Is just me or vidoagmes are getting easier?
It's not just you.
No progression, no sale
It's you
>>336071245
you are just playing easy games.
>>336071245
easier games means more people can play them which means they make more money because more people will buy them
>>336071245
Went back to play some of the games that gave me trouble in my youth. turns out I was either half-retarded and was playing them the hard way, or the controls were just unintentionally designed poorly.
I feel maybe modern video games are just doing a better job at introducing there mechanics to the player, and that might be a part of why they are easier. I know i spend a lot less time learning how to play games these days than I did 5 years ago.
That's a weird question. What kind of games are we looking at here? The most complex/detailed games (War in the East, Aurora, Dwarf Fortress, Digital Combat Simulator, Dominions, UnReal World and such like) for example are recent or still maintained so you could say wargames/roguelikes/simulation games/4X strategy at least are getting more complex, but does complexity translate into "difficulty" and what about if we're thinking of not just the most complex games in the genre but all games within those genres (even including "hello world" equivalents made by novice programmers)?
And what exactly IS difficulty? Here's a chimp playing Pac-Man (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r7ttRaXlnfs). Is Pac-Man difficult? How difficult is it? Are we talking about perfect play (there's several people who play Pac-Man perfectly, it's actually really easy in this sense)? Being able to grasp the rules and interact with them in a meaningful way (like I think the chimp is doing in the video)? If a chimp can play Pac-Man in this sense but not understand the objectives of Call of Duty campaign, is Call of Duty more difficult than Pac-Man? What about if we're thinking of multiplayer?
It's a dumb question.
>>336071245
You're growing up, boy.
There are many factors to the ease of games these days. I'd say the answer is yes, games overall are becoming easier, but it's not all negative.
One part of it is you just growing up and you being more cognitive. I used to think Yoshi's Story was really hard and now I can beat it without losing a life because the game is actually incredibly easy.
Another reason was a lot of old games were made purposefully unfairly hard either to exploit quarters from children or make 2 hour long games seem much longer, and I wouldn't say that form of difficulty is actually a good thing.
>>336071245
they are getting easier
Dark Souls 3 is so easy it's pathetic
>>336072619
Sometimes they were just bullshit
>>336073216
>it's pathetic
As in, you feel pity for the game? None of the Souls games are particularly difficult, but accounting for experience DaS3 is absolutely the hardest game in the series.
Regardless, you should stop being a fucking idiot and realize that there are hard games outside of the Souls series
>>336071245
You got good.
>>336071245
They're getting easier.
Casuals entered the market in 2006. Ever since, it's been a race to cast a net on all the casual money because, surprise surprise, people who are bad with money and have no standards buy more games.
>>336071245
go play the ni oh demo. shit's tricky. and the horrific aliasing is an added layer of difficulty because you cant see shit
>>336073264
>Replayed Tooie recently
>Dreading Canary Mary 2 but determined to beat it
>End up beating it first try
People remember it being way harder than it actually is.
>>336072650
Depth is how much better the best human player is versus an average human player. Or for single player games, the difficulty of the game. You can roughly probe a game's depth statistically, for instance by an Elo or Glicko system. In this case it's the one whose rating reaches the highest, assuming they were all rated by the same system. Think about this for a moment, if a player of rating 1100 is ~60% likely to beat a rated 1000 opponent, and the same for 1200 vs 1100, and so on, the skill rating provides a clear and precise measure of exactly how superior the best players are against the others. And Elo ratings are strongly predictive of tournament performance, with upset matches between players with large Elo discrepancy being virtually unheard of. And Elo is relatively primitive compared to newer systems like Glicko.
>>336074163
>Or for single player games, the difficulty of the game
That is an absolutely fucking retarded definition. If you played a mario game that killed your character at completely random intervals, it might be one of the most difficult games ever made. But it wouldn't have any depth because your skill would not be a factor. Difficulty has to do with a lot of aspects that may or may not be related to depth
this year ive been the closest ive ever been to sucking a guy off. i think before the year is out i will have sucked a dick and theres nothing i can do about it. its just one of those things. im a party boy and sometimes u just gotta go where the party takes u. hey, its 2016, whatever. everybody is bi the day of macho hetero guys has passed. the tarzan thing is in now...a more flamboyant feminine guy in touch with his queer side is what.girls want and im trying to move in that direction
>>336073216
It was easy because you probably overleveled like a pussy. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you didn't summon.
>>336074857
Difficulty is depth, not complexity. Complexity is the possibility space of the game. Depth is how much of that possibility space the game forces you to broach. If you only played Go against a literal retard, you would be playing a very shallow game. Play Go against a grand master and suddenly you're plunged into much greater depths.
>>336075138
good job not responding to that post at all you braindead cuck
>>336074163
>Depth is how much better the best human player is versus an average human player
That's actually a very neat definition for "depth" actually, I like it. However, it's very much different to what people typically consider "difficult". Complexity, difficult, depth... They are all related to a degree but their lines are blurred and both the dictionary definitions and typical use of the word are very much different.
>>336075138
That has nothing to do with you conflating difficulty and depth. Games with depth can be extremely easy, and games that are shallow can be very hard.
>>336071245
are you from 2005?
>>336075370
>Depth is how much of that possibility space the game forces you to broach.
This is the only relevant measure of depth I can think of (for a single player game, where your only opponent is the game environment). Human players will actively explore the game's depths -- multiplayer games in the long run have depth proportionate to their complexity. Single player games have a static opponent until we get machine learning AIs that adapt to and eventually overcome human opponents. It doesn't matter how complex they are, if they never sufficiently challenge you and force you to use every facet of the game's complexity then the depth of the game is shallow.
>>336071245
This is just a meme video games are not getting easier or maybe very marginally. You find games easier because:
- You're just not 8yo anymore
- You're playing a lot of games and you're too good compared to the majority
- You're more experienced and games didnt get harder so you find them easier.
Games difficulty simply havent scaled with the gamers and are now easier in comparison.
in b4 contra fags
>>336076158
-bots no longer exist
-scripted "cinematic experience"
-no single player just throw them straight into multi player
the industry literally stopped trying to make better games
>>336076158
Nah, video games got progressively more casual until the PS1/N64 era where everyone could beat virtually every major release. Now you have to turn to multiplayer for actual difficulty, or a handful of single player games throughout each era that specifically appeal to the hardcore players. Ninja Gaiden on Xbox, Souls games and XCom today, and so on.
The drop in difficulty in modern gaming is a good thing. In a few years, you'll find that your vidya skills are not as good as they used to be.
For example, right now Im getting fucking slaugthered in the Dark World in A Link to the Past. Fucking A Link to the Past! I did a no damage run of this shit just five years ago. I cant believe how bad I have become at it, honestly.
I really like how easy most of the games are nowadays. Makes gaming a relaxing experience after a hard day of work, and I dont have the time anymore to try and try again to practice and kill a danmaku-tier boss.
There will always be hard mode and the Souls games for those who love challenge and have the time for it, thats cool and great. For the rest of us, easy games are the better option. Go ahead and call me a filthy casual. I dont mind anymore.
>>336071245
homeworld deserts of kharak and ashes of syngularity are surprisingly hard or im too old
>>336076734
i had dozens of snes titles as a kid and i finished them all at max difficulty except one game. R-type or something I couldnt finish it at hard.
And keep in mind i was only a kid if i came back now with all my experience at my age, i would crush everygame i had.
I've no idea where those hard title were. Usually 'old school hard' title are extremely niche game that no one played. If you include niche games, you can easily compete with some modern indie games and a couple of mainstream ones
>>336077443
Maybe I underestimate things because I had limited exposure to PS1 back then. N64 games at least were casual as fuck.
>>336071245
It's just you senpai. Happens with every generation of gamers. I felt this way back when I was 20 or so.
>>336071245
They are, but their production values get better every year, so newer games are still more attractive to play.
That's why you have to make your own rules when you play. Play on the hardest setting, and do things like force yourself to do an Ironman playthrough on first try, restart a whole chapter / mission whenever you lose, don't google ANYTHING up ever, etc. That way you get a fucking amazing experience out of everything.
>>336071245
You've just gotten better with age.
>>336077813
Forcing yourself to not use the gimmicks the game provides you breaks immersion though.
>>336078236
I agree, but if you're good at deluding yourself it's not too serious an issue. You gotta believe that the higher rules you create are valuable.
>>336078236
this i just cant do it it feels too forced. i dont mind playing the game on insane but i follow the rules.
the only exception is summoning help in dark souls of course. only major fags do that
