Let me preface this by saying this is all just my opinion. If you read something that you wholly disagree with, just assume that I meant to add “in my opinion” at the end of the sentence even if it is stated as fact.
This was a very interesting read, I agree with it and I’d like to add my left brained interpretation of it, which is likely something that you probably already touched on. It seems like this article focuses wholly on the design aspect of difficulty. However, your methodology speaks towards an important aspect of art. Psychology.
It has been hammered in to my skull that one of the most important aspects of a piece of art is psychology. I have said and will continue to say that videogames are art. In the same way that one may confuse adding hp and having enemies hit harder for what an increase in difficulty should be, many confuse cinematic cut scenes as being the primary element for what would or should make a game art. It’s abhorrent when a game’s main selling point is “it’s just like a movie.” Well, if it’s just like a movie, why not make a movie? What makes the investment of a game worth it?
True, narrative is an element of some games, but the true strength of a narrative game isn’t the plot. Games, on the whole, are often unimpressive when it comes to plot. Instead, it is the ability to inhabit the psychology of the protagonist. Plots usually exist to serve this role. Rather than reading about a character or watching a character, you ARE the character. Moreover, the climax of the experience is when the player and the protagonist experience a moment where their motivations are intertwined and it’s organic.
Although it’s a bit contradictory, it has always seemed that plot was what drove this connection not difficulty. For example, no one in their right mind would call Prince of Persia 4 difficult, however one thing it did well was use narrative to allow the player to inhabit the psychology of the played. It did this in two sections. These are the standout moments of an otherwise unimpressive game. The first time is during a boss fight which requires an understanding of a narrative in conjunction with an understanding of a game mechanic. Essentially you have to jump off of a building and the female lead catches you and places you back on the boss platform. Elika says something along the lines of “Are you crazy?” and the Prince non chalantly responds “I knew you’d catch me.” Presumably, this is what the player is thinking verbatim. It’s certainly what I was thinking.
The second time was at the end. I don’t want to spoil it, but the game holds your hand by telling you exactly where to go and what to do until a moment at the very end. Yet you are able to divine what your goal is largely due to the narrative and character. In both of these instances, you don’t need to be told what to do; you just do it because you, as the player, are in the same place psychologically as the played.
That is the strength of gaming.
What I find extremely interesting about your interpretation about difficulty is that it seems to accomplish this connection consistently, throughout the game and it relies less on plot. I usually don’t turn up the difficulty past normal because in most cases it’s simply aggravating and dull. Why should I bother? However, if difficulty were treated as you suggest then I would set my difficulty higher more often to get the connection and the meaning that I crave.
I haven’t played Thief but, for the sake of consistency I’ll use your example. Thief at harder difficulties requires players to rely more on stealth. This allows the player to inhabit the psychology of the thief they were playing more intently. If the consequence of being seen is a game over, then even though the difficulty is high, the connection is high as well. The tension would be palpable for the player because, Modern Wall Street notwithstanding, most thieves rely on stealth to do what they do. That is at the core what it means to be a thief; to sneak around and taking things without being noticed. If they get noticed, they go to jail and it's game over. That isn't to say there shouldn't be some leeway in the game. Since these are games, not true to life simulations, but you get the jist of what I'm saying I hope.
I imagine that it’s more difficult in to craft this kind of thing in more open kinds of games but if it can be accomplished, this rewards the player with an enhanced experience that goes beyond accomplishment. It speaks to the most important aspect of art; meaning. At least, that’s what I hope the result would be… eventually.
