16 replies to this topic

[sigtau]

Now, first off, I want to all take you back with a memory. Zelda II.

http://www.triforcet...icle-zelda2.txt

Ignore the ASCII art at the top, a friend of mine added that when I taught him how to use FTP... >_> Anyway, that just tells you my opinion on Zelda II. If you are too lazy to read it, here's what it says:

If anything, I thought it was a pretty decent game. Yes, I know. You can smack me for it. But
it's true! It was a pretty damn decent game. So the control style was a bit odd. It's not like
Legend of Kage was any different when it comes to strange control styles. I mean, come on. And Castlevania,
that is a very good game, but it has wierd controls. Does that make it any worse than a Zelda CD-i game?

And another thing. It's still a Zelda game. If it doesn't have "The Legend of" in the title,
then does that make the game any worse? Come on, people. Back when they named it, the people
recieving the game may never have even knew they were making yet another sequel with
"The Legend of" in the title. So, no, it wouldn't make it any worse. Lay off of that, guys.

The difficulty, in my opinion, did catch me pretty off guard. I was expecting it to have mindbending
puzzles and navigation oddities. Instead, you got a sidescrolling RPG. Well, not too shabby
at least. But I do miss the puzzlesolving quite a bit. So that is one thing that you can strike
against it, the fact that it is very difficult. But that doesn't make it any worse than
something as difficult as a first time gamer trying to speed run A Link to the Past.

And lastly. It's got the guts of a Zelda game. I mean, come on. You're questing to save a
princess named Zelda, from an evil incarnation, Shadow Link. Shadow Link happens to be a
Ganon incarnation to many people, by the way. You're questing for something mystical and triangular
shaped, namely a TRIFORCE shard.

My final statement: People, you need to lighten up a bit. Why isn't it a good game to you? Probably
because the difficulty through you back. Games need difficulty, not graphics, violence, and sex. That's
not what a game is about. It's about what it really is there for.

Now let this sink in. On my site, Zelda II: The Adventure of Link made it as Game of the Month for July '07. These days games are mostly based around action and nothing more. Final Fantasy is outselling Zelda because of this (which, in my opinion, Zelda tops Final Fantasy a good bit, but they're both good games).

But there's more of a point here.

They aren't challenging enough anymore!

"Oh, we wanted to appeal to a larger audience," says Reggie Fils-Aime when interviewing about the Wii. Well then actually put a challenge somewhere, there were challenging spots in Twilight Princess but there weren't nearly as many challenges as I thought there'd be. There needs to be two modes for games these days: Progressing difficulty (easy in the beginning, getting more difficult, crazy hard) and an expert-hard mode.

The reason I brought Zelda II into it is because it was one of the first good games that brought some awesome difficulty and labrynth like (thanks to Animus01 for the labrynth-like compliment) dungeons. Games are just losing there luster these days. What do you guys think?

[Mitchfork]

Games today are great, but I hate that they're getting dumbed down. Zelda 2 was probably the hardest game I've ever player, bar none. After Zelda 4, the games started getting much easier. Of course, there are still hard games... but they're not the same quality work as, say, Twilight Princess and some other games.

[Animus01]

Now that you've mentioned the "appealing to a larger audience" part, it does kinda feel that there's a sort of "donut hole" in that huge circle of people they're aiming for. Some games, like Mario Kart, Metroid Prime, and F-Zero have a place for veteran gamers (like, MK's 150CC Cup, MP's Hard Mode, and F-Zero's Master Class). But, I think there're too many games that don't have a place for veteran gamers. If Nintendo gave the option of a Hard Mode to more games, it would definitely help us out a lot.

But, there needs to be some naturally hardcore games floating about. I just can't think of any Wii games that already fit the bill, though.

EDIT: Minor correction: Wii-exclusive games. Call of Duty 3 was pretty challenging for me, but it's not Wii-exclusive, aside from the controls and lack of online play.

Edited by Animus01, 12 July 2007 - 03:12 PM.

[CastChaos]

Agreed, losing luster is the perfect expression.
In the old times, games (like AoL) were created for the fun and excitement of the players AND developers. Nowadays developers care mostly only for graphics and use the same ideas with random modifications. If you played at least two Crash Bandicoot games throughfully then see the New Crash Game Trailer and see for yourself. Another good example is Final Fantasy IX. Squaresoft aimed for recreating the classic style in 3D. Well, can't deny that there are black mages and white mages and such FF1-5 things, but it didn't come out as planned and the FFXII isn't even innovative... Come on, even the characters look the same as in previous episodes...

It's easier to use the NES and SNES to their extent, but with nowadays gaming engines, the developers simply don't know what to do. Aiming for larger group? Just another excuse. They do it purely for money nowadays.

And such.

[Deepfreeze]

Well, I know a few games have dissapointed me on a difficulty scale (I'm looking at YOU, Fire Emblem 8 ), but there have always been ****ty games. Most good games still come with some variant of a hard mode, and if you're ultra-hardcore, you can always play multiplayer or online, because there'll always be someone way better than you there. Not to mention things like speedruns, 100%ing them, etc. There's usually plenty to do besides beat the final boss, if you're good at it.

I, for one, being a casual gamer, often enjoy the decreased difficulty, and if I like the game enough (Fire Emblem 7) I'll play through it again on the hard mode.

Edited by Deepfreeze, 12 July 2007 - 04:45 PM.

[Sharon Daniel]

I like games that are fun and not difficult, so I guess I disagree with most of you on that aspect. I still have to agree on the "losing luster" part, 'cause there's not many fun games being made anymore.

[Exate]

It's definitely been a problem for quite some time. F-Zero GX is the only challenging game I've played in the last seven years or so.

I'm thankful for the fact it's possible to beat most of our modern-day games by doing "low percentage runs" which yileds a slightly, or more-than-slightly harder game.

[Taco Chopper]

Games are getting way too easy if you ask me. I was playing AFL Live 2003 the other day on hard mode, and I was thrashing the other team by 200 points.

Anyway, games that are fun make me want to play them again. Enter The Matrix is pretty good, but I can't play it because the disc has had it and wont play anymore on my PS2.

[Mitchfork]

Games are getting way too easy if you ask me. I was playing AFL Live 2003 the other day on hard mode, and I was thrashing the other team by 200 points.

Anyway, games that are fun make me want to play them again. Enter The Matrix is pretty good, but I can't play it because the disc has had it and wont play anymore on my PS2.

The same thing happens to me, except reversed. The discs are fine, but my PS2 sucks eggs.

[Taco Chopper]

Well, I open up the start menu on Enter The Matrix and I can't load any games. When I do, it does the flashing thing and starts to go spastic. I hate it.

[Koopa]

Let's put it this way: SMB2-US and SMW2/Yoshi's Island contain extra challenges that are, well, challenging, and though I haven't 100%-ed either yet I'm still trying, i find both of them tremendously fun. NSMB I had completed (and I mean complete) within weeks of starting it, and though it wasn't bad it was a bit "been there, done that".

What I can only suggest to game makers is concentrate not only on graphics but also on gameplay.

They aren't challenging enough anymore!

qft.

[Zenith]

TP Master Quest anyone? Hope they make one, I zero-gamed TP on the first try. It'd be cool to see the dungeons redone, and if they doubled the health & attack power of the bosses...they would actually be hard.

Can't say all games are easy nowadays. Anyone else beat "The Showdown" in SSBM with Kirby?

[NineLives]

>:O
Megaman X was a challenge to me when I first played it.
X6 was just BS.
X7 was just BS
X8..... didn't try it.
Mario and Luigi is pretty easy, but it's fun.
New megaman ZX games.
OH YES
Phoenix Wright also brings tough challenges.... trying to figure out stuff.
The Phantom Hourglass was VERY fun! (I enjoyed it, even thogh I can't read japanese)
Well, there are a lot of good modern games.
I really care for the FUN not difficulty

EDIT: oh, if you really want a challenge.... try megaman ZX HARD mode.

Edited by NineLives, 13 July 2007 - 11:33 AM.

[Colin]

I don't really play video games very much anymore, mostly I just mess around with ZC or do something productive.
Most video games just aren't worth it, too easy... too short... too boring... etc.

Edited by Nuvo, 13 July 2007 - 11:38 AM.

[Peteo]

Oh indeed. Video games are not what they used to be, both difficulty wise AND quality wise. Games these days are too easy or too unoriginal. Well at least Nintendo is still trying, but their games aren't that good either anymore.

I'm very dissatisfied at the current state and quality of video games, and I guess that's one of the biggest reasons I make my own games (on ZQuest) instead of playing games.

But back to the difficulty, why can't Nintendo for example put different difficulty modes for their games like Zelda. Wind Waker was so insanely easy that I really hated the game. It could have been a good game with a "HARD mode" I believe.