IS the game, and the first screen you see is, literally, all there is to see.
So, here's what it comes down to: Every game isn't going to stomp on your junk and leave you out in the snow to die. If that was the case, no one would play games. It's okay to have varying difficulty levels. Some games are meant to stand as accomplishments and badges of honor. Others, meanwhile, are more like books - they might be epic literature or pulp, but they're meant to be consumed rather than defeated.
Not all games should be easy, not all games should be hard. And not all games should be held to the same standard; different types of games demand different design.
Two recent games on opposite ends of the spectrum but well-tuned all the same: Mega Man 9 and Prince of Persia.
MM9 is one of the most punishing games in recent memory. The difficulty IS the game. There's nothing else to it, and that's what makes it so replayable. The game, like the best platformers, is very well thought out. No fat to cut off, just a hardcore, 2D platformer. The fun of the game is making it through a given level with nothing but your skill, and the spectre of death has to loom at all times for that to work.
Prince of Persia, on the other hand, makes it impossible to die. Instead of seeing "YOU DIED" pop up on the screen, you get a short scene of Elika reaching down to save you and putting you back at the last checkpoint. The flow and the story are more important than inserting some unnecessary interruptions posing as challenge.
On the other hand, some games appear to just be broken. Whether or not I am victorious in Valkyria Chronicles, for example, can sometimes seem to be left up to whether my incredibly inaccurate snipers can hit the broadside of a barn at point-blank range. (Protip: They can't.) Another problem that Valkyria Chronicles exemplifies rather well is the Trial and Error theory of game design. In a puzzle-style game, there's going to be a lot of that by its very nature. In VC though, you'll often get halfway through a battle to find something you couldn't have planned for and end up thoroughly trounced. That's the way of war, I guess! So you restart the battle with a slightly different lineup and move a couple guys around differently and you go from a pitiful loss to a total victory. The fact that my skill doesn't get a chance to make up for my lack of knowledge/foresight is frustrating - I have to go back and do it again due to circumstances that I was not allowed to plan for and unable to react to.
Another case is the third Katamari game, Beautiful Katamari. Previous incarnations had been rather relaxed for the most part, while offering greater challenges to those who sought them. This one though, made it difficult to accomplish even the simplest of tasks without extreme frustration.
I think a good general rule of thumb when looking at game difficulty is that often, the amount of story dictates the difficulty. Games that make heavy use of voice-acting, cutscenes, and exciting set-pieces are going to, at the very least, let you pick your difficulty, because they want you to see whole game and check out their hard work; if they don't let you choose, they're typically going to make it an easier game. In something like Xbox360's Geometry Wars, again, the difficulty IS the game, and the first screen you see is, literally, all there is to see.
So, here's what it comes down to: Every game isn't going to stomp on your junk and leave you out in the snow to die. If that was the case, no one would play games. It's okay to have varying difficulty levels. Some games are meant to stand as accomplishments and badges of honor. Others, meanwhile, are more like books - they might be epic literature or pulp, but they're meant to be consumed rather than defeated.
Leave a comment