artificial difficulty in retro games

[Anonymous No.1831093]

[Anonymous No.1831095]

Leave us alone /v/.
We don't care.

[Anonymous No.1831096]

>>1831093
>meanwhile in things that never actually happened

[Anonymous No.1831121]

It isn't fake difficulty. You just suck.

[Anonymous No.1831130]

>>1831093
All game difficulty is artificial. You're not actually dodging fireball spitting lizards, jumping on axes, and getting women.

[Anonymous No.1831132]

>>1831130
It's a turtle, not a lizard

[Anonymous No.1831135]

Honestly how do you get past without getting hit? This is from smb 2 jpn, world c-4 I believe.

[Anonymous No.1831137]

>>1831132
mea culpa

[Anonymous No.1831140]

Looks like you have plenty of time to get through.

Get good?

[Anonymous No.1831141]

>>1831135
Duck down in the bottom right corner. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CwkL0noXsCQ#t=34

[Anonymous No.1831165]

>>1831141
nuh uh. For the obstacle in the OP you have no corner to hide in. As seen in that video, you need to have precise timing and momentum.

[Anonymous No.1831170]

>>1831093
the only difficulty that is not artificial comes from another human being playing the game against you, therefore you are gay

[Anonymous No.1831175]

pretty much all of the lost levels. invisible blocks, invisible blocks everywhere. so glad we got super mario usa instead

[Anonymous No.1831179]

That's not artificial difficulty, that's just dickery.

[Anonymous No.1831194]

That fucking Staircase with the icy floor in Link to the Past.

Fuck that particular Staircase.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sn1GjF_6pDA

[Anonymous No.1831201]

ITT: people who don't know what artificial difficulty is

Pic related, an actual example.

[Anonymous No.1831202]

>>1831194
#moderngamers

[Anonymous No.1831210]

>>1831201
They throw two hammers and then wait. Your complaint is about being bad at video games?

[Anonymous No.1831219]

>>1831210
That's an invisible block. Your natural reaction is to just jump over the hammer bros. right away there there but you will die the first time by being pushed back down into a hammer. Something that requires foreknowledge to pass is artificial difficulty.

[Anonymous No.1831221]

>>1831219
You die the first time, you learn. Hell, you have to learn that you can jump over them too. Or do you think the first goomba you meet in smb1 is artificial difficulty as well? The first koopa? The first buzzy beetle? Putting the cartridge in the system?

[Anonymous No.1831227]

>>1831221
None of those things satisfy the condition that I stated.

[Anonymous No.1831249]

>>1831227
You said natural reaction. My question was how far back do we go?

[Anonymous No.1831258]

>>1831249
I said requires foreknowledge. I'm sure the instruction manual makes it clear that rushing into goombas and koopas will kill you.

[Anonymous No.1831279]

>>1831258
So arcades were nothing more than a field of landmines of artificial difficulty? Next to none had manuals.

[Anonymous No.1831284]

>>1831279
Learning how to play a game is different from something you can never prepare for. A perfect AI taught all the rules of a game can still fail at something that is artificial difficulty.

[Anonymous No.1831287]

>>1831279
>Next to none had manuals.
But most did have attract demos and mini tutorials when you start a game.

[Anonymous No.1831291]

>>1831284
So how do you separate the wheat from the chaff? What makes column A artificial and column B not?

[Anonymous No.1831304]

>>1831291
when it frustrates him, it's artificial difficulty.

[Anonymous No.1831312]

[Anonymous No.1831317]

>>1831279
>So arcades were nothing more than a field of landmines of artificial difficulty?
Actually, yes for the most part.
Ever hear the term "quarter sinks"? It serves the same purpose as "artificial difficulty".

[Anonymous No.1831340]

>>1831317
Confirmed for knowing dick about arcades.
The arcade games most people care about weren't unfair, just really hard and with high skill ceilings, and the reason for this is pretty obvious: if a game was very transparently killing you in cheap ways to make you throw in more quarters, very few people would ever want to play it more than once and it wouldn't make much money.
The exception is games that were unique or impressive for the time, like Dragon's Lair.

[Anonymous No.1831351]

>>1831291
He just said how. If it's "something you can never prepare for".
There's a huge difference between traps that will always get first timers unless they are lucky, and not understanding simple and obvious game mechanics like "I WONDER IF THIS ENEMY JUST WANTS TO GIVE ME A HUG, I'LL RUN UP AND SEE. OH NO, IT KILLED ME".

[Anonymous No.1831361]

>>1831093
>Complaining about an end-game obstacle
Every single obstacle in earlier points of the game set you up for the hard stuff at the end. Maybe you should try clearing the entire game instead of hopping through warp tunnels on your first playthrough.

[Anonymous No.1831389]

>>1831165
You dingus, it's clearly there. Check the video after the first fire trap (where they give you a corner) and then it comes up to the one that OP posted

[Anonymous No.1831421]

Pic related

[Anonymous No.1831441]

>>1831340
>The arcade games most people care about weren't unfair,
Did I say anyone cared about quarter sinks?
Go back to bed. Today's not your day.

[Anonymous No.1831448]

>>1831441
I'm saying the arcade games that were hard but fair were the ones that generally enjoyed the most success and were in tons of arcades.
Unfair arcade games generally did more poorly unless they offered a unique or cutting edge experience.

[Anonymous No.1831452]

>>1831389
yes and? I said that in the OP obstacle there is no corner. Your post makes no sense.

[Anonymous No.1831453]

>>1831452
I think he meant to quote the guy you replied to, rather than you.

[Anonymous No.1831501]

[Anonymous No.1831506]

>>1831501
>He's too retarded to duck and stab

[Anonymous No.1831508]

>>1831501
you left off the part of that video that is actually artifically difficult. another enemy spawns on the left while he's still in the tunnel, so he has 100% chance of getting hit.

[Anonymous No.1831517]

>>1831508
OR, he could just stab somewhere other than where the enemy's shield is.

[Anonymous No.1831520]

>>1831501
Hit it in the leg you dipshit

[Anonymous No.1831539]

>>1831194
It's not actually that difficult. It's fairly quick and easy to hit.

[Anonymous No.1831551]

>>1831539
Also it's even easier than this. If you point down and use the pegasus boots right at the middle line there you'll go right in without a problem. It's absurdly easy to do and you should really never miss it.

[Anonymous No.1831563]

Tower of Druaga has it all.

[Anonymous No.1831580]

>>1831279
>actually arguing with this dumb autistic kid
You have better things to do with your time.

[Anonymous No.1831603]

>>1831421
Pretty much. 100%

/v/ was saying the other day that having to complete levels you've already beaten to get through the game is artificial difficulty. So like those old 2D platformers like Super Mario Bros et al. When you lose all your lives and have to go through the whole game again from the beginning it's 'artificial difficulty'.

kek

[Anonymous No.1831606]

>>1831603
*it's not just a /v/ phenomenon either, actually. there are too many fags on /vr/ that blame the game design rather than just admit that they suck at a video game. happens way too often and I see it said for video games I managed to beat when I was just 8 or 9 years old. Utterly pathetic.

[Anonymous No.1831617]

>>1831093
agreed
the latter games were worse
first mario brothers had better movimentation and jogability compared to the sequels

[Anonymous No.1831629]

>>1831617
BRs keep using jogability despite being incorrect or it's just people joking about Brazillians?

[Anonymous No.1831634]

>>1831606
>>1831603
I'm actually glad that this old arcade based idea with lives and continues died out.

Now if just checkpoints never appeared I would be pretty happy with the current way of handling death in games.

[Anonymous No.1831641]

>>1831634
Which is what? No consequences for failing or any sort of risk-reward dynamics whatsoever? You sicken me.

[Anonymous No.1831643]

>>1831093
That's not actually in the game though. In the actual game, one of the corner blocks is missing.

So I guess that's artificial artificial difficulty?

[Anonymous No.1831658]

>>1831643
>>1831141
Check that video. It's the second fire trap.

[Anonymous No.1831659]

>>1831603
>>1831606
People are too accustomed to modern games which are designed to be beaten by anyone and everyone. There's this entitlement that no matter how good or bad you are, you should be able to get to the end, like a movie. The definition of "good game design" has shifted from "demanding mastery of the mechanics to progress" to "being able to be beaten by anyone on their first try". Which is unfortunate, because unless your game is literally an interactive DVD, there's going to be some retard out there who makes a mistake. And of course rather than just fucking learning from their mistakes and trying again, they will proceed to make a Youtube review about how poorly designed the game is instead.

[Anonymous No.1831662]

>>1831641
This is what checkpoints are.
If your reading comprehension wouldn't be so bad you would actually be able to read that I also despise checkpoints.

[Anonymous No.1831663]

>>1831629
Either way it's come to mean Gameplay.

[Anonymous No.1831667]

>>1831641
BRs are retarded.

[Anonymous No.1831669]

>>1831659
God I hate your kind the most. It's always hilarious to see people that think that retro games are hard.

[Anonymous No.1831670]

>>1831141
>>1831093
>C-4
Oh... Did they not actually change this in the All-Stars version then? I remember this from 7-4 but perhaps it's the same in C4 after all.

[Anonymous No.1831679]

>>1831662
So you just want to be able to restart levels infinitely with no consequence. You're still killing risk-reward without any sort of extra chance/game over system.

[Anonymous No.1831680]

>>1831669
Difficulty is relative. And if you seriously think that modern games are on average more difficult than retro games, you're a special kind of moron.

[Anonymous No.1831686]

>>1831679
Yes, that's exactly what I want.

There is a reason why the system you wish for isn't used anymore. It only works for games that are pretty short like for example all of the Mario games. It's also no secret that devs made the games more difficult because of the short length they had.

[Anonymous No.1831689]

>>1831680
Modern games are far more difficult on the hardest difficulty than most retro games.

Of course there are games like Battletoads that have such a badly designed difficulty that there isn't much of a fair challenge left.

[Anonymous No.1831694]

>>1831312
The DOOM engine is able to handle this?

[Anonymous No.1831696]

>>1831634
That's an odd thing to think is good, considering arcade and arcade-like games are better than other kinds of games.

[Anonymous No.1831697]

>>1831686
There's nothing wrong with short games.

[Anonymous No.1831705]

>>1831694
it lags like a bitch once anything starts happening

[Anonymous No.1831708]

>>1831697
When the price is right.

[Anonymous No.1831712]

>>1831680
>And if you seriously think that modern games are on average more difficult than retro games, you're a special kind of moron.
Please list all games of the current and previous generation you have played, and prove to us you are not a tripe-a babby who only plays what EA tells him to play.

After all, 99% of your complaints about games can be solved by not playing shitty games.

[Anonymous No.1831714]

>>1831708
What sort of game you find is worth the most money is not the same for everyone, nor is the value of the money itself.
$15 for me is not the same as $15 for you, and I'd be willing to pay a decent amount of money for a good shmup, but wouldn't be willing to pay anything for most turn based RPGs that boast tens of hours of playtime.
What I'm saying is this: go fuck yourself.

[Anonymous No.1831720]

>>1831689
Most modern hard difficulties are afterthoughts that just make enemies and bosses into damage sponges, make you die in less hits, change nothing else, and often need to be unlocked.
The games are almost always designed around the pathetically easy normal difficulty.

[Anonymous No.1831723]

>>1831708
I would gladly pay $60 for the most exquisitely designed 30-minute game. Assets and production are not what create value in a game.

[Anonymous No.1831727]

>>1831714
I would never pay a single dollar for the worst possible genre called JRPGs.
>>1831723
Yeah, I would also pay a million for some of my dream scenarios.

[Anonymous No.1831728]

>>1831720
>The games are almost always designed around the pathetically easy normal difficulty.
How do you know they're not designed around the hard difficulty and then the easy shit is added afterwards? Are you a game dev? Credentials please.

[Anonymous No.1831772]

>>1831723
You're underestimating how shitty such an extremely short game would be. 30 minutes is barely enough to properly immerse yourself into a game. Just when you get used to everything and start to enjoy yourself it would be over.

Every adult should know that balance is needed in everything. A 30 minute game is already by default a low quality game just because of the lacking content.

[Anonymous No.1831786]

Artificial difficulty is a means of temporarily blocking the player's progress which wants you to THINK it is legitimate difficulty but is not. The usual reason for this is to give the game fake longevity by stalling the player, or to eat up their quarters.

>The game kills the player simply for not knowing something they couldn't have possibly known in advance, i.e. the invisible block scenario. This IS artificial difficulty.
>The game gives the player a false sense of progression when it's really forcing them to perform some repetitive action disguised as new gameplay, i.e. grinding (for lives, exp, etc.) This IS artificial difficulty.
>The game throws dangerous situations at the player that require pinpoint accuracy and timing. This IS NOT artificial difficulty.

Learn the fucking difference.

[Anonymous No.1831791]

>>1831772
>A 30 minute game is already by my personal definition a low quality game just because of the lacking content.
FTFY

[Anonymous No.1831796]

>>1831697
Short + replay value = win.

[Anonymous No.1831806]

>>1831772
>You're underestimating how shitty such an extremely short game would be.
And you're underestimating how completely awesome an extremely short game can be.

[Anonymous No.1831808]

>>1831772
Contra is 30 minutes long.

[Anonymous No.1831825]

>>1831786
This, so much this.

Also, every one else in this thread, pic related.

[Anonymous No.1831827]

>>1831772
Well where do you draw the line? First time playing? I beat Mega man 2 on Difficult this morning in 30 minutes and it was a hectic and great action packed half an hour

[Anonymous No.1831839]

>>1831772
this is why old games have loops

[Anonymous No.1831842]

>>1831728
>game is designed to be played on the difficulty you have to unlock by beating normal
Are you stupid?

[Anonymous No.1831848]

>>1831772
Oh man, you're right. I guess I'll stop enjoying things like Metal Slug, Darius Gaiden, and Ghouls 'n Ghosts now. You've convinced me.

[Anonymous No.1831853]

So what's the shortest great game guise? I've got a Kingdom Grandprix replay that's only 18 minutes long.

[Anonymous No.1831858]

>>1831853
OoT. Can be beaten in like ten minutes.

[Anonymous No.1831859]

>>1831853
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qVOOiCFktU4

[Anonymous No.1831861]

>>1831858
Okay... Without glitching.

[Anonymous No.1831864]

>>1831842
Funny, last few games I played had a hard mode.

[Anonymous No.1831878]

>>1831859
Strider sucks though.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_tn0kCwxOak

[Anonymous No.1831885]

>>1831878
No it doesn't.

[Anonymous No.1831894]

>>1831885
It really does.

[Anonymous No.1831907]

>>1831894
Maybe it does.

[Anonymous No.1831928]

>>1831894
Nah.

[Anonymous No.1831943]

>>1831670
They did change, the little bumpy edges on both sides actually made it a little bit harder

[Anonymous No.1831953]

>>1831539
Did you just record this?

[Anonymous No.1831986]

>>1831853
Clue for the PC was beaten in roughly 1 second. It's on SDA.

[Anonymous No.1831995]

>>1831986
Is it a great game?

[Anonymous No.1832009]

>>1831995
I don't know, I didn't really see much.

[Anonymous No.1832024]

>>1831219
you should have known this new and more difficult game would block the easiest path. you're a whiny bitch

[Anonymous No.1832039]

>>1831603

that's not artificial difficulty it's just bad game design

how fucked in the head must you be to enjoy experiencing the same exact content more than once?

[Anonymous No.1832056]

>>1831448
Yeah, otherwise how would people rack up millions of points in stuff like Robotron?

[Anonymous No.1832091]

>>1831351
I introduced my 2-year-old cousin to SMB the other day, and he kept running into the first goomba every time. That difficulty was so artificial. How did you guys ever like those cheating-ass video games in the 80s?

Seriously, though. With enough experience, you will start to be wary of things that look too easy. If I'm playing a new Doom map I've never played, and I see an empty room with a key in it, I have a pretty good idea it's not as safe as it looks. Once you hit the first invisible block, you know they're going to be around in the future.

[Anonymous No.1832097]

>>1832039

-500/10

[Anonymous No.1832109]

>>1832091
>I introduced my 2-year-old cousin to SMB the other day, and he kept running into the first goomba every time
I hope you don't seriously believe that this is a convincing argument.

[Anonymous No.1832112]

>>1832109
I hope one day you can understand humor

[Anonymous No.1832113]

>>1831694
not really

[Anonymous No.1832118]

>>1832112
I understand it just fine, and that's why I don't recognize that as humor.

[Anonymous No.1832119]

artificial difficulty just feels like some cool new word people use as an nicer alternative way to say they suck at the game they're playing.

[Anonymous No.1832123]

>>1832119
Yeah, the term is garbage and that's usually what it's used for.
I wish people would just say a game is "unfair" and provide proof.

[Anonymous No.1832141]

>>1831705
>>1832113
Are you still running a 486 or something? Nuts.wad runs fine on any modern system.

[Anonymous No.1832145]

>>1831539
I like how this video exists. "How to go down this particular staircase in Link to the Past".

[Anonymous No.1832214]

>>1832123
people used to call games unfair, but yeah, they never offered proof.

[Anonymous No.1832223]

>>1831539
It's easy, just use the peggy booties. They cancel out your ice momentum.

[Anonymous No.1832230]

>>1831786
Uh...the coins in that picture (demonstrating the invisible block scenario you said IS artificial difficulty) are clearly showing Mario where he can safely jump.

[Anonymous No.1832254]

>>1832141

It really doesnt using gzdoom on an 4ghz i7 and sli GTX 580's it drops to 20fps lowest

[Anonymous No.1832256]

>>1831772
>30 minutes is barely enough to properly immerse yourself into a game
>muh immersion

We're talking about GAMES, not shitty asperger visual novels like Persona.

[Anonymous No.1832262]

>>1832254
Something's bottlenecking it, must be a driver issue. Quit using shitty Windows 8 or something, I don't know. Not my problem.

[Anonymous No.1832269]

>>1832123
Artificial difficulty in games is 90% high critical hit rates and 10% unavoidable traps. The "difficulty" is "artificial" because the player fails according to the game even though there's nothing they can do to stop it.

Everyone knows what it means. Using the term wrong is nothing more than a meme. End of story.

[Anonymous No.1832291]

>>1832256
>The two latest games focus on and reward social interactions
>Aspergers
Get a fucking dictionary!

[Anonymous No.1832293]

>>1831680
Why are you refusing to respond to this anon who is calling you out? >>1831712

[Anonymous No.1832335]

>>1832291
>The two latest games focus on and reward social interactions
Why would you play a social life simulator unless you didn't have a real one?

[Anonymous No.1832371]

>>1832091
On the doom reference, fine would be picking up the key and being assaulted by various enemies. Not fine would be picking up the key only to have the platform its on instantly descend into acid permanently, and the only way you can get through the part is to immediately jump while running at full speed a split second before you get it.

While the first tests your skills in dealing with enemies in an enclosed area, the second just serves to kill you unless you know the trick to the trap. No amount of skill or quick reflexes could prepare you for that, unless the map designer put similar, less lethal situations earlier in on the map.

Megaman 2 would handle something like that correctly -- invisible pits in the floor in Dr. Wily's castle first drop you harmlessly to the floor below, and later drop you into spikes. By the time they're dropping you into spikes, you should know that there's invisible pits since you've fallen in one and have devised ways around them.

[Anonymous No.1832386]

>>1832293
>Lists a large subset of games from various eras, many of which have considerable difficulty
>"Oh, you didn't play MY very specific subset of games? Than your opinion is invalid."

[Anonymous No.1832420]

>>1832335
>Why would you play a social life simulator unless you didn't have a real one?
Yeah, everyone with a social life is out with friends all of the time and has no spare moments for video games.

More importantly, how would someone who can't be social in real life achieve it in a video game?

[Anonymous No.1832461]

>>1832420
You can't savescum in real life.

[Anonymous No.1832472]

Goddamn you guys and your "artificial difficulties", "bad game design" and "hipster shit".

[Anonymous No.1832478]

>>1832335

Hahaha why would you play a sports game if you play sports. Great logic, kid.

[Anonymous No.1832482]

>>1831603
>not using the continue trick in SMB1

[Anonymous No.1832485]

>>1832461
protip: become Hindu

[Anonymous No.1832489]

>>1832482
>needing to continue in SMB

[Anonymous No.1832504]

>>1831808
Exactly, and the difference between Contra and God knows how many short, expensive indie games is in the replayability. Contra, to a newcomer, is really rather difficult. It's a game whose mechanics and abilities you have to learn, otherwise you're going to die, and very quickly. However, this doesn't mean you stop playing: you just keep on going and improve, little by little. You replay it. If you have a short, expensive game and it's not replayable in all the right ways, it's not worth shit.

[Anonymous No.1832506]

>>1832109
The first time I played SML, I didn't know how to jump. Kept running into the first Goomba, died every time. I soon realised that the buttons actually did things, but still.

[Anonymous No.1832509]

>>1832489
pretty much, but if you're that bad and you do happen to game over...

[Anonymous No.1832514]

>>1832509
Then you should restart from the beginning and develop gaming skills like we all did on the NES.

I wonder if people actually enjoy games sometimes.

[Anonymous No.1832516]

>>1832254
>gzdoom
>zdoom

There's your problem. ZDoom is retarded at actor processing, so it shits itself when trying to run thinkers on hundreds of actors at once. PrBoom+ doesn't have this problem because all the monsters are hardcoded.

[Anonymous No.1832518]

>>1832420
>how would someone who can't be social in real life achieve it in a video game?
Maybe because video game characters are a lot more readable than people in real life?

[Anonymous No.1832523]

>>1831093
>back when the SNES was new
>I didn't have one yet but I read about the games in Nintendo Power
>read that Mario could punch by pressing "Y"
>parents go to mall, i get to play SMW at a demo display
>some older kids are watching me
>trembling, excited to see Mario's amazing new punching power, I run up to the first goomba and press Y
>I die and lose my turn
>kids laugh at me for running straight into the first goomba

[Anonymous No.1832592]

>>1831953
Yes. Why?

[Anonymous No.1832615]

>>1831629
I say jogability still. But I say it to make fun of that Brazilian dude who started the Streets of Rage 2 thread where that meem came from.

[Anonymous No.1832629]

>>1831219
>foreknowledge
>artificial difficulty

Yeah, fuck Myst!

[Anonymous No.1832630]

>>1832262
No one fucking asked you.

[Anonymous No.1832647]

>>1832523
>not pressing Y as soon as you start playing

[Anonymous No.1832650]

>>1831689
No they aren't. I play action games and shooters on the hardest available difficulty.

Played MGS2 on Extreme, killed 25 metal gears, was tough. Tougher than EA/Activision high difficulties. Still nothing compared to NES megaman or castlevania or even retro styled games like touhou.

None of that shit makes you analyze how you are playing, you can just spawn in the last room and keep pushing until you luck your way to the next room/checkpoint. Punishing player action the way old games did and dark souls and touhou forces players to think to get ahead.

[Anonymous No.1832682]

>>1832650
>Still nothing compared to NES megaman

NES Mega Man isn't even hard.

[Anonymous No.1832945]

>>1832371
You created a situation out of nothing to prove your point.

Also, refer to >>1831825

[Anonymous No.1832953]

>>1832682
I bet you used the pause glitch you fgt.

[Anonymous No.1832958]

>>1832953
No, actually.

Yellow Devil is just an easy-to-follow pattern that never changes. The only variation in that fight is where his eye appears. That fight is built on memorization.

[Anonymous No.1832997]

>>1832629
>Comparing a platforming challenge that punishes you for not seeing an invisible object the first time through
>To a puzzle game where the entire fucking point is figuring out the solution, and where there is no distinct punishment for a wrong answer

2/10 made me respond

[Anonymous No.1833068]

>>1831539
The fucking fact this this video exists SHOWS there's a problem. Thanks for confirming! :3

[Anonymous No.1833130]

>>1833068
No it doesn't and your logic is bad.

By the very definition every single video of anything in existence is proof that it's broken.

Oh no, the very fact a video jumping over a goomba exists SHOWS there's a problem!

In this case it does show there's a problem, you're literally a fucking backwards ass fucking retard who belongs on /v/ and you couldn't have possibly passed second grade with that degree of incompetent reasoning skills. :3

It doesn't however demonstrate that the game has a problem.

[Anonymous No.1833134]

>>1833130
Turn off that shitty filter.

[KOManiacJim No.1833179]

Here's my logic on why old games had to be difficult:

Back in the day the main audience for game systems would be adolescents who are only allowed to pick one game to get on the family's payday. That means that if the players are going to get about several weeks worth of gameplay then the devs have to make the game difficult in order for it to last.

[Anonymous No.1833194]

>>1833179
There are several reasons like that. Another reason is that many games were arcade ports and arcade games were made extra hard to suck more money out of your pocket.

[Anonymous No.1833209]

>>1833179
>>1833194
Also games were very short, but making them hard made it look like they were very long

[Anonymous No.1833212]

>>1833179
difficulty was a way of making a game more interesting/replayable esp because games back then were so short

[Anonymous No.1833220]

>>1833179
>>1833194
>>1833209
>>1833212
These are all myths though, there was no calculated effort to make games as hard as possible. It's just that people weren't crybaby casuals back then.

[Anonymous No.1833221]

>>1831563
I wonder how Druaga got popular with all of its cryptic bullshit.

I mean, at least the 'artificially difficult' Ghosts n' Goblins had a logic that players could learn and exploit.

[Anonymous No.1833225]

>>1833220
Myths? This are well known facts that concluded from various interviews.

Another popular reason for difficulty in retro games is that the devs played the games so much that they seemed pretty easy so they decided to make them even more difficult.

[Anonymous No.1833241]

>>1833225
>devs played the games so much that they seemed pretty easy so they decided to make them even more difficult
Yes, which means they weren't deliberately making the games as hard as possible.

[Anonymous No.1833246]

>>1833241
No one even said that. They just gave some reasons to why retro games are difficult.

[Anonymous No.1833264]

Sometimes I honestly wish people would stick to their own generations of games and not bother with older games so I don't have to hear their 'opinions'. They have no reference points to go off of so it's always the same bullshit.

Call me elitist all you want but it does get tiring.

[Anonymous No.1833279]

>>1833264
Stop taking everything seriously you read on this board.

[Anonymous No.1833307]

perfect example of the concept: Syobon Action

[Anonymous No.1833317]

>>1831093
Imagine reaching that area in the GBC remake.

As much fun as SMBDX was, I fucking hated how small the screen was. Especially when it came to large jumps and not being able to see upcoming enemies.

[Anonymous No.1833319]

>>1833279

There's a difference between banter and totally moronic threads about 'artificial difficulty'. I guess you like threads filled with buzzwords and dick measuring contests.

It wouldn't be a problem if the whole board wasn't overrun with stupidity now.

[Anonymous No.1833330]

>>1833134
Go fuck yourself.

[Anonymous No.1833357]

>>1833221
The same way Spelunker got popular in Japan despite its unforgiving difficulty. Many kids just grew up and were traumatized trying the game

[Anonymous No.1833379]

>>1831351
Just joining this conversation, but not sure how this is hard.

[Anonymous No.1833382]

>>1833246
Yes, and every single reason that was given boils down to "they deliberately made the games real hard to increase their monetary worth", which is at odds with the idea that developers made their games harder because, having playtested them so much, the games felt too easy to them. In that scenario, the developers are just trying to make a game that they enjoy playing.
Not even the guy you replied to.

[Anonymous No.1833386]

>>1833379
Nothing I'm talking about in my post is hard, so I'm not sure what you're trying to say.

[Anonymous No.1833404]

>>1831121
Sometimes... no, a LOT of times, game designers are just lame. Most hard games are about "artificial difficult" because most games are bad.

[Anonymous No.1833410]

go play call of duty if old games are too hard. complaining wont make you a better player kids.

[Anonymous No.1833414]

>>1832230
This isn't the point of coins.

Coins = get them to improve your score

Be placing coins as hint for traps, without warning the player about this change, you a breaking the game's rules.

[Anonymous No.1833415]

>>1831501
There are some good examples of artificial difficulty in this thread. You are giving an example of someone sucking.

[Anonymous No.1833436]

>>1831221
> You die the first time, you learn
You are forcing the player to memorize bullshit.

> Or do you think the first goomba you meet in smb1 is artificial difficulty as well?
No because the manual says that you kill them jumping at their heads

>>1831279
Yes, most arcade games were designed to suck coins from the players.

>>1831340
> if a game was very transparently killing you in cheap ways to make you throw in more quarters, very few people would ever want to play it more than once and it wouldn't make much money.
Bullshit. Games like Megaman 1 and 2, Metroid 1 and Castlevania 1 are filled with cheapness and yet are considered classics.

Most players just think that dying in games over and over again is "challenging"

[Anonymous No.1833443]

>>1833414
Coins are sometimes used to tell the player about secrets or help guide them through things like otherwise blind jumps in Mario games, but yeah, most of the time they are just there to be collected and don't really telegraph a damn thing, least of all hidden trap blocks.
Besides that, it's just some video game comic. The coins are there because the guy who drew it really wanted you to be sure it was a Mario level, and so included Mario things in the image. They aren't there as part of some game's design.

>>1833436
>Most players just think that dying in games over and over again is "challenging"
On the contrary, I believe it's the not dying that's challenging.

[Anonymous No.1833445]

>>1833436

What's sad is that you spent a few minutes typing out that post when you could have just said you can't play games for shit. Why are you even here?

[Anonymous No.1833448]

>>1831421
But most old games (before the 90's) were full of trial and error gameplay, poor design and artificial difficulty. Why is this so hard to admit? Nostalgia? Hipster mentality?

When videogames started, most game designers had no idea what they were doing

> oh man this megaman boss without any kind of pattern is so challenging!!!!111

Lol.

>>1831603
> So like those old 2D platformers like Super Mario Bros et al. When you lose all your lives and have to go through the whole game again from the beginning it's 'artificial difficulty'.

Well, Super Mario Bros 3 was artificial difficulty because it was a fucking long game without password or save states

[Anonymous No.1833451]

>>1833436
Metroid 1 is fucking awful but the rest of the games you listed go out of their way to introduce elements to you in controlled conditions so you know what's going to happen and its up to the player to react accordingly when put in a more difficult position down the line. Even Mega Man 1, which is fucking broken wide open from the word go, does this.

if you're too stupid to pick up what's going on in the game, that's you're fault.

[Anonymous No.1833453]

>>1833221
Ghosts n' Goblins was all about memorization and trial and error bullshit

> Ghosts n' Goblins had a logic that players could learn and exploit.

> exploit

When you need to exploit a game, this means that the game sucks

[Anonymous No.1833473]

>>1833445
No arguments, ok.

>>1833451
Megaman 1 and 2 have poor designed bosses that lack a real fighting pattern and some pretty stupid enemy placement. Megaman 1 also forced the player to get a secret item to finish the game

Castlevania 1 controls are too clunky while most enemies and bosses are too fast. They don't telegraph their attacks properly. There is a lot of bullshit enemy placement and retarded hitboxes in the game. Some parts of the game are only doable if you have a specific sub-weapon, but you will only know this after dying

> tfw fighting the grim reaper without a cross

[Anonymous No.1833476]

>>1832291
>>1832291
Yeah, as an Aspy, my brain is geared to get bored by visual novels and slightly-interactive CG movies. My brain is wired for actual games.

These insults are used incorrectly.

[Anonymous No.1833480]

>>1833451
> Best megaman ever made.
- /vr/

[Anonymous No.1833482]

>>1833473

>wahh games made for kids are too hard

I don't need to argue your points when it's clear you're a babby who can't play the most basic games.

[Anonymous No.1833493]

>>1833453

>A game having an internal logic that you have to study and understand.
>To master the game, you must turn the game against itself.

This is bad?

[Anonymous No.1833494]

>>1833436
>Games like Megaman 1 and 2, Metroid 1 and Castlevania 1 are filled with cheapness and yet are considered classics.
"Filled" is a HUGE exaggeration.
Sure, Mega Man 2 has boobeam traps, Heatman's disappearing blocks, and quick lasers (that last one's arguable whether it's unfair or not), but things like that stand out so much because they contrast so strongly with the rest of the game which generally provides a very fair challenge. The same basic idea goes for Mega Man and Castlevania as well.
Metroid isn't hard, and for an average playthrough isn't short either. It's nothing like an arcade game, and arcade games were the subject of discussion in my post, so I don't know what point you are trying to make there.

>>1833473
>mfw beating the grim reaper without a cross
It wasn't a big deal.
The idea that you NEED a specific sub-weapon to have any chance of winning at any point in the game is a complete fabrication.

I feel sort of dirty even touching the "2clunky4me" argument, but everything about the game is designed around how your jumping and whipping works. Nothing unreasonable is ever demanded of you.

[Anonymous No.1833497]

>>1831539
The first seconds of the video are hilarious.

> you need to be at this EXACTLY PIXEL to move down, because we (game designers) said so. Invisible walls are 100% fair, stop complaining!

>>1832145
Pretty much this.

[Anonymous No.1833501]

>>1833319
I agree with you. Personally I get tired of the 80 millionth "Recommend me games for X console, or in X theme", when we have a game recommendation thread up 24/7.

The trick is to avoid shit threads, and post threads about quality old games that don't appeal to the kids. HoMM, text adventures, Atari or Master System games, etc.

[Anonymous No.1833504]

>>1832945
He had to create a situation out of nothing because Doom doesn't have artificial difficulty.

[Anonymous No.1833520]

>>1833386
It's clearly hard for several people here.

I'm agreeing with you.

[Anonymous No.1833521]

>>1833493
I think the guy you're replying to is thinking more of things like knowing exactly how the Red Arremer's AI works and manipulating it such that he flies off screen and despawns himself. That sort of shit.
I would agree that if you have to do something like that to stand a chance, it's not a good time.

Note: I'm not saying Ghosts 'n Goblins is like this. I've only played and beaten all of the sequels and spinoffs, but have never bothered with the original because it looks plain and boring to me.

[Anonymous No.1833525]

>>1833520
Oh.
Well thanks anon.

[Anonymous No.1833536]

>>1833134
it's not a filter

[Anonymous No.1833538]

>>1831093
>artificial difficulty

you're on the wrong board, son. people here actually play games.

[Anonymous No.1833543]

>>1831539

>filter scanlines

HAHAHA

[Anonymous No.1833548]

>>1833536
Get a better capture card then.

[Anonymous No.1833550]

>>1833448

>But most old games (before the 90's) were full of trial and error gameplay, poor design and artificial difficulty

From what I can tell, Trial and Error gameplay is a part of artificial difficulty which is bad game design. I won't deny that but I don't see those three things as different.

A lot of games designed in this time period were rather short and the challenge was playing through 'difficult' levels that made the game seem longer. A big part of this was adding things that were contrary to a good design and which simply made a game harder.

>When videogames started, most game designers had no idea what they were doing

They did. They purposely designed certain games around being short but extremely difficult. The Nes Ghosts and Goblins has just 6 stages but the game is full of the same bad design (Trial and Error, 'artificial difficulty,' and having to run through the game twice) that make the game much longer than it needs to be. Though the Snes counterpart is thought to be a difficult platformer too, its not as hard for the same reasons the Nes version is difficult. It shares the same bad design in having to play through the game twice, but there's a lot less bs so the game is much more tolerable.

>Well, Super Mario Bros 3 was artificial difficulty because it was a fucking long game without password or save states

It was only long if you decided to play every stage and used no warps. Using warps found in the first World alone the game can be done in 20 minutes or less depending on how good the player is

I don't think a game being long adds to it's 'artificial difficulty' though. I consider artificial difficulty to be bad designs that push on the bullshit factor.

For example - Arcade Fighters that allowed you to beat a cpu, get btfo by the next cpu, have to put in another credit/coin to rematch, then the cpu who just destroyed you becomes a complete pushover. This is artificial difficulty used to get people to spend more on arcade games.

[Anonymous No.1833559]

For the sake of clarity, could everybody involved here give a definition of "artificial difficulty", so we can tell if you're even talking about the same thing?

[Anonymous No.1833573]

>>1833559
I can guarantee you that nobody here knows what they're talking about.

[Anonymous No.1833593]

>>1833559
>I consider artificial difficulty to be bad designs that push on the bullshit factor.

My definition. I include bad designs to be Trial and Error gameplay, Shitty Controls (not clunky, but actually shitty) and Unfair stage designs

Nes Ghost and Goblins is the epitome of all three factors.

Castlevania 1 and 3 has clunky controls that aren't shitty while Shaq Fu has shitty controls in general, for example.

For Bad/Unfair Level Design, (Not retro, but...) Sonic Advance 3 has this problem. The GBA screen + the speed of the game means you often don't have time to prepare for what's ahead. In 1 and 2, this was fine since Spin Dashing usually was safe and there were a lot less instant death points in the stages. In 3, they added a lot more bottomless pits and crushing devices, so you'd often hit a wall/careen off an edge and die before you had a chance to react

Also, difficult platforming =/= unfair platforming but some games can have both. Unfair platforming punishes the player without warning while difficult platforming just takes practice. Some games can have both. Megaman is probably considered a difficult platformer while IWBTG is considered difficult and unfair (at least, to me). IWBTG punishes first time players with traps that only a newcomer would trigger (unfair) but mixes this with precision platforming, unique puzzles and timed platforming that would take practice to get used to and master (difficult)

[Anonymous No.1833627]

>>1833593
>someone else who recognize Sonic Advance 3 has the most unfair level design of the Advance series by far
Not retro, but goddamn, I've been waiting for so long.

[Anonymous No.1833684]

>>1833504
Default Doom doesn't, but a lot of user created WADs have various degrees of bad design such as the previously mentioned thing. The only difference is it's ok to shit on them because they're made by random modders, but talking poorly about a game I played in my childhood is forbidden.

The one thing I dislike about /vr/ is that a large portion of the board's denizens refuse to acknowledge any flaws or just things that could be improved on in their favorite games. Instead, they develop the sort of mentality that anything other than outright broken things should be defended because it's part of the original experience regardless if it should be or not.

On thread topic, there was a part in Megaman 3 in the Doc Robot Needleman stage where you had to fly your rush jet adapter over a long pit, picking up energy refills along the way so you could complete it. If you die during the flight, the capsules don't respawn, forcing you to get a game over to retry that part. While it's not particularly difficult to complete that segment, it's certainly poor design since it can place the player in an unwinnable state with no recourse except for failure.

[Anonymous No.1833689]

>>1833684
Yeah, I love that game, but I don't think that was great design.

I'm not sure if it counts as artificial difficulty or not, though. Probably does, but doesn't quite feel like it fits to me.

[Anonymous No.1833694]

Test

[Anonymous No.1833743]

>>1833694
A rousing success.

[Anonymous No.1833784]

>>1833743
Bravo, Julienne

[Anonymous No.1833796]

>>1833684
That is how I felt trying to kill Sigma in X4. Once you run out of energy for your weapon, you are forced to kill yourself until you can restart with your weapon filled. This is made worse if you picked the tank that gives you extra lives

[Anonymous No.1833802]

>>1833796
I just used the normal buster for the entire fight.
Stop whining

[Anonymous No.1833803]

>>1833802
Well, in his first form, you have no choice but to use Rising Fire. It's the only thing that can hurt him.

But you'd have to be fucking terrible at the game to have this much trouble with Sigma.

[Anonymous No.1833813]

>>1832945
Actually I think that situation was pulled straight from a level in Doom 2. Then again they called it Tricks and Traps, so I don't know what I was expecting.

[Anonymous No.1833826]

>>1833559
>definition
waaaaaaaaaaaaaaah games are hard, they shouldn't be hard. the guy who made this is a bad programmer.

It's a shit term used by armchair game designers who think they could do better.

[Anonymous No.1834006]

>>1833559
see
>>1831219

[Anonymous No.1834075]

>>1831093
Nigga, that ain't artificial difficulty. You just need to time it right and let your momentum carry you forward. If you stop before every obstacle you're a pussy anyway.

Required excessive grinding, AI cheating, and things like invisible blocks that you can't possibly know about your first time through are artificial difficulty though. Even though it isn't artificial difficulty, it's still bad game design when games that have poor control or hit detection require jumping on tiny platforms and shit like that.

[Anonymous No.1834076]

>>1833593
>>1833627
I dunno. I felt Advance 2 was worse.

Though Ocean Base in Advance 3 was pretty bullshit at times.

[Anonymous No.1834079]

Artificial difficulty is when the only form of challenge comes from endurance because enemies have too much health.

[Anonymous No.1834093]

>>1833220
Well it varies from dev to dev obviously, but one of the developers of Echo the Dolphin claimed the game was designed to be hard because the developers didn't want people to rent it and beat it over the weekend.

I doubt they were the only developers with such concerns.

[Anonymous No.1834107]

>>1832523
There are no goombas in SMW. What the fuck is going on?

[Anonymous No.1834109]

>>1834107
Are too. They just work a bit differently than in previous games.

[Anonymous No.1834120]

>>1834109
>tfw goombas weren't meant to be mushrooms but actually chestnuts

[Anonymous No.1834130]

>tfw you always get stuck on random parts of games
>everytime you see a thread about a really hard boss or section of a game it's one you didn't really struggle with
>everytime you ask for advice people make fun of you because you're stuck on a part no one else gets stuck on

Why can't I just be normal, /vr/

[Anonymous No.1834175]

>>1833543
It's actually more than scanlines.

[Anonymous No.1834179]

>>1834175

[Anonymous No.1834180]

>>1832514
>castlevania let you replay levels ad infinitum
>mega man 2 gave you passwords
>"nuh brah we all hardcore coz we playd super mario no continues"

lol

[Anonymous No.1834182]

>>1834179
pls

[Anonymous No.1834187]

>>1833536
Actually it is a filter.

>>1833548
Get a better website that supports a better video format from a better encoder.

[Anonymous No.1834192]

>>1834182
If you insist.

[Anonymous No.1834205]

>>1833436
Metroid 1 has almost no cheapness. There's like three things in the game that cheap, two of them are variations of falling in lava pits. One requires a bomb hop out of the lava to get out even with high jump, the other requires a lot of e-tanks to get out since it makes you stuck if you land just the wrong way. The other would be the Mother brain fight with the bullet curtain effect added onto the regenerating barriers. It's possible to beat, but it's pretty much the only place you're likely to actually end up dying. Otherwise the game pretty much leads you where you need to go and clues you in on a specific secrets secrets and makes it easy to find secrets .

[Anonymous No.1834217]

>>1834192
stahp

[Anonymous No.1834236]

>>1834217
I'm sorry Dave, I'm afraid I can't do that.

[Anonymous No.1834264]

The AI in this game

[Anonymous No.1834268]

>>1834264
I never played that one, but Jade in MK trilogy was beyond cheap.
Even on easy difficulty she STILL kicked my butt.

[Anonymous No.1834271]

>>1831786

>invisible blocks you only discover by trial and error
>repetitive actions to grind something

This is Castlevania 2. The "invisible" blocks and the heart grinding doesn't require any skill, it's only repetitive. It's the only example of artificial difficulty I could remember. In other hand, I like the VIP Mario hack series, they put this kind of frustrating thing in the game, but somehow it's absolutely fun.

[Anonymous No.1834281]

>>1834268

>Jade

Only the dead can know peace from this evil.

[Anonymous No.1834358]

>>1831825
>'proceed with caution'
>springs trap

[Anonymous No.1834378]

>>1834264

>Enemies that can can perfectly counter any input
>Enemies that can cancel your combo by blocking
>Reaching the mountain of bullshit that is Motaro and having to deal with teleportation, immunity to projectiles and all attacks taking off 1/3 of your lifebar

Hands down the most infuriating arcade fighter I've ever played.

[Anonymous No.1834449]

>>1834378
You heard it here, folks. Blocking is artificial difficulty!

You might want to clarify that to "by blocking in the middle of your combo despite being in hitstun".

[Anonymous No.1834556]

What's wrong with trial and error gameplay? Tons of arcade games are like that, and they're hella fun to play. And how is that fake difficulty? Maybe the developer intended that fire trap to be just like that so you'd take a hit and have to face bowser as small Mario?

You're all taking it too seriously. A ton of older games had problems that have been pointed out in this thread, but that's just what you have to prepare for when you play retro games, that's the nature of them, they're old.

[Anonymous No.1834562]

>>1834358
except that didn't happen in dark souls

[Anonymous No.1834585]

>>1834556
What do you consider trial and error?

[Anonymous No.1834690]

>>1834180

Can you even read? I said if someone is bad enough to need continues on SMB then they would benefit from restarting the game anyway to get better.

Nobody thinks Mario is hard, kid.

[Anonymous No.1834712]

>>1834690
the hipsters on this board regularly complain about it being too hard.

[Anonymous No.1834713]

>>1834690
I thought the original was pretty fucking tough.

[Anonymous No.1834715]

>>1834690
No, I'd say the NES Mario games get pretty challenging.
I think people forget how hard they can get near the end because they've been playing them for decades and know them like the back of their hands.

[Anonymous No.1834727]

>>1834712
>>1834713
>>1834715

Well that's fine but I mean it's still just timing jumps and very basic strategy.

[Anonymous No.1834750]

>>1834715
>decades

most of these games take 3-4 weeks of practice for doing a perfect run, this includes supposedly "hard" games like castlevania. now sure, if you're just casually playing games every once in a while it'll take longer, but that's not the same thing.

[Anonymous No.1834767]

There's nothing wrong with enjoying a challenge but the way you fags brag about "gitting gud", "man up and stop complaining", "stop sucking at videogames" is fucking immature and discouraging. You should always stick to smaller, easy goals when doing this shit, try getting as far as possible, even cheating if you have to. Then slowly take off the training wheels. At the end of the day it's just a videogame and losing and feeling frustrating doesn't do any good to your self esteem.

[Anonymous No.1834774]

>>1834750
Also Mario has a harder second loop if you don't use any warps, so technically none of you actually "beat it". Now stop penis waving about stupid shit no one cares about in the real world.

[Anonymous No.1834775]

>>1834449
It was perfectly clear to me, but you are probably right.

[Anonymous No.1834779]

>>1834774
How is it harder?

[Anonymous No.1834801]

>>1834750
You've never replayed a game after beating it?

[Anonymous No.1834803]

>>1834767

Why would someone be on /vr/ if they don't play games already? If babby wants to play and gets offended it's not my problem.

[Anonymous No.1834815]

>>1834803
You're not helping people man up and enjoy the hobby properly, you're just scaring people off.
It doesn't really offend me because I don't play skill games to begin with, but it's toxic behavior that will eventually lead to a mid life crisis when you spend to much time on a vidya only to find out the community still cal you a "scrub" and tell you to "git gud". But whatever, I can be a manchild too if you want, here you're momma is so low she gave a blowjob to a midget. Happy?

[Anonymous No.1834819]

>>1834815
>you're not helping people improve at the game and enjoy the hobby properly
Autofixd

[Anonymous No.1834830]

>>1831202
Yeah man I fucking hate these fucking millenial entitled gamers. Shit was wayyyy better back in the old days

[Anonymous No.1834831]

>>1834815

>I don't play skill games
>people get scared to play games
>games is super serious

Okay.

[Anonymous No.1834836]

>>1834264
>>1834268
>>1834378
I beat it when I was like 10. Step up scrubs.

Also
>>Enemies that can cancel your combo by blocking
That's bullshit. The AI can't block your combo once it's started unless you fuck it up.

[Anonymous No.1834839]

>>1834831
>>games is super serious
I got multiple death threats for mistakes I made in games in the past. There is no denying that there is, as he said, toxic behavior among gamers, either people who never learned how to lose or people who ram their dicks into other people's business.

[Anonymous No.1834840]

>>1833179
http://steamcommunity.com/id/jimmckigney

[Anonymous No.1834841]

>>1834839

I don't remember threatening your life so if you're done that would be great.

[Anonymous No.1834853]

>>1834801
depends on the game. I'll spend my time on those games that have enough mechanical depth and a high enough skill ceiling in them to remain interesting. I can't say this applies to many games (when viewed critically most games both old and new hardly add anything substantial to the table, they're just copypasta of something that's usually far better than what the developers seeked to immitate, often without understanding what made the original good).

[Anonymous No.1834868]

>>1834775
It's not that it's unclear, it's that the wording is such that it's easy to misrepresent. Trollproofing your statements is never a bad idea.

[Anonymous No.1834882]

>>1834831
Yeah maybe scared off would be pushing it, but I sure feel like giving up after spending so much time on something as useless as videogame skills.

[Anonymous No.1834908]

>>1834853
Ooh I bet your 1cc on doodoopoo gets all the ladies wet, huh? You have a pretty high score, how many pussies have you fucked, nerd?
If I found you in real life you and your spaghetti arms and pencil neck wouldn't seem so tough anymore. Go back to ur mario bros, NERD.

[Anonymous No.1834912]

>>1834882
>>1834908

>oops this isn't /tv/

[Anonymous No.1834948]

>>1834908
does that rectum of yours really bleed so much when you hear of people being better than you?

[Anonymous No.1834950]

How 'bout you winning at the game of LIFE, bich?

[Anonymous No.1834952]

>>1834948
>better than you
>on fucking babby mario bros
Not really, you know you're beta when you need to resort to a children's toy as your only achievement in life. GET OUT OF THE HOUSE.

[Anonymous No.1834956]

Would those instances in old adventure games where you get instakilled by something you couldn't have possibly predicted count as artificial difficulty or just bad game design?

[Anonymous No.1834957]

>>1834950
wow, you must be a true asset to your local protologist.

[Anonymous No.1834958]

>>1834952
ur ababy
>>1834956
no, atmosphere

[Anonymous No.1834960]

>>1834950
I dont get it, why am I staring at a picture of two women?

[Anonymous No.1834961]

>>1834952
this butthurt is truly delicious, can I have some more?

[Anonymous No.1834963]

>>1834908
>>1834950
>>1834952
I'm impressed. Don't worry about these other losers.

[Anonymous No.1834989]

Go back to practicing your skills on my little pony game, u little faggot. You'll always be a weak 6' inch wrist omega faggot.

[Anonymous No.1834993]

>>1834830
Shit was better in the old days... because you were a kid back then, and everything seems better than it really is when you're a kid.

[Anonymous No.1835008]

>>1831786
>>The game kills the player simply for not knowing something they couldn't have possibly known in advance
So, most of Dark Souls?
I'm not saying it's a bad thing, but the difficulty is definitely artificial if that's the definition.
not retro though

[Anonymous No.1835017]

>>1834989
And what do those generic nameless whores have to do with your post?

[Anonymous No.1835020]

>>1834993
Not that guy, but that really doesn't apply to me in the slightest.

[Anonymous No.1835027]

>>1834993
I remember taking three months to complete Shining Force 2. I just cleared the hardtype hack in three days.

[Anonymous No.1835046]

>>1835008
Dark Souls hints at nearly every challenge it throws at you in advance, else you can just read the orange soapstones. That's what they're there for.

[Anonymous No.1835103]

>>1835008
the game is also full of bugs and inconsistent bullshit like that desynced damage volume on one of the dragons.

[Anonymous No.1835173]

>>1834960
kekkk

[Anonymous No.1835290]

>>1831219
>You're just now understanding that almost all games rely on trial and error.
>If they're not they are ridiculed for handholding

[Anonymous No.1835291]

>>1834109
They're called galoombas now. A distinction was always made in Japanese, but only when Mario 3D World came out was a name change made in English.

[Anonymous No.1835636]

>>1833453
I don't mean "exploit" like what one anon said with tricking the Arremer into despawning (though I use the trick in the final level). I mean the fact that the game operates on patterns that can be ultimately learned by observing the game and taking advantage of those patterns.

I mention Druaga because it does not seem to play by that rule-book - some secrets are completely un-learnable without sheer trial-and-error or being outright told.

>>1833473
>CV points

Oh come on. Kids can beat these games. CV1 is nothing in the bullshit department like CV3 is with cheap enemy placement, and even then I was able to beat CV3.

You have plenty of time to react to enemies (like the soldiers with a slow attack animation), and if you aren't immediately reacting by whipping and using your sub-weapon, then why aren't you doing that?

Yeah, there are the vultures and flea men, but they all have a specific time they are vulnerable to your attack, before they reach you. It's just a matter of successfully attacking them, because the punishment for messing up is being hit (with the occasional additional punishment of death).

[Anonymous No.1836317]

I find 16-bit games are often much easier than 8-bit games (especially NES) because enemies respawn instantly any time the screen scrolls back to their spawn point. But on 16-bit games the games always pretty much remember what enemies you've killed in the stage. Ironically I've found Game Boy handles this better than NES. Like in Metroid II, when you kill an enemy in a hallway, it stays dead whenever the screen scrolls back to it, but in NES they always respawn.

[Anonymous No.1836352]

>>1836317
No.
There are plenty of NES games were enemies don't respawn when scrolled off screen, and there are plenty of 16-bit and Game Boy games where they do.

[Anonymous No.1836392]

>>1836352
No what? I said that was my experience with the games I've observed, like Metroid, Zelda, and Contra, that's the way it worked when they made the jump from 8-bit to 16-bit. I didn't say it was 100%. Of course there'd be some games that were designed differently.

[Anonymous No.1836403]

>>1836392
It sounded like you were just saying enemies always respawn in NES games, especially when you said "in NES they always respawn".

[Anonymous No.1836420]

>>1833684
>it's ok to shit on them because they're made by random modders
So? You aren't exempt from criticism just because you're an amateur. If you're an amateur and you make a shitty level, then you should accept the criticism and try not to make those mistakes in the future. You do know many of those "random modders" have also gone on to become professional game designers, right?

The official levels aren't exempt from criticism either. Most of Doom 2's second half is really tedious to play through.

[Anonymous No.1836427]

>>1836420
Doom 2 as a whole was tedious for me to play through compared to the first one. Which is odd, since that was my first Doom as a kid and I did not play Doom 1 until much later

[Anonymous No.1836468]

>>1836420
I'm not complaining that random modders get criticism, I'm complaining that professional parts usually get a pass by a good number of people due to nostalgia. Heaven forbid you complain about something bad in a retro game with a decent sized fanbase, you'll just have a bunch of people accusing you of being too bad to get through whatever it was (And if you did it without much trouble, they'll use that as a defense to its existence) as if it's the only reason someone could dislike it.

In a sentence, my major complaint with discussing games on /vr/ is that many of the locals are unable to take an objective and critical look at their favorite games and realize that none of them will be completely perfect, and any suggestions that something was poorly designed or could've been done better will be met with strawman arguments and personal attacks.

[Anonymous No.1836496]

>>1834585
>What do you consider trial and error?

>do something
>fail
>repeat until you learn from your failures
>succeed

[Anonymous No.1836515]

>>1836496
It's trial and error just because you fail?
What about challenges where what you actually need to do is apparent if you are paying attention, and the execution is what's challenging and could cause you to fail?
Of course, you learn from your failures in this situation by seeing what doesn't quite cut it in terms of execution (you could say the same thing about pretty much everything, not even just in games), but the point is a challenge like that doesn't REQUIRE trial and error. A skilled player may get it right the first time and have no one to blame for their success but themselves.

[Anonymous No.1836535]

>>1836515
>It's trial and error just because you fail?
It's trial and error because there is something to be gained from failure. A game that relies purely on reaction speed - one where you have to hit lights as they randomly blink on and off - has no real learning component even though you can fail.

>What about challenges where what you actually need to do is apparent if you are paying attention, and the execution is what's challenging and could cause you to fail?
Does the failure help you improve, even in minute amounts?

>A skilled player may get it right the first time and have no one to blame for their success but themselves.
Trial and error is one of the fundamental ways of attaining skill; in the context of games, it is by far the predominant way.

[Anonymous No.1836571]

It's easy to externalize your problems, but the true difficulty is in yourself.

[Anonymous No.1836601]

>>1836468
>>1833684
I feel you, but it isn't just /vr/ or exclusive to retro games. It's pretty much a trait of any place you discuss games. Any form of critisism or diffrence of opinion on someone's pet game is felt as a personal attack. Games can be harder to talk about than politics or religeon sometimes.

[Anonymous No.1836606]

>>1831772
>has never played a beat 'em up

[Anonymous No.1837575]

>>1836535
So then, again, if that's the sort of definition you're using, you could say this about literally everything that is possible to mess up.
I mean, the typing you did to reply to me? It's clearly trial and error. You might have hit the wrong key once and had to hit backspace and typed what you meant to type in the first place, learning to better hit only the keys you want to in the process, or you might have typed something and then thought of a clearer way to say it, deleted a lot of already finished text, and redone it for the better.
Do you see how using "trial and error" like this makes it completely meaningless?
The only time the term has any worth is if it's used to describe situations wherein trying something to see if it succeeds or fails (or using a walkthrough, whatever) is the ONLY practical solution available to you.

After typing all that nonsense, it occurs to me that what you are describing is "practice".
Do you really not see the difference between practice and trial and error?

[Anonymous No.1837586]

>>1831670
That looks a bit tight, especially given how 2slow mario is.

[Anonymous No.1837593]

>>1837586
It is.
If you're Super Mario, I can't remember whether you are forced to take a hit or have just a couple frames of leeway if you do everything perfectly.

[Anonymous No.1837596]

>>1835290
>>1831219

Since when is trial and error an invalid method of problem solving anyway?

You faggots simply never learned this. Take math for example. In tests, I hated simple division so fucking much, I learned by myself how to find the answer using trial and error multiplication. I could do it quicker than faggots doing division.

Pls go

[Anonymous No.1837601]

>>1837593
It's possible to get through it as super Mario but you need extremely tight timing. And you have to do it three times in a row.

Funny enough though, for the versions without the steps, you can simply get in a corner and duck and the fire bar won't hit you.

[Anonymous No.1837602]

>>1832650
Nah, I played all those examples you said and think MGS2 is harder. Maybe, just maybe, the game loses to the original CV

[Anonymous No.1837603]

>>1837593
Well, I don't play Mario, but that looks like something that I can do comfortably in Mega Man X. Sonic would also be in trouble.

[Anonymous No.1837648]

>>1837603

But what about if you had DK? Really I'm dying to fucking know.

[Anonymous No.1837706]

>>1837596
this.

you guys are just upset because you've got the short term memory of a house fly.

[Anonymous No.1837729]

>>1837596
In multiple choice tests, you don't guess and check with a small handful of possible answers that aren't correct, fail, and have to start the entire test over again. Plus, in a video game, the possible answers aren't just laid out in front of you like that. You may not have a clue what the correct course of action is. Really not analogous in the slightest.

[Anonymous No.1838184]

>>1837575
>Do you see how using "trial and error" like this makes it completely meaningless?
It's not completely meaningless, it's a fundamental aspect of human learning. Which is why whining about trial and error in games is absolutely absurd.

[Anonymous No.1838189]

>>1837729
>In multiple choice tests, you don't guess and check with a small handful of possible answers that aren't correct, fail, and have to start the entire test over again.
Because you don't have that option.
If you got your scores immediately and could repeat it as many times as you wanted, trial and error would be a valid method.
>Plus, in a video game, the possible answers aren't just laid out in front of you like that. You may not have a clue what the correct course of action is. Really not analogous in the slightest.
This is the sort of situation where trial and error is most applicable.

[Anonymous No.1838236]

>>1831859
i cant believe i watched the whole thing

[Anonymous No.1838273]

>>1833179
>>1833194
>>1833209
>>1833212
But players actually LIKED challenging games, which is why the arcade "suck more money" reasoning is particularly misleading. Most people didn't want a game you could just breeze through. An arcade game you could blast through on one credit would be seen as a joke. On home consoles, the challenge was still part of the fun. And even the occasional dick move was more likely to get a "ohhh shit, you got me you sneaky bastard, but not next time" instead of "RAHGH ARTIFICIAL BAD DESIGN". I don't have any scans to prove it but some old reviews actually had "challenge" as one of their categories.

[Anonymous No.1838458]

>>1838273
this

difficult games tend to be more rewarding to finish, which lends them more replay value than something you can just blitz through

[Anonymous No.1838524]

>>1831995
No clue.

[Anonymous No.1838582]

>>1833448
Who the fuck keeps letting /v/ in here?

[Anonymous No.1838591]

>>1837729
>In multiple choice tests, you don't guess and check with a small handful of possible answers that aren't correct, fail, and have to start the entire test over again

You'd have to be stupid to do that. There's a reason lives exist in video games.

[Anonymous No.1838595]

>>1837602
>CV
Do you mean Code Veronica? That's the only Resident Evil I've ever had to restart completely because I actually ran out of ammo against the Tyrant in the airplane. Only other one that happened on was Dead Aim's hard, I got to the final boss with no saves and found out I didn't have enough ammo to actually kill it even if I hit perfectly with every shot (And there's no Knife against that boss).

[Anonymous No.1838601]

>>1838595
CV = Castlevania

[Anonymous No.1838612]

the only example of "artificial difficulty" i can think of is in Buster's Hidden Treasure, there is no password for any of the last 5 levels or the final boss. you start with 3 lives if you use a password, so you pretty much have to play straight through the game and save up lives or you have no chance. that always pissed me off as a kid

also the entirety of Simon's Quest

[Anonymous No.1838615]

>>1838458
There has to be a balance as well. I might've masochistically finished IWBTG and its NES equivalent, Battle Kid, but if a game is so difficult that it just frustrates the people trying to play it, it probably needs to be toned down unless it's targeting a very narrow portion of the population.

Sadly, I haven't played Battle Kid 2 even for bragging rights because I found the first to be so difficult towards the end I just don't care to subject myself to that again.

[Anonymous No.1838656]

>>1838612
>the only example of "artificial difficulty" i can think of is in Buster's Hidden Treasure
That Dragonball game had the same thing, continues only worked for lvl11, anything past it and you had to clear with just one life, and oh your life decreases with time! there's anything more artificial difficulty than your life decreasing with time for no goddamn reason?

[Anonymous No.1838667]

>>1838615
I agree with that sentiment, I feel the same way about holy diver (if they took that a bit further they game would be more irritating than challenging).

[Anonymous No.1838669]

>>1838667
*the

[Anonymous No.1838670]

>>1831421

A lot of games (especially the first 3d games on the N64 and Playstation) ARE archaic and full of bullshit though, because it was a brand new thing and the technology wasn't right yet.
I'm playing through MGS1 again for the first time in 15 years and it strikes me how God awful the aiming in it is. It basically forces you to be stealthy for that reason alone. Also some of the hitboxes are fucked up. Gray Fox floored me when I was on the other side of the room a minute ago.

[Anonymous No.1838680]

>>1838670
3d games are still archaic, half of them don't even have enemies that can handle z correctly.

[Anonymous No.1838845]

>>1838615
Frustration heightens the emotional reward when you finally succeed.

[Anonymous No.1839160]

>>1838845
Not really frustration, just regular challenge. Too much frustration just makes me feel like I've wasted a ton of time on something (IWBTG is a great example, I didn't really feel anything making my way to the end).

The only time I really feel a rush is when I'm outsmarting someone in strategy games, nothing beats the feel of watching someone plan or call something wrong and being punished for it. I used to love Starcraft and C&C for that reason. AI enemies and other CPU based difficulties in games don't really appeal to me much, so I usually don't care for them to be ridiculously hard. Opinions on this last bit, but hopefully it gives some insight into why some people complain about overly difficult parts in games.

[Anonymous No.1839172]

>>1838656
This, so much. I hate games where your life is slowly draining and you have to constantly find ways to refill it. That is not fun, that is annoying. Adventure Island until IV and SA II blew for this.

[Anonymous No.1839201]

>>1838591
I'm saying in a video game you don't have the luxury of trial and error not killing you and making you start the game over.
This is a very different scenario from a test where you can do all the trial and error you want, pick the answer you determine to be correct in the end, and it's all good.

[Anonymous No.1839214]

>>1831093

[Anonymous No.1839235]

>>1839201
>I'm saying in a video game you don't have the luxury of trial and error not killing you and making you start the game over.
So? It's a game, and you lose nothing but a bit of free time.

>This is a very different scenario from a test where you can do all the trial and error you want, pick the answer you determine to be correct in the end, and it's all good.
Wrong. Trial and error doesn't really work in tests, because you don't know what errors you have made until you get the results back - and then it's usually too late to change them since most times you can't just freely redo the test. Which is why people study and prepare for them.

[Anonymous No.1839259]

>>1839214
While that image is correct it also showcases that not all forms of difficulty are worthwhile, or make for good games. Tedium and pure random chance (the "press button until random number is correct" example he game) both make for shitty games.

[Anonymous No.1839263]

>>1839235
>Wrong. Trial and error doesn't really work in tests
Let's go back to the guy I first replied to:
>>1837596
>In tests, I hated simple division so fucking much, I learned by myself how to find the answer using trial and error multiplication
It does for certain things, especially if it's math, and ESPECIALLY if it's multiple choice.

Also, I'm not saying trial and error is a bad thing. I have no problem with it at all as long as it doesn't stem from something like unforeseeable traps.
All I'm saying is that the test comparison isn't particularly valid because a video game will generally punish you for each mistake the instant you make it, whereas with a test only your final choices are judged, and all at once after the fact. You're free to employ all the trial and error you want in your decision making process.

[Anonymous No.1839295]

>>1839214
I find a lot of the examples in their to be poor, but the camera angle things always makes me think of RE2. Every so often you'd get zombies positioned right at a camera angle change so you'd run smack into one unless you shot every single thing from off screen. Thankfully, RE2 wasn't exactly very hard, and the times that happened weren't a big deal.

As for puzzles, the only time I've been incredibly frustrated at them is in point and click games. I remember exploring forever in Shadowbane and dying to my torch going out a bunch while I was looking for the next thing to advance the game. I knew it had something to do with the well, and I cranked the bucket up, but every time I tried to check it for stuff I couldn't. Three hours later, I finally gave in and asked someone, they said you had to "Open" the bucket. I mean, by game logic it makes sense since its treated as a container, but I don't think I would've gotten that and that just made that part feel cheap.

Also, the ruby in Uninvited. Picking it up has no immediate effect, but roughly 30 actions later, you'll get a message saying the house is starting to have an effect on you, followed by another notice at 60, 90, and finally death at 100. The ruby is never used for anything and must be discarded at a very specific point outside with no reason to use it there other than simply guessing it.

Speaking of that, there was a comic where a guy had a similar frustration trying to open a glass case and get something. He tried a bunch of commands and finally got it right with a simple one that he simply hadn't tried. Anyone have it?

[Anonymous No.1839305]

You know those games where selecting "hard" difficulty doesn't change anything other than giving the enemies more health...

is that artificial difficulty in the sense that its inauthentic?

[Anonymous No.1839317]

>>1832523

This is a crime. You were wronged, my friend.

[Anonymous No.1839318]

>>1839305

No, it's probably the way the game was meant to be played anyway.

[Anonymous No.1839321]

>>1839305
No, because enemies having more health generally means they have more time to injure or kill you

[Anonymous No.1839323]

>>1839305
No.
No difficulty is artificial, even if it comes from things like bugs, bad camera angles, or terrible design.
The term is stupid and people need to stop using it.

[Anonymous No.1839327]

>>1839318
>>1839321
>>1839323

Ok what about a point and click adventure game where you get killed if you go to a certain screen without a certain item that you are never told about.

Bad game design but not artificial difficulty, right?

[Anonymous No.1839334]

>>1839327
Do you have a decent example of that?

[Anonymous No.1839336]

>>1839334
Basically any Sierra adventure game

[Anonymous No.1839337]

>>1839334
I did.
>>1839295

Then again, I tend to give point and click games a free pass to fuck with you as it seems to be a tradition among them. When you go in expecting to laugh at all the horrible ways you'll die rather than attempting to think things through, only to have you slapped for not following the exact logic used in the game, it tends to be more fun.

[Anonymous No.1839343]

>>1839327
>Bad game design
Why is it bad design? You get killed, you learn that the room is dangerous, and now you can avoid it.

[Anonymous No.1839349]

>>1839343
Depends. Have you already past the point of no return for collecting the item, yet are never hinted to that you might need it? Is the item something innocuous that simply seems a waste of space or so common as to not warrant pick up? Well, you're now left against a brick wall with no way to progress and no way to tell where or when you went wrong.

[Anonymous No.1839367]

>>1839349
Even that, though, can be part of a game where failure is intented, and the game as a whole is a puzzle to figure out. There's also always the possibility that the game is intended for veterans of a genre. Take for example a fantasy RPG where you can make your own party. Veterans of RPGs generally understand that you want a party that is at least somewhat diverse so you can deal with the various challenges that spring up. Is it bad design if a player can lock himself into a failstate by making his entire party thieves, or not having a healer, or some other gross error? I don't believe so.

I'll agree that it's not very fun to be left in the dark and unable to proceed, but I'm still not sure if I'd simply call it bad design.

[Anonymous No.1839387]

>>1839367
What about this?

>Future Wars

>Upon time traveling to the future, the player finds a newspaper dispenser in a train station. The newspaper inside is needed a few minutes before the endgame to block a vent filled with deadly poison and kill the alien captors. Players who missed the newspaper would find themselves trapped in their prison cell with no way to escape and face the final enemy steps away.

[Anonymous No.1839395]

>>1839387
Frustrating, to be sure, but bad?
Honestly I think the only real bad design is when a game fails to deliver what it was supposed to.

[Anonymous No.1839396]

>>1839395
>The Dirty Harry game for the NES has a completely normal-looking room which you cannot exit after you enter it, forcing you to reset the system. It's not a bug — the door is replaced with graffiti saying, "ha ha ha."

[Anonymous No.1839413]

>>1839396
Cruel, but not necessarily bad.

[Anonymous No.1839439]

>>1839413
>The ZX Spectrum port of Great Gurianos used up so much memory that there was no room to include the ending. Dave Perry was forced to make the final boss undefeatable

[Anonymous No.1839442]

>>1839396
Have we stooped as low as quoting TV Tropes?

[Anonymous No.1839449]

>>1839442
Doesn't make it any less true...in this case

[Anonymous No.1839453]

>>1839442
Did you miss >>1839214 ?
This dipshit quotes and links to it multiple times. Here's the actual posting for it. http://www.insanedifficulty.com/board/index.php?/topic/10-fake-difficulty-is-real/
Apparently he made a website dedicated to the idea of "difficult" games. It's fucking awful. I've been poking around for a couple hours there now and it is a pure cringefest.

[Anonymous No.1839463]

>>1833504
Some of the hitscan enemies, when you can't get to them in time, will always damage your HP unavoidably at random intervals.

[Anonymous No.1839468]

>>1834130
You must have a radically different approach to the fundamental problem solving aspects of video gaming.
I'd love to study you.

[Anonymous No.1839472]

>>1834774
>>1834779
You get the newgame+ thing even if you use warps as far as I remember.

[Anonymous No.1839475]

>>1839395
>>1839413
>the only real bad design is when a game fails to deliver what it was supposed to.
So the only time something is poorly made in your opinion is if the developer didn't intend it?
If the camera was really awkward and shitty in some game seemingly because it was poorly programmed you'd say it was bad, but if the developer later said it was supposed to be that way all along, you'd switch sides and suddenly it isn't bad anymore?
What if something complex and enjoyable came from a mistake or oversight on the developer's part? Would that be bad design to you?
Explain yourself.

[Anonymous No.1839492]

>>1839475
>So the only time something is poorly made in your opinion is if the developer didn't intend it?
Basically, yes.
>If the camera was really awkward and shitty in some game seemingly because it was poorly programmed you'd say it was bad, but if the developer later said it was supposed to be that way all along, you'd switch sides and suddenly it isn't bad anymore?
There's no "sides", this isn't a war or a soccer match. Shitty camera is almost always an indicator of poor design so I'd feel reasonably confident in calling it as such. In the few cases it isn't, big deal.
>What if something complex and enjoyable came from a mistake or oversight on the developer's part? Would that be bad design to you?
Yes. Bad design does not necessarily mean bad game. Design is the process, not the end result.

[Anonymous No.1839493]

>>1833179
>>1833194
>>1833209
>>1833212
>>1833220

[Anonymous No.1839496]

>>1839492
Lol get a load of this retard

[Anonymous No.1839514]

>>1839492
>Design is the process, not the end result.
Design CAN mean that, especially as a verb, but it can also refer to (and does in this context) the way some particular thing is formed or arranged, which is something that can be looked at and judged without any knowledge of what the creator intended.

Words have multiple definitions.

[Anonymous No.1839521]

>>1839493
Fucking Iwata

[Anonymous No.1839695]

>>1839172
>>1838656
It worked...somewhat decently in Kain and later the legacy of kain series.

[Anonymous No.1839773]

>>1839695
I said without reason. Legacy of Kain had a reason and they integrated it to the plot. Most NES games had no reason to decrease your life other than screw you.

[Anonymous No.1839796]

I have only ever gotten past World C-4 of SMB2j while big once, by complete chance. I have not been able to repeat it. Unfortunately I wasn't Fire Mario, so I couldn't defeat Bowser using fireballs.

I can usually get past that section as small Mario though.

[Anonymous No.1840028]

>>1839773
Hunger meter. Now there's a reason in every game.

[Anonymous No.1840038]

>>1840028
>Hunger meter that kills you of hunger after two minutes
>Robots having hunger meter
>A fucking marble having hunger meter

Well at least you tried.

[Anonymous No.1840061]

>>1840038
>Robots having hunger meter

>robots don't need energy to function

[Anonymous No.1840215]

>>1833684
isn't there a spot before that where you have to use the rush marine in a similar situation on another stage? I wanna say gemini mans.

I just played through megaman 3 so I definitely remember being totally aware I was gonna need to pick up energy and finish it in one go in that situation.

it's not really that long a distance doesn't take longer than 10 or 20 seconds.

[Anonymous No.1840225]

>>1833473
that item is not secret to you faggot it's sitting right there for the taking.

[Anonymous No.1840243]

>>1839259
Then people should call it just a bad game, not a game with fake difficulty

[Anonymous No.1840287]

>>1839773
The reason is to keep you moving
>>1840243
Clearly, but people here love their buzzwords

[||D.II.II\/II.||D No.1840406]

>>1831772
A lot of shmups barely push 30

[Anonymous No.1840429]

>>1832420
>how would someone who can't be social in real life achieve it in a video game
Being good at DDR does not mean you actually know how to dance.

[Anonymous No.1840469]

>>1840406
Can't you clear Ikaruga in about 20 minutes? And the Touhou games can be cleared in well under an hour.

The guy you're responding to is reminding me of everyone whining about pikmin, calling a game of its duration "Unacceptable" and how it was the BLUNDER OF THE CEMETERY

[||D.II.II\/II.||D No.1840534]

>>1832371
Egoraptor pls

[Anonymous No.1840592]

>>1831603
If you're able to complete the level you've already proven you could so why not save all that time and just start back where you left off?

[Anonymous No.1840596]

>>1840592
Wait what kind of question is this? It's an NES game, do you know what that is?

[||D.II.II\/II.||D No.1840672]

>>1833559
If there was an actual definition the troll wouldn't work so well.
Example: this thread

[Anonymous No.1840690]

>>1840429
Because DDR is nothing like actual dancing. Bad analogy.

[Anonymous No.1840714]

>>1831093
>artificial difficulty
Stop saying things you read on the internet.

[Anonymous No.1840719]

>>1831093

that obstacle is actually completely passable with small Mario. if you're small, you can pass it easily with little effort. If you're big it'll likely hit you and make you small, but that's not artificial difficulty at all. get good

[Anonymous No.1840739]

>>1840690
>he thinks life sims are like real life
Look at him. Look at him and laugh.

[Anonymous No.1840745]

>>1840719
>you can pass it easily with little effort
No.
It's easier with Mario than it is with Super Mario, for sure, but it isn't easy by any means.

[Anonymous No.1840814]

>>1833559
"Artificial difficult" is difficulty based on miscommunication. When a game fails to communicate its rules to the player (or when it doesn't enforce said rules consistently), it's artificial difficulty.

Pic semi-related. Not vidya, but it does demonstrate how faulty communication can provide an unfairly frustrating "challenge."

A fun, fair challenge is one where the player understands the rules. If you don't understand this incredibly basic concept, please never design a video game because I guarantee it will be terrible.

[Anonymous No.1841026]

>>1839214
>Has modern gaming really convinced you that exploration and learning within a game are THAT BAD?
Notice that it said "DENIAL of information critical to progress". The whole point is that learning in this situation is impossible because you're not given the means to learn the answer. And nobody said "fake difficulty" means the game isn't difficult, just that it's not fun or challenging for the player.

This is why I hate arguing with people like this guy. They willfully misinterpret what was said to make their argument. A couple of the points he made toward the end were alright, but this one is just grasping for straws.

[Anonymous No.1841084]

>>1841026
>>1840814
>Hexen
>that one part where the game requires you to fall down a bottomless pit to proceed
>every other bottomless pit in the game kills you, and most players will have learned to automatically load their save when they hear the character's death-wail

People will try to defend this somehow, I just know it.

[Anonymous No.1841086]

>>1832371
Oh look, one of maybe 3 people in this thread who actually knows what fake difficulty is.

[Anonymous No.1841103]

>>1833796
Use Zero fgt

>>1833803
The final boss is one of the hardest Sigmas.

[Anonymous No.1841117]

>>1840814
Like how Portal has the rule of "White surfaces are suitable for portals" and Portal 2 proceeds to make that include THE FUCKING MOON?

[Anonymous No.1841118]

>>1840287
Keep you moving while you have to dodge and jump through platforms. Ergo, artificial difficulty. It wouldnt be so hard if you werent pressed to do do it FAST because of bullshit mechanics.

[Anonymous No.1841126]

>>1833473
>some parts of the game are only doable if you have a specific sub-weapon

This is completely false.

[Anonymous No.1841156]

>>1841117
Which is heavily foreshadowed, and then the game locks your camera to pointing at it so you literally cannot do anything other than shoot at that one thing. So no, not at all.

[Anonymous No.1841164]

>>1841118
Sorry, but no. Time limits are no more "artificial" than the dodging and jumping.

[Anonymous No.1841184]

All I'm seeing here are excuses for not improving your skill levels.

[Anonymous No.1841208]

>>1841117
You aren't very smart, are you?

[Anonymous No.1841248]

there was a game that i dont remember the name of, but a "puzzle" you had to solve was basically guessing what this gnome?'s name was. and the answer was SUPPOSED to be Rumplestiltskin spelled backwards except it was required for you to spell it wrong to get the answer right. there is absolutely zero indication that you have to spell it wrong, you were just supposed to figure that out. absolute bullshit and the only example of "artificial difficulty" i can think of.

[Anonymous No.1841287]

>>1841248
In King's Quest. It wasn't actually artificial difficulty because there was a pattern to it, just a stupid one.
http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_is_the_name_of_the_gnome_in_king%27s_quest

Fuck you Roberta.

[Anonymous No.1841348]

>>1841248
>>1841287
oh god fuck kings quest. that whole series is full of this shit.
>kings quest 5
>have speed at max because Graham's stupid ass can't go more than 10 feet per hour
>leave a house after completing something inside
>cat kills a mouse as i'm walking away
>5 hours later
>oh you didnt save the mouse that was killed at warp speed? well fuck you, game over eat shit

[Anonymous No.1841350]

No such thing as artificial difficulty.

Fuck off /v/.

[Anonymous No.1841358]

There is no such thing as artificial difficulty.
If we take it to the literal sense,any kind of difficulty in a game is artificial.If we take the usual terms they all fall in the game's actual difficulty,yes even invisible blocks and what not,unless it's a bug of some kind.
The former exist and has existed way before these faggots spewing this no sense,it's called bad level design for gameplay elements like enemies and stage layout or badly optimized like a shitty camera.
But of course,why bother actually discussing these kinds of things individually for each game when you can just make a thread accusing the game in a term that varies from people to people and the only common factor in these meanings is to just call a game shit.

[Anonymous No.1841390]

>>1841358
>unless it's a bug of some kind
Even if it's a bug the difficulty caused by it is real.

[Anonymous No.1841416]

>>1841350
>no such thing as bugs
>no such thing as unpredictable RNG

heed your own advice and fuck off to /v/

[Anonymous No.1841419]

>>1841390
so a bug locking up the game or preventing a boss from spawning (making progression impossible), is difficulty.

[Anonymous No.1841421]

>>1834236
This is actually good.

[Anonymous No.1841425]

>>1841348
Don't forget you needed to get a boot from the middle of a fucking desert on the opposite side of the game to throw at that cat.

Or that fucking pie you needed to beat the yeti.

[Anonymous No.1841446]

>>1841156
>>1841117
I would almost consider that a game flaw, since the game is breaking one of its own rules, which is that you can't put a portal on something that's moving. But the game makes it so obvious that you're supposed to shoot the moon that it barely presents a problem.

[Anonymous No.1841472]

>>1841419
Does it make the game harder to beat?

[Anonymous No.1841480]

>>1841446
>which is that you can't put a portal on something that's moving
I had more of an issue with that when you had to put portals on moving panels to make a laser cut through some pipes.

[Anonymous No.1841504]

>>1841472
nope, it's a game of chance and not skill, the only thing the bug accomplishes is wasting time rather than demanding anything from the player, while the game itself remains just as easy (or hard) to beat as it would be without it.

this is because nothing that the player does matters since it can't affect the outcome, it's like someone walking up to the console and turning it off while you're playing.

[Anonymous No.1841520]

>>1841504
I'm not arguing that it's GOOD difficulty, but it's clearly difficulty either way.

>it's like someone walking up to the console and turning it off while you're playing
And that would make beating the game harder.

[Anonymous No.1841571]

>>1841520
>Why bother calling these flying feathered things birds, they're all animals right? "Birds" is a useless term.

We're not saying that something being artificially difficult means it isn't actually adding to the difficulty of the game, anon. Would you rather it was called "artificial/fake challenge" instead? That one's probably more accurate.

[Anonymous No.1841579]

>>1841571
I'd rather you never use any such terms again because they are all retarded.
Just call a game unfair or poorly design or whatever. It makes you sound like you have a brain in your head, especially if you can back it up with evidence or reasoning.

[Anonymous No.1841580]

>mfw OP checks this thread and marvels at his masterpiece every day

Must feel real good

[Anonymous No.1841632]

>>1841579
Those are pretty vague ways to describe a game. What term would you use specifically to describe a part of a game that punishes the player for something outside their control?

It just sounds like you're arguing semantics.

[Anonymous No.1841643]

>>1841632
I would say that the game is unfair because it punishes the player for something outside their control, rather than using made up terms that always, without fail, start huge arguments because there is no consensus on what the term refers to and half the time it is used just to shitpost.

[Anonymous No.1841659]

>>1841643
you'd get the same response if you called it unfair, there's no consensus over what's unfair and what isn't either

[Anonymous No.1841681]

>>1841659
Not really, no. "Unfair" is much less incendiary than "artificial difficulty".
Also, that's why I'd explain that I'm calling it unfair because the game punishes the player for something outside their control.
The point is the actual argument and not using stupid terms that nothing good has ever come from, not the different terms I'd use instead.

[Anonymous No.1841698]

>>1841681
which is the same thing most people do when they point out something is artificially difficult. at best the two terms are synonyms in how they're being used, people will buttrage about either term (which is very much their own problem)

[Anonymous No.1842000]

>>1831093

[Anonymous No.1842037]

The concept of artificial difficulty is retarded, but I cleared Donkey Kong Country recently and enjoyed it. I was slightly annoyed by how mechanics were introduced and expanded. What I'm used to is a mechanic being introduced, practiced in the level design throughout the introductory stage, and then steadily built upon as the game goes on, until at the end dealing with the mechanic is hopefully like second nature.

In DKC, it seems like a mechanic gets introduced, built upon, and expanded in the course of a single fucking level. It was mildly frustrating, but I still liked the game a lot.

[Anonymous No.1842047]

>>1842037
Play BattleToads for what you describe cranked up to 11, plus unrelenting difficulty.

[Anonymous No.1842060]

>>1842047
That's true, actually. So brutal

[Anonymous No.1843285]

>>1842000
This is the most accurate version of this image I've seen yet.

[Anonymous No.1843340]

>>1833497
He's just being careful when going down, something that is reasonable when walking over a floor full of ice.

[Anonymous No.1843349]

>>1831853
Metal Gear Ground Zero probably or gonehome.gif

[Anonymous No.1845252]

Artificial difficulty is hardness due to bad design. An example is bad camera.

[Anonymous No.1845258]

>>1840814
this nig knows his stuff

[Anonymous No.1845268]

Because the platforms' hitboxes don't match the sprite.

[Anonymous No.1845271]

>>1831312
This should be the end of episode one instead of that dark area

[Anonymous No.1845275]

>>1845252

Calling it that is almost as stupid as the concept of 'rape culture'.

[Anonymous No.1845284]

UGHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH

[Anonymous No.1845290]

If something is made to be difficult, how can it be artificial??

In my book, "artificial difficulty" is something like self challenges you impose to yourself to make the game more difficult than it is. For example, a 3 heart challenge in a Zelda game, or a 5 Coin rule in Arcade games. THAT'S ARTIFICIAL.

If a game is hard because it has bad controls or whatever that's just unfair difficulty that you have to get around, not artificial - it was made to be like that.

[Anonymous No.1845294]

>>1845290
> it was made to be like that.
Unfair difficulty IS artificial difficulty. That's the definition.

[Anonymous No.1845314]

>>1845294

Why don't we call it 'player-independent difficulty' from now on? Since artificial difficulty is one of the stupidest concepts ever and what you're describing is difficulty inherent to the interface or construction of the game and not dependent on the player's abilities to overcome it through use of control mechanics.

[Anonymous No.1845341]

>>1845314
I mean, we can't exactly decide to throw out an established definition just like that in any case, but I personally don't feel that artificial difficulty is an incorrect term for it... It refers to difficulty created by the construction of the game, yeah -- e.g. instead of being genuinely challenging, it's brought on by poor design or controls. Thus, artificial, not true.
Just my $.02 though, I guess.

[Anonymous No.1845367]

>>1845341
Artificial difficulty was never a thing until Dark Souls was made. It shouldn't be applied to classic games.

[Anonymous No.1845371]

>>1845367
>Artificial difficulty was never a thing until Dark Souls was made.

This is false.

[Anonymous No.1845662]

>>1845367
>trial and error bullshit didnt exist in old games
my little anon can't be this delirious

[Anonymous No.1845710]

>>1845367
>games were not buggy pieces of shit before that one, yeah... wait

[Anonymous No.1847070]

>>1833559
pretty much what >>1840814 said

I also consider games where difficulty settings do nothing but determine how spongey enemies are as fake difficulty.

[Anonymous No.1847514]

>>1833559
artificial difficulty to me means the "challenge" of the game is no longer based on the players skill. in other words, any situation where a player of any skill level would still fail something. being forced to take damage to progress (the only example i can think of for this right now is in Dark Souls you are forced to take fall damage before fighting the stray demon), trial and error (pretty much any nes game you can think of, the trap doors in metal gear come to mind), and any "puzzle" where not even close to enough information is given (such as the king's quest gnome puzzle mentioned earlier)

[Anonymous No.1847525]

>>1845341
It's not an established definition. Every time there's a thread like this it shows that it's a loose collection of vague-as-hell concepts with no consistent criteria that people throw around when they feel like it.

Also I like how your post misuses the word "genuinely," further illustrating the problem. "Genuinely" doesn't mean "in a way that I think is good."

[Anonymous No.1847529]

>>1841659
>>1841681
>>1841698
"unfair" has a whiny connotation of being a sore loser unless the person has a good justification for it, and that connotation makes the person more likely to feel the need to justify their criticism with an explanation

the problem with "artificial difficulty" is that is has a legitimizing air of objective-sounding criticism, that's why it became popular, because people can smugly throw it out as if they're being incisive critics and revealing how the game is OBVIOUSLY flawed according to principles of design or some shit

there's a big difference in choice of terms

[Anonymous No.1847534]

>>1845294
But that's not what the word artificial means.

[Anonymous No.1847547]

>>1831221
>Putting the cartridge in the system?
Fuck you there was artificial difficulty in that. Fucking blowing on the contacts and shit.

[Anonymous No.1847582]

>>1845367
You mean "people never worried about it", right?

[Anonymous No.1847826]

>>1841126
>>1833473
I do think it's fair to say the Grim Reaper is impossible without a sub-weapon. I mean, sure, there are a small percentage of people who can kill the Grim Reaper without a sub-weapon and by only using the whip, but these are the sort've people who are autistic savants who have played the game a million fucking times and have the reaper's AI mapped out in their head, something 99% of the people on the planet don't have the time to do.

The Reaper is doable with the holy cross but hard as balls. The holy water ofcourse is an instant win.

[Anonymous No.1847830]

>>1833404
All games are "about" artificial difficulty. No difficulty in games is "natural." The very statement is meaningless.

Sometimes people mean "bad game design" or "bad controls", but, if you do, say so. "Artificial difficulty" makes no sense whatsoever.

[Anonymous No.1847836]

>>1833436
>You are forcing the player to memorize bullshit.
Nobody is forcing anybody. And having to learn to play before you succeed is the definition of challenge.

>Yes, most arcade games were designed to suck coins from the players.
It's like saying that most movies were made to suck money from the theatregoers.

[Anonymous No.1847840]

>>1833473
>Castlevania 1 controls are too clunky while most enemies and bosses are too fast.
Controls are not clunky at all, i.e. all situations are beatable with those controls. The game never, ever requires you to to do something that you can't do witht he control scheme.

Sounds like you're just a really, really bad learner.

[Anonymous No.1847841]

>>1847836
Arcade Games ARE designed to suck money from people you mouth breather.
That's the ENTIRE POINT.

You don't pay as you go through a movie, but the vast majority of arcade games are designed so that getting through the game on one CC is impossible and you have to keep playing - and paying - to learn the whole thing.

That's not artificial difficulty, it's just mandatory difficulty.

[Anonymous No.1847842]

>>1833480
>One trick boss makes the whole brilliant game shit
Really? It's like finding atypo in a Shakespeare edition and immediately throwing the whole collection of works into the fire.

[Anonymous No.1847857]

>>1847841
>Arcade Games ARE designed to suck money from people you mouth breather.
>That's the ENTIRE POINT.
Music IS designed to make people buy records or go to performances. That's the ENTIRE POINT. Books ARE designed to appeal to people and get bought. So? I don't see your argument.

Good arcade games, of which there are scores, are not unfair. They may be challenging, but they are perfectly beatable. For example, Makaimura/GnG, one of the more challenging games, is fully beatable. Even though it has randomly spawning enemies, it makes sure it never kills you. It can be very challenging, but it's never unfair.

What games are you talking about? Name some that are designed to "suck money" as opposed to "entertain for a fee."

[Anonymous No.1847864]

>>1847547
Why do people blow in the contacts when using a q-tip is better?

[Anonymous No.1848253]

>>1847864
Cotton swabs are something you have to buy, remember where they are, and not be too lazy to go and get. Unless you have a bunch sitting next to your video games, it's a little inconvenient.
On the other hand, you pretty much always have your breath, and if you don't, you have bigger concerns than your video game not loading.

[Anonymous No.1848270]

>>1847842
Megaman games are only good for speedrunning. Casual play is shit because it rewards farming/grinding.

[Anonymous No.1848494]

If this "artificial difficulty" bothers you so much, you shouldn't be playing most retro games.

[Anonymous No.1848570]

>>1847864
>>1848253

If they're really dirty you need to use a q-tip. Blowing in the contacts has no effect, and in fact the trace moisture most likely damages them a bit.

If the game isn't starting, wiggling it around in the housing and resetting is the best way to fix it.

[Anonymous No.1848574]

>>1848494
Most retro games don't have artificial difficulty, though.

Well, the good ones don't.

[Anonymous No.1848582]

Do fighting games have artificial difficulty?

[Anonymous No.1848595]

>>1848582
The ones with intense input reading? Yes.

Art of Fighting 2 is the most sadistic game ever. And everything Mortal Kombat is just mean.

[Anonymous No.1848760]

>>1831137
mea koopa

[Anonymous No.1848778]

>cltr-f "sonic 3"
This bastard right here

[Legion of Anon No.1848867]

>>1848582

Try playing against an SNK fighting game final boss and ask that question again.
"Oh, you thought you'd have a tough but fair fight like the rest of the game? Bend over, bitch."

[Anonymous No.1848889]

>>1848867
I don't see what's wrong with making the boss fight a lot harder than the regular fights like in SNK fighters. For me, feels a lot more satisfying to beat.

[Anonymous No.1848893]

>>1848889
Compare an SNK boss to something like a boss from a Castlevania game and you see why SNK Boss Syndrome is silly.

[Anonymous No.1848940]

>>1833473
Yeah, fighting the Grim Reaper without the Cross
You play it like a man and bring the Holy Water from the beginning of the level, that's how.

[Anonymous No.1849272]

>>1848778

>le epic IMPOSSIBRU BARREL maymay xDDDD

[Anonymous No.1850914]

>>1848494
I wish there was a virus that crashes the computers of everyone who uses the term "artificial difficulty" seriously. Back in the old day, we just used the term "cheap" and explained why.

[Anonymous No.1850945]

>>1850914
languages evolve old chap, just thought you should know

[Anonymous No.1850968]

>>1850945
It's not "evolution" when people prop up a new term that has a nonsensical literal meaning, no consistent criteria, poorly-defined practical usage, and just makes people say "well what do you mean by that exactly?" It degrades the conversation instead of helping it.

[Anonymous No.1850975]

>>1850945
Except that doesn't change the fact that "artificial difficulty" is any less of a dumb term. As opposed to what? Non-artificial difficulty? Difficulty levels in video games are artificial by their very nature.

[Anonymous No.1851008]

>>1831539
thanks i just saved this

"how to go downstairs in lttp"

will be good to use when i have no pic for a certain topic

[Anonymous No.1851024]

>>1835290
But Trial and Error isn't skill based, a Mario level where the platforms are all tiny and incredibly spaced apart while bullet bills shoot at you is difficult, but it will test the player's skill of timing and momentum. An invisible block literally could not be determined in anyway beforehand and is just a cheap trick to kill the player and learning to avoid it doesn't take any skill either

I don't get what's so hard about this to understand, the fact that a game uses cheap tricks to kill you doesn't make it difficult or better. I don't understand the people who think all complaints of "artificial difficulty" is just being bad at the game even though I think the term sounds fucking stupid, since it does indeed exist

[Anonymous No.1851124]

>>1841580
I was just bored. I guess /vr/ is even more bored than I am. Artificial difficulty is a meaningless term, just like "artificial drama" etc.

[Anonymous No.1851126]

You haven't seen artificial difficulty until you've played Startropics.
>you are presented with two identical paths
>one path leads onward, the other path leads to a trap (usually instant death)
>unless I missed something, the player has no reason to even suspect that there is a trap, let alone figure out which route is correct without trial and error
>the game does this shit repeatedly

[Anonymous No.1851130]

>>1850975
It's not too bad of a catch-all phrase compared to "The computer is cheating."

[Anonymous No.1851159]

>>1831141
holy shit that was thrilling

[Anonymous No.1851162]

>>1851130
>"The computer is cheating."

Its actually not as bad as complaining "i didn't do this" or "but i was doing x" , "my controller is broken" when poeple watch you fail miserably at a game

[Anonymous No.1851179]

>>1851162
Sometimes the computer cheats, we all know it. Anyone who played MK2 on max difficulty can tell you.

[Anonymous No.1852725]

>>1848778
that's not even regular difficulty you fucking casual

[Anonymous No.1852734]

Invisible blocks are not artificial difficulty, just because it goes against your natural gamer instinct to jump over the hammer brother into an invisible block is not artificially difficult. The game itself is challenging the way you play it, it knows you want to hold the run button and jump carelessly over the hammer brother so it punishes you for it. You don't need to have foresight to not die the first time you need to stop just running carelessly and actually proceed with caution.

[Anonymous No.1852745]

>>1852734
>just because it goes against your natural gamer instinct to jump over the hammer brother into an invisible block is not artificially difficult.
>natural gamer instinct
>not common fucking sense to jump over the hammer brother when it's not throwing a hammer
>just because it literally did something you could not expect it is not making the game artificially harder for you by crippling/killing you with no way to avoid it

>You don't need to have foresight to not die the first time
You don't need to have anything to not die the first time because there is nothing you can do to prepare for it
I know you're trying to look like a "hardcore gamer" or something but that is simply a case of cheap mechanics and there is no counter argument to it, and people who say it doesn't exist need to get fucked.

[Anonymous No.1852760]

>>1851179
>max difficulty

Uh...no. Even on easy difficulty, the CPU starts reading inputs after about the 3rd or 4th opponent. They also perform moves a player could never do, such as throwing consecutive fans w/Kitana and uppercutting without crouching.

It's also impossible to throw the CPU player after the 3rd opponent. It's like the game shuts off that ability,but allows them to throw you out of almost anything, even when they're out of actual throw range.

[Anonymous No.1852774]

Damn, if you guys are this upset about that part from Mario I wonder how you'll react to Mr. Gimmick as a whole.

[Anonymous No.1852861]

>>1845268
This was easy though. The only hard one was in Wily's Fortress.

[Anonymous No.1853724]

>>1847514
The stray demon fight is more a part of the boss design, it's supposed to take you by surprise and adds alot of tension because you are forced to start on the defensive to heal which is fair as you have already fought this boss save for the blast move so you know it's patterns. It would only be cheap if the fall killed you, which is very unlikely seeing as all you have to fight is some hollows before him and you should have estus if they hurt you.

for me the most obvious artificial difficulty comes in the form of rng, say in something like smt4 where your partner uses an attack the boss resists, the enemies get a crit or back attack etc. it's a much bigger issue than in other games as the press turn system means you can die without being able to take any turns if that shit happens.

[Anonymous No.1853736]

>>1851162
The computer in streetfighter 2 can do charge moves without charging...

[Anonymous No.1853838]

I'm glad none of you
>MUH ARTIFICIAL DIFFICULTY
whiners were alive back in the day. Although, even if you were, those long, pointless letters you would have inevitably mailed to GamePro and vidya publishers would have been laughed at and immediately discarded.

By your ridiculous definitions of difficulty, every game would have been twenty minutes long with no discernile challenge whatsoever. The Resident Evil series would be missing 3/4 of it's content.

[Anonymous No.1853875]

>>1853838
upset?

[Anonymous No.1853882]

>>1851179
>Civilization
>Past Prince difficulty, the computer receives an extra settler at start.
>Receives extra combat units when building a city.
>At the highest difficulties, he receives a free settler every time he builds a city, allowing him to build another city.

That why I hate games with cheating AIs, it becomes less about playing well and logically and more about abusing the gaps in their logic to defeat them.

[Anonymous No.1853897]

>>1853875
No. Mildly amused, yes. Their are multiple threads, posted on a daily basis, that are solely dedicated to whining about how difficult a game/particular section of a game is.

[Anonymous No.1853908]

>>1853897
*There*

[Anonymous No.1853913]

I would consider artificial difficulty something that cannot reasonably be known beforehand. Such as a floor that drops out from under you with no actual previous indication that it would do such.

Anything where you die no matter what skill level you are at.

[Anonymous No.1853921]

>>1853838
Yeah, video games were totally perfect back in our day and beyond reproach. It's ludicrous that anyone has the gall to criticize them, I'm certain it's because they're just bad at them. They probably shouldn't be playing these games in the first place and simply stick with their COD and Battlefield games.

[Anonymous No.1853925]

>>1853897
stupid sexy echidna

[Anonymous No.1853950]

fuckin timed doors in the tomb raider games

I actually skipped levels out of frustration over that shit

[Anonymous No.1854079]

>>1853921

Indeed. Most old retro games are shit. The ratio is at least as bad as modern games. Why do people pick sides? I play retro and modern games and anything in-between that I personally deem as good. I am in my 30's now and I remember very vividly being just as disappointed back in the late 80's and 90's about games I rented as I am now with a good deal of games. Games were just as shitty back in the day and just as shitty now. The only real difference is that modern games are shitty because they lack imagination and go into full blockbuster soulless mode. A lot of retro games just sucked because of pure designer laziness.

[Anonymous No.1854117]

>>1853921

Man, Fallout 1 was so great

[Anonymous No.1854126]

>artificial difficulty

Epic.

Simply epic.

[Anonymous No.1854731]

>>1853950
Please explain how this post is related to anything in this thread.

[Anonymous No.1854805]

>>1852745
>If you don't agree with me
>You need to get fucked

[Anonymous No.1855445]

>>1847857
He's talking about how the game is designed to be unfair at certain parts to force you to spend more money on it. It would be bad game design regardless of having to pay to continue, and I don't understand why you're comparing that to paying to see a movie. We're talking about how the design of the game is affected by the monetization method.

Reading comprehension, anon.

[Anonymous No.1855452]

>490 replies

[Anonymous No.1855874]

>>1851162
>the computer isn't cheating

LOL

[Anonymous No.1855880]

>>1855452
Nobody here actually plays video games.

Fuck your worst girl

[Anonymous No.1855890]

>>1848595
What's intense input reading?

[Anonymous No.1855953]

>>1855890
The instant you press anything, the computer instantly counters it without fail.

[Anonymous No.1856176]

>>1855890
super street fighter 2 turbo in the arcades. fei long specifically

[Anonymous No.1856178]

>>1855890

try playing samurai shodown 2 without cheesing the computer

[Anonymous No.1856215]

>>1855880
>alienware laptop
DOUBLE NIGGER

[Anonymous No.1856489]

>>1851130
The computer DOES cheat by definition, because it always has access to information a human player would not.

[Anonymous No.1856497]

Don't you guys feel embarrassed openly discussing your lack of skill?

[Anonymous No.1856504]

>>1856497
>caring what strangers on the internet think about you
no because i'm not a faggot

[Anonymous No.1856545]

Artificial Difficulty List:
Computer does the impossible
Camera/controls makes x action excessively difficult
That's about it

[Anonymous No.1858295]

Whenever a game makes you grind for money or health to progress