Just how Easy will Easy be?

[Sensuki]

I worry about this too, because I've never been able to get through any of the Infinity Engine games even on Easy. I just don't have the patience to constantly die, reload, die, reload, die reload.

 

I'm sure if you asked someone who doesn't struggle with the IE games, they would be able to point out to you what you're doing wrong. They're really not hard at all, you just have to have a grasp of the mechanics and the 2E rules.

[Flying Magician]

The "casual" difficulty is alright, but I bet the name is too offensive. Better call it "awesome" or "special".

Edited September 27, 2012 by Flying Magician

[kenup]

The "casual" difficulty is alright, but I bet the name is too offensive. Better call it "awesome" or "special".

That would be more offensive.

 

I say just call it "Skyrim Master Difficulty".

[Jarmo]

I'd like "Hard" mode to have a description somewhat like this:

 

"This mode is for those with no life, the gamers who either don't understand stories, or can't relate to them. If you like endless grinding and feeling real big and smart after winning a computer opponent designed to be won, this difficulty level is for you."

 

No. Seriously speaking, I don't mind if someone plays the game just for the combat, if that's what he wants to do. I do roll my eyes a little when someone goes "a wall of text blah blah blah somethin something next next click click already, just show me where to go and I'll go there and kill everybody." But it's not me playing and it's nothing from me if that's the way they roll.

 

Someone else enjoys the story, but also the extra challenge of higher difficulty, hey that's cool.

 

Someone like me enjoys the story and likes to immerse in it, combat is fun, but dying breaks immersion so I seek a difficulty level where I don't die.

 

And someone just likes the story and doing all kinds of things that are possible in the game world, but doesn't enjoy combat one bit.

 

For it's many faults, Mass Effect 3 did one thing right. It gave those just wanting combat the chance of totally ignoring all roleplaying choices in the game, while giving "story mode" for those who wanted everything but combat. Didn't try either myself, so can't say what kind of experience they offered.

 

Easy - everyone can breeze through the hardest fights without even paying attention.

Impossible - where the harder fights are not even possible with a badly made character and a single mistake will cost you the whole game

 

And then a bunch of options in between.

[Lohi]

No doggie treat found; romance option failed. The goblindirewolf is gnawing at your ankle. What would you like to do?

Reload game to when I was at the store, buy a doggie treat, then go out to find the encounter again.

[Lohi]

Player has + 50% on health, physical and magical damage and defense

 

Enemies have - 50% on health, physical and magical damage and defense

But that's such a bad way of making easy mode. A lot of games do it but it feels like a hastily designed feature added at the last minute. Harder difficulties tend to about more than just that; adding more enemies, adding in stricter, rules, etc. Why shouldn't easier difficulties get the same effort from the developers?

 

I liked the original System Shock method. You got 3 sliders for difficulty; combat, puzzles, and hacking. If you liked the combat you kept the difficulty at normal, if you hated doing all those wire connecting puzzles you turned that down, if you thought swimming in 3D hacking spaces was cool you could turn that up.

 

In some ways the BG style of difficulties felt a bit wrong. "Strict D&D" rules I never liked and were too random; ie, hit points on level up, if you were unlucky then you had an extremely weak character, if you were lucky you got someone pretty tough (I knew a lot of tabletop versions that just gave the average hitpoint on level up, no dice rolls). So I always played on "normal". It felt hard enough in many fights on normal.

[Meshugger]

*sigh*

 

You know like real life, achieving something requires a certain level of work. Now, since we are talking about a game, the more difficult it is, the more rewarding it will be to be able to finish it. If you suck at gaming, then (mentally) train, reload and do it again until it is done correctly. The best things in life do not stem from hand-holding, effortless pat on the back or getting awarded only by participating or showing interest, it comes from overcoming difficulties that you previously thought being impossible/unsolvable.

 

Mediocrity should never be virtue in video game design. It should be a sin, an abomination.

Edited September 27, 2012 by Meshugger

[jtav]

I wouldn't be interested in something like ME3's story mode because that took away gameplay options (no picking class and autolevel). I even enjoyed the "oh crap" feeling of the Dracolich fight in HOTU. But things like the endless sneak attacks when clearing the manor in NWN2 and resting after every encounter with mooks wasn't fun.

[ogrezilla]

*sigh*

 

You know like real life, achieving something requires a certain level of work. Now, since we are talking about a game, the more difficult it is, the more rewarding it will be to be able to finish it. If you suck at gaming, then (mentally) train, reload and do it again until it is done correctly. The best things in life do not stem from hand-holding, effortless pat on the back or getting awarded only by participating or showing interest, it comes from overcoming difficulties that you previously thought being impossible/unsolvable.

 

Mediocrity should never be virtue in video game design. It should be a sin, an abomination.

The main purpose of a video game is to provide enjoyment and some people enjoy games with less difficulty.

Edited September 27, 2012 by ogrezilla

[Meshugger]

*sigh*

 

You know like real life, achieving something requires a certain level of work. Now, since we are talking about a game, the more difficult it is, the more rewarding it will be to be able to finish it. If you suck at gaming, then (mentally) train, reload and do it again until it is done correctly. The best things in life do not stem from hand-holding, effortless pat on the back or getting awarded only by participating or showing interest, it comes from overcoming difficulties that you previously thought being impossible/unsolvable.

 

Mediocrity should never be virtue in video game design. It should be a sin, an abomination.

The main purpose of a video game is to provide enjoyment and some people enjoy games with less difficulty.

 

This game should not cater to them.

[halobender]

*sigh*

 

You know like real life, achieving something requires a certain level of work. Now, since we are talking about a game, the more difficult it is, the more rewarding it will be to be able to finish it. If you suck at gaming, then (mentally) train, reload and do it again until it is done correctly. The best things in life do not stem from hand-holding, effortless pat on the back or getting awarded only by participating or showing interest, it comes from overcoming difficulties that you previously thought being impossible/unsolvable.

 

Mediocrity should never be virtue in video game design. It should be a sin, an abomination.

 

Funny you should say that because I'm pretty sure the same end result occurs no matter what level of difficulty I play a game at, and the time I save playing on a lower difficulty allows me to put hard-work and mental effort into activities much more fruitful than my own entertainment.

[ogrezilla]

*sigh*

 

You know like real life, achieving something requires a certain level of work. Now, since we are talking about a game, the more difficult it is, the more rewarding it will be to be able to finish it. If you suck at gaming, then (mentally) train, reload and do it again until it is done correctly. The best things in life do not stem from hand-holding, effortless pat on the back or getting awarded only by participating or showing interest, it comes from overcoming difficulties that you previously thought being impossible/unsolvable.

 

Mediocrity should never be virtue in video game design. It should be a sin, an abomination.

The main purpose of a video game is to provide enjoyment and some people enjoy games with less difficulty.

 

This game should not cater to them.

why not? does it hurt your experience with the game?

[Flying Magician]

*sigh*

 

You know like real life, achieving something requires a certain level of work. Now, since we are talking about a game, the more difficult it is, the more rewarding it will be to be able to finish it. If you suck at gaming, then (mentally) train, reload and do it again until it is done correctly. The best things in life do not stem from hand-holding, effortless pat on the back or getting awarded only by participating or showing interest, it comes from overcoming difficulties that you previously thought being impossible/unsolvable.

 

Mediocrity should never be virtue in video game design. It should be a sin, an abomination.

The main purpose of a video game is to provide enjoyment and some people enjoy games with less difficulty.

 

The idea of making games accessible and appealing for the widest group possible is quite recent invention. If it's main anything, then at best it's one of main reasons why modern games sucks.

 

Besides, it's a game for a specific group. Not a dumb facebook minigame. Maybe you didn't noticed, so I'm pointing it out.

 

why not? does it hurt your experience with the game?

Fat, lazy casuals, people not interested in games, kiddies with short attention span- trying to make the game attractive for those people brings nothing good. Usually they're also unable to appreciate it.

Edited September 27, 2012 by Flying Magician

[Jasede]

If you want to enjoy the story, read a book. Don't play a role-playing game.

 

That said, it shouldn't be too hard to add an option for the disabled to make the game more enjoyable to more people. It shouldn't be a design goal nor should it be included if it takes away from any other part of the game but if it can be done in the time frame then I'm all for adding a casual mode that simply removes all the monsters or gives them 1 hit-point or something.

[Loki Ador]

*sigh*

 

You know like real life, achieving something requires a certain level of work. Now, since we are talking about a game, the more difficult it is, the more rewarding it will be to be able to finish it. If you suck at gaming, then (mentally) train, reload and do it again until it is done correctly. The best things in life do not stem from hand-holding, effortless pat on the back or getting awarded only by participating or showing interest, it comes from overcoming difficulties that you previously thought being impossible/unsolvable.

 

Mediocrity should never be virtue in video game design. It should be a sin, an abomination.

 

You realize some people have other things to do in their life than reloading and trying to get better at a game ?

 

If some people feel like doing so, good for them if it is their enjoyment. Other don't. Yet they will accept funding the game, or buying it, thus contributing to its success, provided they are offered an option that allows them to play it the way they want.

[ogrezilla]

*sigh*

 

You know like real life, achieving something requires a certain level of work. Now, since we are talking about a game, the more difficult it is, the more rewarding it will be to be able to finish it. If you suck at gaming, then (mentally) train, reload and do it again until it is done correctly. The best things in life do not stem from hand-holding, effortless pat on the back or getting awarded only by participating or showing interest, it comes from overcoming difficulties that you previously thought being impossible/unsolvable.

 

Mediocrity should never be virtue in video game design. It should be a sin, an abomination.

The main purpose of a video game is to provide enjoyment and some people enjoy games with less difficulty.

 

The idea of making games accessible and appealing for the widest group possible is quite recent invention. If it's main anything, then at best it's one of main reasons why modern games sucks.

 

Besides, it's a game for a specific group. Not a dumb facebook minigame. Maybe you didn't noticed, so I'm pointing it out.

 

why not? does it hurt your experience with the game?

Fat, lazy casuals, people not interested in games, kiddies with short attention span- trying to make the game attractive for those people brings nothing good.

this is one of the worst posts i've ever read. you know the old games had adjustable difficulty right?

[Loki Ador]

The idea of making games accessible and appealing for the widest group possible is quite recent invention.

 

 

Having been myself a gamer for a long time, I would be curious to know on what you base this claim. Indeed, the existence of difficulty settings for video games has been a recuring feature for quite a long time.

 

As for difficulty settings making the games worse, well, they were present in Fallout 1, 2 and Baldur's Gate

Edited September 27, 2012 by Loki Ador

[drake heath]

I think easy should be just that, easy. Just like hard should be hard.

 

If someone wants to play on easy it's their prerogative, it doesn't affect me or the game whether or not someone is breezing through the combat.

[Jasede]

*sigh*

 

You know like real life, achieving something requires a certain level of work. Now, since we are talking about a game, the more difficult it is, the more rewarding it will be to be able to finish it. If you suck at gaming, then (mentally) train, reload and do it again until it is done correctly. The best things in life do not stem from hand-holding, effortless pat on the back or getting awarded only by participating or showing interest, it comes from overcoming difficulties that you previously thought being impossible/unsolvable.

 

Mediocrity should never be virtue in video game design. It should be a sin, an abomination.

 

You realize some people have other things to do in their life than reloading and trying to get better at a game ?

 

If some people feel like doing so, good for them if it is their enjoyment. Other don't. Yet they will accept funding the game, or buying it, thus contributing to its success, provided they are offered an option that allows them to play it the way they want.

Actually, I don't. It seems pointless to me to play a game if you don't want to get any better at it.

It's like playing soccer but not trying to win. Where's the enjoyment in that?

 

Maybe you get some out of it. I don't. I don't want your way of playing a game to infringe on my way. Hopefully there will be options to make sure that is prevented.

[ogrezilla]

*sigh*

 

You know like real life, achieving something requires a certain level of work. Now, since we are talking about a game, the more difficult it is, the more rewarding it will be to be able to finish it. If you suck at gaming, then (mentally) train, reload and do it again until it is done correctly. The best things in life do not stem from hand-holding, effortless pat on the back or getting awarded only by participating or showing interest, it comes from overcoming difficulties that you previously thought being impossible/unsolvable.

 

Mediocrity should never be virtue in video game design. It should be a sin, an abomination.

 

You realize some people have other things to do in their life than reloading and trying to get better at a game ?

 

If some people feel like doing so, good for them if it is their enjoyment. Other don't. Yet they will accept funding the game, or buying it, thus contributing to its success, provided they are offered an option that allows them to play it the way they want.

Actually, I don't. It seems pointless to me to play a game if you don't want to get any better at it.

It's like playing soccer but not trying to win. Where's the enjoyment in that?

 

Maybe you get some out of it. I don't. I don't want your way of playing a game to infringe on my way. Hopefully there will be options to make sure that is prevented.

you haven't read the thread I take it? It was confirmed that there would be separate options to make the game easier.

 

Bobby Null is a Developer of the game

 

Hey all,

 

Whenever I see polarizing topics about CRPGs, I typically look back to the true inspiration of these CRPGs for the answer, table top RPGs. The honest truth is, there is no right answer. Some table top groups like to hack and slash their way godhood, while other groups are happy to chat with each other in a tavern for hours on end. Some minmax their characters to ridiculous levels, while others play severely underpowered characters they find interesting. Who is right? They all are!!!

 

As a long-time Dungeon Master, I've learned there is only one rule that is important. Is the group having fun? Making games is very similar, except we need to please a much larger audience. Instead of making 5 or 6 people happy, we are trying to make millions (hopefully) of people happy. Of course we can't please everyone in the gaming world, but what we will try to do, is please every role-player.

 

IMO, the best RPGs use story elements to reinforce the game play. That game play may be combat, choice mechanics, skill use, etc. This does not mean the game play should be unplayable for "casual" players. At Obsidian we value narrative and game play equally.

 

Whatever the "easy" mode ends up being, it will be very manageable for that type of player. We've already announced manageable stretch goals to include some WICKED options for you hardcore types (believe me, you are gonna get punished ). The folks that want an easier time of it, will have that option as well. As long as making the game accessible does not influence or "dumb down" the difficult settings (which it won't), everyone wins. After all, we are making this game together. We want you ALL to enjoy it.

Whatever the "easy" mode ends up being, it will be very manageable for that type of player. We've already announced manageable stretch goals to include some WICKED options for you hardcore types (believe me, you are gonna get punished ). The folks that want an easier time of it, will have that option as well. As long as making the game accessible does not influence or "dumb down" the difficult settings (which it won't), everyone wins. After all, we are making this game together. We want you ALL to enjoy it.

So will there actually end up being some form of easy mode then, that's separate from regular mode?

 

To reiterate my earlier post, I think a lot of gamers shy away from bumping up the difficulty, not necessarily because they want a casual experience, but because they view default as the optimal or intended form of the game. With that in mind I think it's important not to make the default difficulty experience too accessible or "dumbed down". It should really be a happy medium without the hand-holding of an "easy mode", or the hardcore brutality of the difficult modes.

 

I totally agree. The default mode should, and will be, a challenge for the average RPG player. I've not spoken to Josh about specifics for an "easy mode". This will either be a mode in and of itself, or we'll have a few options to lower specific gameplay features to more casual levels. Again, the goal will never be to trivialize the default difficulty settings.

Edited September 27, 2012 by ogrezilla

[jtav]

As for why I play instead of reading books or watching movies, do you know of any books/movies that will let you be the brave knight instead of just reading about it. I mentioned a few pages back that I just bought Arcanum. It's been a blast watching my big, dumb half-ogre get ripped off and slowly turn bitter and evil from all the people trying to use him. A book just can't offer that kind of reactivity. I've become increasingly frustrated with modern games because they treat me like a child whose attention can't be held without scantily dressed women and explosions. I love having my stats affect how the game plays out. And I really don't see how my mediocre performance at one aspect of gameplay should invite scorn and ridicule.

Edited September 28, 2012 by jtav

[Flying Magician]

this is one of the worst posts i've ever read. you know the old games had adjustable difficulty right?

 

Meh, just trying to adjust myself to you. And speaking of adjusting, I condemn your views on challenge in games, not the adjustable difficulty.

 

The idea of making games accessible and appealing for the widest group possible is quite recent invention.

 

 

Having been myself a gamer for a long time, I would be curious to know on what you base this claim. Indeed, the existence of difficulty settings for video games has been a recuring feature for quite a long time.

 

Check once again a genre of choice. Pay attention if today "normal" didn't turned into yestarday "easy".

[Jasede]

As for why I play instead of reading books or watching movies, do you know of any books/movies that will let you be the brave knight instead of just reading about it. I mentioned a few pages back that I just bought Arcanum. It's been a blast watching my big, dumb half-ogre get ripped off and slowly turn bitter and evil from all the people trying to use him. A book just can't offer that kind of reactivity. I've become increasingly frustrated with modern games because they treat me like a child whose attention can't be held without **** and explosions. I love having my stats affect how the game plays out. And I really don't see how my mediocre performance at one aspect of gameplay should invite scorn and ridicule.

It's because I believe combat and playing an RPG are one and the same thing, or at the very least closely interconnected. I feel as if a lack of challenge makes for an unsatisfying experience. To me, if you're good at RPGs you're good at the combat in them as it stems from building effective characters and making sound tactical decisions.

 

Like I said before, since there'll be an easy mode, apparently, there's really no reason for further debate. That said I'll still judge you as I please because I feel we're both old enough to live with people being blunt and lacking tact.

Edited September 28, 2012 by Jasede

[ogrezilla]

this is one of the worst posts i've ever read. you know the old games had adjustable difficulty right?

 

Meh, just trying to adjust myself to you. And speaking of adjusting, I condemn your views on challenge in games, not the adjustable difficulty.

 

 

 

I actually prefer difficult games.

Edited September 28, 2012 by ogrezilla

[Grimlorn]

I can't believe how many people think games should be easy just so they can run through it as quickly as possible. I guess they expect developers to stroke their egos throughout the game this way. Challenge isn't fun.

 

But on the other side of it, it hurts people with an average or higher IQ who want some challenge. Because we play it and think it's dull, easy, streamlined crap you get from Bethesda and Bioware. What to do what to do? I guess they'll have to take the easy difficulty or leave it. If you can't beat it, tough.

Edited September 28, 2012 by Grimlorn