/vr/ - Retro Games

>>3103502
Platformers are not easy.

>>3103532
Platformers? No. 3d early platformers though? Hella easy.
>>3103540
See, you don't have to do it so fancy by just jumping across those small blocks until you get to the star.
2d platformers are more difficult imo. SNES and NES have great difficult games.

>>3103502
>>3103545
>Hella easy.

A /v/ tier shit post thread on /vr/? Thanks OP.

>>3103502
>Did I grow up in the era of easy gaming?
Yes. But that was also the 16 bit generation.

Compare the difficulty of Super Mario World to the earlier ones.

>>3103545
>See, you don't have to do it so fancy by just jumping across those small blocks until you get to the star.

you but if you do it that way you suck at video games. SM64 has a much higher skill ceiling and more movement depth than any 2d platformer, even if at 2d platformer is less accessible initially. the freedom and depth is is why SM64 has nearly endless replay value, while 2d platformers are the same fucking thing every time.

>>3103549
>I don't agree, therefore shitpost

You could have at least attempted to argue against it. That's the whole point of this site, you dense fuck

>>3103549
I made this thread with the thought that the games I grew up on were easier- the challenges were not as hard, the games are more forgiving, and because it was an experimental time of 3d graphics they decided to do all this for an adapting audience.
>>3103550
See I didn't want to say ALL SNES games are hard, but Mario World wasn't exactly the most difficult. Of course Mario 2 and 3 weren't either- just 1 and Lost Levels really. Mario I feel is sort of an easier game for all ages.
>>3103556
I'm not disagreeing with you, but at the same time you expect a kid (such as myself in this period growing up) to comprehend such actions. I saw the challenge and did what I could calculate what to do to win it. I know it sounds boring and low, but I was literally 5-66 playing this game, of course I was going to play it this way. The most complicated it got was doing wall jumping challenges. It's not the skill ceiling I'm saying, it's the skill floor- the minimum amount required to beat the levels.

>>3103564
>>3103559
>I'm shitposting and I expect you to feed me.

Na kid.

>>3103575
So, you agree then. That's nice.

Oh, and arguing isn't shitposting, not talking about retro is. Consider arguing if you want to be taken seriously. "Na kid", indeed.

>>3103584
See NiGHTS, Burning Rangers, Dino Crisis, most 5th gen RPGs, Jet Force Gemini, and I'm going to throw Conkers in also. That game can be a bitch.

That's just to name a handful off the top of my head.

Troll away.

>>3103605
Congratulations, you have successfully made a compelling argument. I completely agree.

The "It's War" chapter in Conker was a real bitch to get. The turret scene, the Self Destruction sequence, balls to the wall hard.

>Troll away

You have no faith in the spirit of this board.

Querey- what is the perfect balance of forgiving and difficult? If you die, would it not be too forgiving to allow the player a continue and to start from the level's beginning or checkpoint? On that note, then what is the use of a live counter?
is it not too frustrating to have the player have to start from levels before this or start all over again in general?
Have we advanced video games by allowing saving/ continues between missions, or have we made it too easy?

>>3103627
NiGHTS I guess.
Not too demanding to beat the game with C ranks for the ending. Tough to get 100% S ranks.

>>3103627
Game overs don't make games harder, they just make it inconvenient to keep trying. It's artificial difficulty.

>>3103627
Well, as you said, it depends on how the game itself plays. If it takes a long time to get to the point of failure, it would only be fair to make getting to that point easier.

And even then, certain levels of forgiveness allow for different genres entirely, i.e. shmups and bullet hells

>>3103639
Might be on the wrong board.

>>3103643
Why? Some of my favorite games are retro.

>>3103639
>Artificial difficulty

Naw man, it forces you to replay past levels, meaning you're always getting better. It's not about difficulty, it's about competence; this allows for way harder level design in a single game.

But I suppose if you wanted instant gratification, I heard there's lots of game over-less games on mobile devices.

>>3103564
>Of course Mario 2 and 3 weren't either- just 1 and Lost Levels really
I can beat SMB1 easily, no warp zones and both quests, but I've never beaten 2 or 3. Is something wrong with me?

>>3103650
Getting better at previous levels doesn't really help much when the mechanical movement depth of your game amounts to holding right and jumping. Usually the parts that cause game overs are trial and error segments, as opposed to segments that require a better understanding of game mechanics.

>>3103556
I have it, beat it pleb. Probably haven't played since the oughts. Game isn't that fun for me. Skill ceiling is a meme. Skifree on windows 95 had no skill ceiling.

>>3103658
>Getting better at previous levels doesn't really help much when the mechanical movement depth of your game amounts to holding right and jumping
>Getting better at previous levels doesn't really help much
>when the mechanical movement depth of your game amounts to holding right and jumping
>when the mechanical movement depth of your game
>amounts to holding right and jumping

Mr. "Doesn't Play Platformers", everyone. You can do better than that.

>Usually the parts that cause game overs are trial and error segments, as opposed to segments that require a better understanding of game mechanics.

Perhaps the better understanding lies in the depth of the mechanic of "holding right and jumping", something you clearly haven't considered.

>>3103662
>Mr. "Doesn't Play Platformers", everyone.
Who said I don't play platformers? I'm a big fan of the 3d ones.

>Perhaps the better understanding lies in the depth of the mechanic of "holding right and jumping", something you clearly haven't considered.
Being able to attempt one segment over and over will with efficiency will make you better at that segment more quickly than replaying segments you already find trivially easy.

You don't practice chopsticks to get better at jazz scales, you just practice jazz scales.

>>3103670
>I'm a big fan of the 3d ones.

Right, and the "hold right and jump" meme applies to 2d ones. Unless there's a 3d game that uses this "flawed" mechanic?

>...more quickly than replaying segments you already find trivially easy.

Well, yeah, and you're defining instant gratification.

You don't learn Csikos post by only repeating the parts you can't play, you go through it, bit by bit, learning the intricacies, to create a truly compelling performance.

Nobody wants to listen to an off-tempo mess of notes that only slightly resembles the original song, and it's not nearly as fun to play. You probably just forced yourself to learn the difficult parts so you could brag about it.

>>3103680
>Well, yeah, and you're defining instant gratification.
I'm pretty sure he's defining doing repetitive shit. It's the "Watch this cut scene before this super hard boss" of the 90s

>>3103680
>You don't learn Csikos post by only repeating the parts you can't play, you go through it, bit by bit, learning the intricacies, to create a truly compelling performance.

No, you have to play the song up until the hard parts and then start over if you make one mistake.

>>3103689
>repetitive

Yes, meaning instead of doing tedious work, you would rather have your progress instantly saves. You're a very observant person.

>>3103690
You're the one that brought up piano music, don't get mad at me when I throw it back in your face.

>>3103695
>You're the one that brought up piano music, don't get mad at me when I throw it back in your face.
Yes, and the analogy is still apt. All I did was point out the flaw in how you used my analogy.

Being able to practice a part repeatedly will make you better at that part than having to go through the whole thing to get one attempt at practicing that part. This is incredibly simple to understand.

>>3103702
And this is why the difficulty is artificial. The game heavily deters you from actually practicing the parts that require practice. If you had a real opportunity to practice those parts, you'd probably get good at them pretty quick, because they're not actually that hard.

>>3103502
Born in '89, I grew up in the same era, and can agree on the toughness of older games compared to the ones I played growing up.
I've never beaten:
Mario 1 or 3 (beat every 3D console mario tho) None of the 2D Zeldas (but all of the 3D ones) Never beat any retro Metroid games (just Prime:3 and Other M)
Never beat any 2D Sonic (but did both Adventures, Heroes, and the Shadow game)
Never beat any Megaman game except Legends and Tron Bonne.

I have a tough time with 8 and 16 bit games. Easy ones no prob, Super Mario World, Yoshi's Island. But early 3D seems more accessible to me.

>>3103502
Yes, youngfag, you missed truly difficult games.

>>3103702
>>3103690
>>3103670
You were one of those annoying fucks in high school who brought a guitar and could only play one riff huh?

Imagine how much more "difficult" Super Mario 64 would be than every 2d Mario game if you had to start the whole game over after losing all your lives.

Good thing Nintendo abandoned artificial difficulty with the release of Super Mario World.

>>3103708
It's an old mechanic used to extend play time. Alot of 8 bit games only take an hour or two to beat if you never have to start over. Archaic now but with limited storage they had to make people feel like they were getting their money's worth. It's only discouraging now because we are used to save points and have larger libraries of games to choose from.

>>3103715
No, I'm one of those knowledgeable human beings who understands how practice and improvement works.

You don't master a song by playing the whole song from the start and then retrying when you make a mistake. You practice each part individually, with additional focus on the most challenging parts. If you can already play a part perfectly, there is little need to practice that part again aside from going over it every now and then.

>>3103702
Yes, and my point was that your analogy was inherently flawed.

Practising the one part over and over doesn't mean shit when it comes to stringing the whole thing together, it'll be jilted due to not being used to doing it in one go. Savestating vs repetition, basically.

Better yet, pianos and video games are fundamentally different in how you learn to play them, so again, your analogy is flawed.

You're arguing for instant gratification, the opposite of what game overs are for. How don't you get that? There's no shame in admitting you prefer to get the hard parts over immediately.

>>3103708
Only, well-designed platformers will introduce you to these mechanics slowly, throughout the game. It's not "artificail difficulty", you're just unobservant and unwilling to learn ("It's only holding right and jumping, how hard can it be?").

>>3103720
Ding ding ding. This is the reason why "artificial difficulty" exists. It's why game overs exist.

>>3103721
So you want a game where you can play any level at any time but to truly beat it you need to do it in one sitting from start to end?

>Ding ding ding. This is the reason why "artificial difficulty" exists. It's why game overs exist.
And it's a good thing. Also difficulty cannot be artificial, it's not grape flavoring.

>>3103725
>So you want a game where you can play any level at any time but to truly beat it you need to do it in one sitting from start to end?
I want a game that is fun to play, has mechanical depth, and doesn't pretend to be hard when it's not. A high skill ceiling is a bonus too, but not mandatory.

>>3103725
>So you want a game where you can play any level at any time
And yes, I do. Super Mario 64 was great for this.

>>3103731
You want an infinite amount of credits and save points is what you want.

>>3103731
>I want a game that is fun to play
>has mechanical depth
>doesn't pretend to be hard when it's not
>high skill ceiling is a plus

How much more vague can you be? Why don't you just ask for an "obscure 10/10 game plz"?

>>3103725
You just explained smb and warps.
>>3103735
Try old Sim games, vs gran truismo has no ceiling.

>>3103734
>You want an infinite amount of credits and save points is what you want.
Or maybe just remove the archaic and shitty "lives" mechanic altogether.

>>3103747
Have you checked out gone home or journey? It seems right up your alley.

>>3103741
Read the thread.

>>3103747
>remove the archaic...

Dude, it's ON A RETRO CONSOLE. It is INHERENTLY ARCHAIC.

Man alive. I didn't think I would see so much ignorance in one sentence tonight.

>>3103724
>pianos and video games are fundamentally different in how you learn to play them, so again, your analogy is flawed.
you're retarded aren't you? muscle memory and visual cue based skills are all fundamentally the same in how they are improved open. it hardly matters if you're pressing keys instead of buttons or watching a plumber jump instead of reading notation.

>>3103748
>Have you checked out gone home or journey? It seems right up your alley.
Those games have no mechanical depth, nor are they fun to play, so no, they aren't up my alley. Story games are even more boring than 2d platformers, honestly.
>>3103749
>Dude, it's ON A RETRO CONSOLE. It is INHERENTLY ARCHAIC.
The key word in that sentence was "shitty." I'll concede that my use of "archaic" was redundant, because archaic doesn't necessarily mean that it's bad, even though in this case it does.

>>3103751
Generalization: the reply

Pianos aren't reaction based. They're rhythm based. Yes, they're both based on dexterity, but one allows for variation, and one doesn't.

I'm sorry if that nuance is lost on you.

>>3103760
I know you think game overs are shitty. You're just not admitting that you prefer to have your hard parts instantly placed in front of you, for you to complete as efficiently as possible.

You don't want to admit that you don't like the challenge provided by this "archaic" design choice.

>>3103760
>Those games have no mechanical depth, nor are they fun to play, so no, they aren't up my alley. Story games are even more boring than 2d platformers, honestly.
Ok I understand. You want something with hipster cred and infinite continues.
Maybe look at the upcoming indie games?

>>3103709
>Yoshi's Island
>easy

I bet you never went for 100%, nor tried to beat the extra levels on 100 as well cause beating the game like that is INCREDIBLY hard compared to other Nintendo games. Try doing Extra 3 or Extra 5 without getting irate. I dare you.

>>3103769
I guarantee this guy is a poser. Probably has a lootcrate sub, too.

>>3103502
>>3103540

You can play banjo and mario at high level and pull out much more impressive stuff than what's required for beating super mario bros in one continue. Look up speedrunning or something.

>>3103774
Maybe in terms of glitch or TAS runs, but I always found 2D live speedruns to be more entertaining to watch.

But then again, there's a larger margin of error for 3d, so it does require more precision. Damn, I'm torn, now...

>>3103763
>Pianos aren't reaction based. They're rhythm based. Yes, they're both based on dexterity, but one allows for variation, and one doesn't.
Pianos are very reaction based, especially in genres of music heavily focused on improvisation like jazz.

Moreover, games aren't reaction based if they're the same every time you play them. Playing through easy levels to get to a hard part is literally just reciting memorized inputs.

>You're just not admitting that you prefer to have your hard parts instantly placed in front of you, for you to complete as efficiently as possible.
No, I just don't like having to repeat all the shit I already did just to get one attempt at a hard part again. I'm fine with doing the easy parts initially, it's being forced to do them repeatedly that I think is absurd.
>You don't want to admit that you don't like the challenge provided by this "archaic" design choice.
But it's not challenging, it's just boring and time consuming. Repeating easy segments over and over is not challenging.

>>3103773
Na he's not a poser.

He's just a modern gamer. They expect games to pretty much play themselves. If they have to actually practice at a game, then it's clunky and shit.
Look at reddit and /v/. Those kids play some horrible trash and bitch about shit that's just asinine.

>>3103774
Speed running takes all the fun out of games, I have a job where I can perform repetitive actions for hours.

>>3103783
>Repeating easy segments over and over is not challenging.

You shouldn't have to repeat them that often. It's hold down right and jump eh?

>>3103786
>perform repetitive actions for hours.
This is a very shallow take on speedrunning. It's a much more involved process than you think. I'd argue that speedrunning makes games more interesting and adds a whole lot of replay value.

>>3103783
>reaction based
>improvisation

Again, I'm sorry if the nuance of "reaction" and "rhythm" is lost on you, as you're going to keep arguing like you're right. You're fundamentally wrong.

>games aren't reaction based if they're the same every time you play them.

They are, it just means you have to do the reaction at the same point every time. Especially on pixel perfect jumps.

>Playing through easy levels to get to a hard part is literally just reciting memorized inputs.

And refining them. Too bad that's lost on you as well.

>I'm fine with doing the easy parts initially, it's being forced to do them repeatedly that I think is absurd.

Yes, you want to do the hard parts as efficiantly as possible. Instant gratification. Again, you're clearly not willing to admit that, because that instantly classifies you as an impatient modern gamer.

>it's not challenging

Refining your skills are. See pic.

>>3103785
Exactly, he's hanging around here for no reason other than nerd cred.

>>3103794
I said fun. A math equation can be interesting. Speed running isn't even playing games. It's armchair athletes training to be competitive in a virtual sport.

>>3103813
>Speed running isn't even playing games.
>Except for that part where they play the game

>>3103818
Apperently that post was lost on you.

>>3103798
>Again, I'm sorry if the nuance of "reaction" and "rhythm" is lost on you, as you're going to keep arguing like you're right. You're fundamentally wrong.
Are you going to explain why I'm wrong or are you just going to continue asserting that I am? Learning music improves your reaction time, this is a fact. Jazz musicians cue each other, and must also be ready to react to cues, this is also a fact. Rhythm and reaction are not mutually exclusive.

>They are, it just means you have to do the reaction at the same point every time.
You are confusing "action" with "reaction." If you're doing the same thing every time it is no longer a reaction, because you aren't reacting to anything.

>And refining them. Too bad that's lost on you as well.
Repeatedly doing the same easy tasks is not a good way to refine your skill. In fact, doing this can be categorized into the "amateur" criteria on your graph. The way to refine your skill is by doing increasingly challenging things, not repeating easy things.

>Yes, you want to do the hard parts as efficiently as possible. Instant gratification.
How is wanting to practice and refine the difficult segments of a game instead of being forced to mindlessly repeat the easy segments the same thing as instant gratification? If I wanted the whole game to be easy, maybe. I would actually prefer there to be no easy segments at all.

>Refining your skills are. See pic.
Which is done by practicing increasingly difficult things that you aren't familiar with, not repeating easy things that you already know.

>>3103813
>I said fun.
but speedrunners do have fun. they very much enjoy what they do. it's a push and pull hobby. there are boring parts, but they result in a very thrilling and satisfying payoff. it's okay for you to not find it fun, but you shouldn't project that onto others.

>>3103820
>nuh uh

Logical.

>>3103826
Okay, I will. Rhythm is the nature of being able to predict and hold a musical pattern, and reaction is the mental response to important stimulus i.e. dropping a hot glass after accidentally burning yourself

>If you're doing the same thing every time it is no longer a reaction, because you aren't reacting to anything

The mental gymnastics is strong. You are reacting, it's just a repeat. It's like dropping the same hot glass on a different day.

>Repeatedly doing the same easy tasks is not a good way to refine your skill.
>Also, I don't know what "refine" means

I'm not implying that there's no ceiling for these skills. But if you don't take pleasure in executing the "easy parts" expertly, platform games aren't for you. Sorry you've been lying to yourself all this time.

>The way to refine your skill is by doing increasingly challenging things, not repeating easy things.

Yes, and this "incresingly challenging thing" is the "hard part" you're referring to, and if you can't get to that part consistently, you haven't refined your skills enough! Simple as that.

>If I wanted the whole game to be easy, maybe.

That's what I feel is the case. You're not willing to refine your skills, you want to be able to brute force your way through a game, like save-stating in DOOM.

>I would actually prefer there to be no easy segments at all.

These "easy segments" are typically introducing you to new mechanics gradually. Go play IWBTG.

>not repeating easy things that you already know

You ever speak another language? Because not using it frequently is the best way to forget it.

Having more storage space on the media reduced the need for high difficulty to pad gameplay time. They were easier but bigger and had more exploration. There's plenty of tough games on any generation even if you have to turn the difficulty up to make it so.


>>3103831
They only smile if they win. I would say the enjoyment is from the recognition they will get as "the best". Not from the game. Look at all these smilin faggots.

/vr/
Don't have fun with greentext
Don't have fun with spoiler tags
Don't have fun with games
Fuck a body pillow

>>3103848
It's like you're forgetting that people like to challenge themselves.

Don't you know that cliche? "I climb the mountain because it's there"?

>>3103848
>I would say the enjoyment is from the recognition they will get as "the best". Not from the game.
>Actually thinks speedrunners do it for prestige.
Yeah, that's definitely why they play 20 year old games that nobody gives a fuck about but them.

>>3103860
Except for all the other virgins in their social circle?

Feminists are right, having a dickwaving contest about difficulty is toxic behavior that should be prohibited.

>>3103848
There are speedrunners who play only one game because they specifically find it very entertaining to play. You're forgetting that most of, or at least part of the reason why they speedrun is to stream to their audience and subscribes. And quite a few speedrunners play a variety of games because they don't want their audience to get bored with the same title over and over, and it's often the case that these ones are the most popular. Even then, however, as I said, a few refuse to add a larger variety of games precisely because they have fun with the one they're playing, AND they wanna reach the top.

>>3103852
this is the most logical conclusion for why people speedrun. that other dude is fucking retarded lol

>>3103894
>You're forgetting that most of, or at least part of the reason why they speedrun is to stream to their audience and subscribes.
very few speedrunners have a twitch partnership. the vast majority just do it because they like doing it.

don't believe me? take a look at the leaderboards and calculate the % of twitch partners on them.

www.speedrun.com

>>3103891
Right, the group of people that bond over mutually engaging in something they find interesting.

I don't see how changing the fact that anyone cares changes the legitimacy of speedrunning as an activity, or even a sport.

>>3103893
>Feminists

Go away, please; this isn't about dickwaving nor will it be.

>>3103901
>Go away, please;
NO

>>3103895
My sister is retarded say that shit again and I will track your ip, fly to your city, knock on your door and punch your dog.

Say hi to mom for me and thank her for the cookies stephen.

5th gen was fine, turn the difficulty up or think of a handicap if it's not hard enough.

>>3103927
>fine

This kills the thread.

>>3103895
Listen to someone who speedruns explain it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b56N17d4WnM

>>3103927
>pic related

>>3103974
Goose is a delusional and retarded sociopath, nobody takes him seriously. That said, he's not wrong, but what he said can apply to pretty much every time consuming hobby.

People spend hours planting flowers and bushes in their garden for fuck sakes.

>>3103532
In comparison to actually difficult games, such as competitive RTS or FPS at a high level, they are though.

Lives were in earlier games for two main reasons. First and foremost, to pad the gamelength. By forcing the player to repeat parts of the game (or the entire game for that matter), the game lasts much longer than it otherwise would. If people could just skip the parts they've already mastered, they would also master the hard parts a lot faster, and therefore beat the game faster. The second reason is because that's what arcade games did, and back in the day, the more home-console games were like arcade games, the better they were.

Having to repeat the same parts you already know over and over just to get single attempts at a hard part doesn't make the game more difficult. It makes it more time consuming, yes, but more difficult? No. All it does is make it so you can practice that part less in a set amount of time. It doesn't make it any harder to learn, or any harder to beat once you have learnt it. This is, of course, assuming that the point of the game is just to beat it, and not speedrun it or anything. If speedrunning is the goal, then repeating even the easy parts over and over to find and perfect the most efficient route is relevant. If you just want to beat the game, it isn't relevant at all.

>>3103979
>but muh deferred gratification

>>3103978
You make that sound like a bad thing. I'd like having a nice garden, If I could bother watering it all the time.

>>3103720
I'm not saying it's good, but here's what I see these days-
I'm playing a well constructed video game that is visually impressive, well programmed, but lacks the challenge. I beat the level on the first try every time, and I feel like I'm getting a free easy victory just for playing. I'm not fond of that.
>>3103974
I know he's frustrated and is talking out of anger here, but at the same time I think this take is subjective. >>3103978 What he said, hobbies in general are mixed bags that can give/take meaning from lives either short or long term. My little brother speedruns and has fun with it. He has no records and I don't think expects to be some hot shit. His explanation is "Most people who get records play a small collection of games constantly and know the games forwards and backwards. (Which makes sense) I speedrun because it's a way for me to explore games I love even further past the initial challenges preset in the game."
Speedrunning is a mixed bag. If you're doing it for the hot bitches and MLG dosh, don't. But if you generally love the game enough to deconstruct it and learn every aspect about it (see paneking 255), by all means.
But see here's the kicker- before when I said I enjoy the challenge of games, I'm not personally interested in speedrunning. I want the adventure of playing many different diverse games as opposed completely mastering one game.

>>3103609
>The "It's War" chapter in Conker was a real bitch to get. The turret scene, the Self Destruction sequence, balls to the wall hard.
Never played it but the last boss on Banjo Kazooie and all of them on Diddy Kong Racing gave me the idea that Rare make stupid hard bosses.

>>3103979
>Lives were in earlier games for two main reasons. First and foremost, to pad the gamelength.

Shut the fuck up. Joke asshole cunt, you think you're some kind of smart knowledgeable person writing a good post when you're a fucking idiot. At least typical trolls write lame two line posts instead of acting like they're hot shit. Shut up, that's all nonsense.

>>3104705
Gruntilda? She wasn't so hard. I have a harder time with the DKC games then her.

>>3104793
I could never aim the "spear attack", or whatever you call it, at her. Plus I'd thought the game show was the actual final boss so once I found out that wasn't the case I think I sort of gave up mentally.

>>3104804
The game show is fun but would have been anticlimactic as the finale. I did always appreciate Rare putting in trivia questions in thier game though. It's like a "have you been paying attention?"

Rare made the best bosses. The final boss in the game ought to be hard. It should make you sweat a bit, but it's hard to make good difficult bosses.

>>3104764
Nice counterargument, Autismus Maximus.

>>3104489
Challenge in modern games is rarely found in singleplayer. There are exceptions, see Dark Souls and plenty of balls-to-the-walls platformers, but singleplayer has been largely tailored towards casuals.

Good players looking for a challenge play competitive multiplayer, in some form or another. But I guess you're one of the casuals who are too shit to git gud at any of those, so instead you cry that your shitty singleplayer games (that were never difficult to begin with) have become too easy. Boo hoo, idiot.

>>3103550
There were a shitload of hard games on both the SNES and the Genesis.

The ability to save every game made everything a lot easier.
Gen 3 and 4 had a bunch of games that could save, particularly RPGs, but saving didn't utterly dominate games until gen 5.

>>3105138
>The ability to save every game made everything a lot easier.
*less time consuming.

you're getting difficulty mixed up with games being more time consuming.

>>3105116
What can you say to someone who is such a fool that they think a TAS run is a way of saving time to beat a game. You're literally retarded, now shut up and stop acting like you know anything.

>>3105165
>they think a TAS run is a way of saving time to beat a game.
What the actual fuck? I didn't even mention TAS. Anywhere. You're so far up your own ass that you don't even know what you're fucking reading. Go die in a ditch you useless manchild.

>>3103540
that star's easy as shit to get even without TAS tactics. it's really just a poorly designed mission

>>3105257
that's not a TAS, it's a real time single star performed on console.

>>3105171
This has to be a troll. Nobody could be that stupid.

It's all relative.

People who grew up playing in arcades in the early days probably thought home consoles were "easy gaming" since you didn't have to get out of the house, perform on the spot in front of a crowd, and you didn't have to spend money every time you lost, or try to beat a game on one quarter. You could just relax, play and practice as long as you wanted in the comfort of your own home, use free continues, passwords, saves, and once you were done with the game, it was Game Over. It wasn't about competing as hard as you can to get the high score with other people.

People who started on 8-bit consoles might think 16-bit consoles started the trend of easy gaming. Super Mario World was much easier than SMB1, A Link to the Past was much easier than LoZ1. Metroid, Mega Man, Final Fantasy, Castlevania... all of those series had lowered difficulty, more streamlining and tutorials, etc. on SNES and Genesis.

Most people who grew up before the 7th generation probably realize how increasingly easy and dumbed down games have gotten since then.


I would definitely say there was a shift in difficulty with the PS1 era. That's when you had a lot more storage space for games especially with CDs, so instead of compact, challenging 2D arcadey games that you would replay a lot, developers made longer games with more content (sometimes superfluous as it is with a lot of collectathons and lenghty PS1 JRPGs, but whatever). They would use that space and new technology to make games that were more focused on story, visuals, cinematics, etc. rather than challenge and mechanics. And since it was when 3D gaming was popularized, with a new, more complex control scheme, I assume some designers made games easier so people could adapt to this new way of playing games.

>>3105932
(cont.)

FF7 is definitely emblematic of "easy gaming" from that era. It's all about the visuals and story, and the game is easier than almost any RPG on 16-bit systems if you understand how the materia system works. Same with series like Mario Kart, Star Fox 64, F-Zero... Zelda and Castlevania also got easier and slower-paced with OoT and SoTN.

That being said, I don't think it's "easy gaming" especially by modern standards, and it's not black and white at all. Some parts of Super Mario 64 can be pretty difficult going back to it. Getting all the notes in Banjo-Kazooie is a pain in the ass. Games like Crash Bandicoot are about as hard or even harder than stuff like Donkey Kong Country from the 16-bit era. Lots of games like Rayman, Valkyrie Profile, RE1, Goldeneye or Perfect Dark on the harder difficulties, Alundra, etc. had some decent amount of challenge.