Topic: Why are easy games so taboo?

It's not a taboo, it's a trend that started with retrogaming. People started to love those old games again and noticed that they were dying a lot more than in modern games. Of course old games weren't 'harder' - they just had different rules, like starting all over again when you die and so on. All NES Super Mario Bros games could be completed in half a hour even by an inexperienced player if they were given save slots.

So yeah, both audience and critics are complaining because games are getting too easy now, while in the early 2000 they were all complaining because games were getting too hard (hence hand-holding) or because they didn't want to read the manual before playing (hence tutorial levels). So basically what people asked for two generations ago has become their nemesis. Everybody blames the fact that games have become "mainstream" and have to please the general audience, actually implying that the general audience is composed of brainless idiots unable to walk and chew gum at the same time - the irony of it being that 30 years ago games were built for children, who are usually pretty stupid, and the only reason we were good at these games was because we had nothing to do all day.

I don't really care if a game is easy or hard because it depends on what kind of emotions the game is trying to pass on. I'm perfectly happy with a high degree of challenge for games that require memorization or mechanical action and I'm also fine with games whose focus is not on challenging the players mechanically but in charming them with a story, an interesting world to explore or whatever.

There will always be a bunch of gamers who get erotic pleasure by playing super hard stuff or performing one credit runs on the most difficult arcade games, but the fun comes mainly from feeding their ego - the ludic equivalent of speed metal or w@nking.

Because some people can't enjoy games if they're not difficult?

I like good games, whether they're easy or hard. In fact today I just played Kirby's Epic Yarn for the first time and I loved it.

And... Do you guys remember how a lot of people disliked TW101 because it was "too hard". It's kinda funny...

EDIT: Wait, this is a GamingSince64 thread? /sigh

It really depends on what the game is, how interesting it is, how long it is and even how much you paid for it.

it's not that they are taboo but that some players seem to want all games to be eazy. if i'm playing mario or kirby i don't expect to be taxed which is fine. sometimes i want to relax. what i do have issue with is taking titles that are traditionaly difficult and making them eazy for gamers who refuse to challenge themselves and feel they need to be catered to. in fire emblem death was always ment to mean something and drive the player to think thinks through because death is forever. if one of your warriors dies they are gone and you (hopefully) will not make that mistake again. this made it challenging while making you warriors feel special but gamers who refused to challenge themselves prevailed and fe awakening gets a casual mode.

if you suck you deserve to fail.

I agree that the only hard level in 3D World is Champion's Road (I've only beaten it with Luigi) and that is only because it has no checkpoints. If lets say it had checkpoints straight after the first 2 green star locations then it would be very easy.

wait.

aren't you the same guy who posted the thread about how much you hate having 'help' or an 'easy mode' or whatever in Nintendo games now, like the special blocks in NSMB games and stuff to help people get past too-challenging levels and win the game? because if so, i think you've answered your own question — there's no problem at all, just a few vocal people who denounce the availability of this 'help' to others who may feel the need to indulge.

What does this have to do with the Wii U?

Whoops, thanks for reminding me — i'd meant to move this thread after posting that comment. All better :3

You see things as very black and white don't you?
you think people asking for easy games means they want a game they can't lose.
what easy means is a game that doesn't give you a heart attack because it causes you stress.

For me, it depends on how fun the game is. If it's something that I personally find really fun and engaging (Such as Kirby), I don't really care that it's easy. However, I do personally like to feel challenged, especially in genres that I spend a lot of time playing (RPGs especially).

Yeah I do.

Don't see why there cannot be a range of games of different difficulties for people with differing levels of skill.

Only genres that have that I can think of are FPS and RTS. (I am considering full AAA games).

Super Mario Bros and Super Mario Bros 2 (J) Lost Levels is probably the ideal way to do it.

(The first I played and enjoyed as a 6 or 7 year old - I wasn't good it at it but liked playing it).

I can see an argument against it. If a game is really easy, then some elements that exist in the game may not be taken fully advantage of. A good example of this would be like playing Halo on Easy instead of on Heroic or Legendary. Elements like trying to beat a pretty difficult enemy AI, ammo management, making efficient use of cover, using movement to avoid damage, etc. are thrown out the window. So much of what makes it exceptional is thrown out the window if you take out the challenge, since you don't have to think on your feet. Overcoming that challenge is part of what makes it a better experience on higher difficulties.

It's part of why I can't enjoy Kirby games anymore. There's no reason to take advantage of a lot of the stuff going on in them because you can just fly over enemies a lot of the time. Being forced to work within constrictions can make a game a lot more fun. Pokémon has been having the same problem, especially recently, but the multiplayer metagame keeps it from being just too easy.

If you want to look at the best example of difficulty in games, I'd point to Resident Evil 4. It nails making every situation possible to overcome, but very difficult and nerve-wrecking. The feeling of overcoming a tough boss with just a few bullets left is bliss in that game, and it does it on such a consistent basis that it blows my mind.

It's not like difficulty is necessary; Journey gets along fine without it, since overcoming an obstacle isn't the point of it. Rather, exploring a world is the point of it.

I hate Halo on higher difficulties because Halo is terrible at all of that, IMO, yet on Easy or normal I get to shoot things for more than 5 seconds without dying, and enjoy the excellent story that makes Halo worth playing (hence why there are so many surprisingly well-written books based on the mythos and I guess even a movie? Seriously what is "Nightfall"?). :T

Like, I get what you're saying, but honestly a game can be enjoyed to equal levels for two completely different things by two completely different people. Hence why arguments like this are so difficult, because there are people who don't understand that terms like "difficulty" and "quality" don't have to mean the same thing to everybody...

I don't accept that the spectrum from easy to hard necessarily has any correlation with quality or enjoyment. It changes hugely depending on the genre and the particular game.
I tend to like difficult games, I'm incredibly persistent and if I need to try something 100 times in order to succeed, then I try 100 times. So I hugely appreciate games like Dark Souls, for example.
However, 2 of my favourite games are Windwaker and Final Fantasy 9. They are arguably the easiest games in their respective series. But it just doesn't affect the experience for me, they're just brilliant games and they accomplish that without needing to do so by challenging the gamer.

Better question is "why is an easy mode so taboo?"

Or maybe "why is having easy mode as the default so taboo?

I couldn't care less whether a game is hard or easy, though games where you don't have to try at all or ones that are borderline infuriating don't interest me. All that really matters is that I enjoy the game.

To be honest defaulting to easy can be considered condescending to some seasoned gamers, like the developers think you're so incompetent, you need training wheels as a default. It's kind of stupid a mentality, but I can grasp why someone would think that way.
Personally, I prefer my games to provide some kind difficulty without being a snooze fest. However, I prefer my difficulty to be fair (a death that was clearly my fault) rather than cheap/fake (i.e. low player health with super damaging enemy attacks, one hit deaths, completely random failure states with zero indication of existing).

Considering I can barely trust a game to work anymore, let alone be designed with things like "fair challenges" (which is more difficult to design that people give credit for), I think I'll take a game that's at least "fun" when I can get it...if I was picky like that, I'd have maybe 2 or 3 games a year to play unless I did a lot of digging into obscure indie games, which is an ocean of $#!+ I don't feel like sailing through. It's bad enough I watch new anime...a man can only handle so much stink...

Sometimes if a game is too easy, I find that I get bored. I've often found that with Kirby games, hence why I've never been a big fan of that franchise. I'm also finding that with Pokemon, which probably adds to my growing disinterest in the series (along with a lack of innovation).
I'm certainly not ashamed of playing on easy mode though. When I was younger I would play on the hardest difficulty, but I just don't have time for that anymore. I'll usually play on normal/medium difficulty, but since my time for gaming is often limited, I find that I will play on easy mode every now and again just so I can progress (especially if it's a game with slow combat or it's more narrative driven). I don't like being stuck in the same level for an hour, especially if there's an engaging story.