Right. I'll beleive you when you actually do what you say: come back when you get beat the original Pacman. Then tell me how easy it was.
...because, as we know, in order to "beat the game" you have to get a perfect score... That TOTALLY proves your point. GG.
Anyway, the very fact that you'd even bring up Pac-Man boggles the mind. It's like bringing up Geometry Wars or Tetris. These games aren't supposed to have "ends." You're not supposed to "beat" them. Modern games, for the most part, have stories. That means beginning somewhere and ending somewhere. That's something Pac-Man, Tetris, and Geometry Wars lack, and THAT's why these games are "harder," not because they're older. The newest iteration of Pac-Man is just as difficult as the old one, in the end. Pinball also has no end... it is clearly the hardest game ever!
Pretending for a moment that difficulty isn't a completely subjective concept... Compare Super Mario 64 to Mario Bros. Mario 64 was more difficult for me, but Super Mario Bros. on SNES was more difficult than either, and Mario Bros. 2 was more difficult than any of 'em. Oh and lulz at whoever brought up Castlevania. That game wasn't difficult, it was retarded. Someone already pointed out the "throw holywater at the floor" bit...
Go play Ninja Gaiden Sigma on the hardest difficulty, then get back to me about new games not being difficult. Prince of Persia for Xbox was also pretty difficult, certainly more difficult than King's Quest, Duke Nukem, or Megaman... although the hardest game ever is still Leisure Suit Larry... in real life.