Is it ever justifiable choosing easy mode?

It's a direct measure of your penis size irl.

>>3420707
yes

>>3420707
Yes it is if

- You're new to the genre
- You're not a good player
- You just want to get from start to finish

>>3420707
Only to see how the game makes fun of you

>>3420707

it's your game play as you want. There is no sense of honor and you're not a badass for playing on hard.

Play however makes it fun for you.

>>3420717

>rise of the triad difficulty levels

"Will of iron, knees of jello"

"I think I left the stove on"

>>3420707
It is in games like NAM or WWII GI.

>>3420709
That's why I always play on the hard difficulty.

>>3420743
To compensate, huh.

Men with actual big dicks of course play on the setting that is the most fun. Which is almost always normal.

>>3420743
It's a direct correlation, but an inverse one.

>>3420707
Yes, for a few reasons:
>You just want to chill and play some vidya
>You want to focus on the immersion and environment of the game and not get your ass beat
>You're trying to discover new elements of a game you've already beaten like secrets, Easter eggs, alternate story arcs etc.
>You're a speedrunner
>You're trying out a genre of game that you don't normally play.

File: 1470854593675.gif (628KB, 500x375px)

628KB, 500x375px

>>3420730

This is the truth.

Personally, it depends on what type of game it is. If hard means "bigger numbers, more grinding" then I'm definitely not picking it. If there's actual gameplay changes, map edits, different AI behavior then it's very likely I'll do a hard playthrough once I feel like I'm decent at the game.

>>3420761
All of these, also:

>when hard mode is just bigger/smaller numbers and makes the gameplay more tedious while adding little or nothing to the actual challenge

>>3420962
That seems logical.

Easy mode is often too much of a cakewalk and it often gets boring, but it may be justifiable for games where the combat and stuff isn't really the focus of the game. Same reason it may be fun to play GTA with cheats on if you just want to cruise around and run over cops.

Generally I play normal mode because it's often the most 'optimized' difficulty setting. Hard mode if it feels to me like gitting gud will actually be a worthwhile investment. For RPGs for example it's usually not really necessary to up the difficulty because it just tends to make battles last longer, with a few exceptions.

File: 1470923581330.jpg (6KB, 200x218px) Image search: [Google]

6KB, 200x218px

>>3420707
yes, if you're a fuckin pleb

File: 37476-Rhapsody_-_A_Musical_Adventure_[U]-1.jpg (112KB, 640x552px) Image search: [Google]

112KB, 640x552px

In RPGs there is no reason to choose a difficulty above easy since it would just force you to grind more.

The only reason to play those games is the plot anyway.

Difficulty selection is a bug

My 3 year old son can't even read yet but he knows how to get into the difficulty setting on his game and change it to hard. I've never been more proud of him. You guys should be ashamed of yourselves.

Depends on the game.

Lot of new games just make things tedious not harder.

What really pisses me off is when the hardest mode is locked and you have to beat it on normal first

>>3421068
So what's the alternative? Adaptive difficulty is unfun shit. Risk/reward mechanics don't work well with all genres. Just excluding casuals is throwing money away. Difficulty selection should be mandatory.

File: ejimeasy-1[1].png (2KB, 320x224px) Image search: [Google]

2KB, 320x224px

Remember when video games actively punished you for playing on Easy? Pepperidge Farm remembers.

Earthworm Jim 2

File: conlowb-1[1].png (43KB, 320x240px) Image search: [Google]

43KB, 320x240px

Contra Legacy of War

File: fispie-1[1].png (7KB, 320x270px)

7KB, 320x270px

Fightin' Spirit

>>3421114
3 years old, and already not allowed to play games for fun.

Good job.

File: Streets-of-Rage-3[1].jpg (26KB, 600x300px)

26KB, 600x300px

>>3421174
He's the one who does it. He gets frustrated if he's tired and I change it to easy but he soon goes in and switches it back to hard.

>>3420707
>>3420716
/thread

>>3420716
A lot of older games actually gave you bad endings or just straight up called you weak for choosing easy and didn't let you play the last few levels.

>>3421062
>I don't know what I'm talking about

>>3421146
>So what's the alternative?
Commit to what the game wants to be.

>Difficulty selection should be mandatory.
difficulty selection is admitting defeat, that you're unable to make an enjoyable game, unless it's "beaten" by everyone, and poses a difficulty challenge to everyone

>>3421214
Luckily very few developers will deliberately make their games worse just to please some autists on /vr/.

>>3421216
Honestly if more games just rewarded you slightly for basing difficult mode that some would be enough for me. eBay asked me to write a review of The Last Of Us earlier this year for some reason and since it was a game I had been eager to finally play I took them up on it. I gave it give stars which it totally deserved compared to most modern story driven games but I made a point that with its mechanics and level design it really felt like a game that would have good replay value but it really didn't - like at all which was a surprise and disappointment so I compared it to Silent Hill both favorably and unfavorably.

>>3421224
It should be:
Easy - unskippable tutorial, unskippable cutscenes
Normal - unskippable cutscenes
Hard - everything skippable

This is a good reward because mostly only skilled people would want it.

>>3421230
Easy - Good ending unavailable
Normal - Very hard unlocked
Hard - Special advantage unlocked
Very Hard - Secret ending available, Extreme advantage unlocked

>>3421230
>>3421260
you guys give perfect reasons for why I stay the hell away from such games

>>3421260
This is punishing casual players, which is unnecessary when you can instead reward hardcore players with things that are only of value to hardcore players.

>>3421224
>rewarded
just how shallow are you fucks?

>>3421269
I prefer to think of it as encouraging casual players to slightly improve their skills and get more out of their experience. Normal mode shouldn't be so hard that "casual" players can't complete it, especially after a practice run on "easy" which we could even label as "practice mode" if that suits you better. We could even move everything's label down one notch by adding that.

>>3421276
They'll see it as punishment. Casuals enjoy being casual. It's pointless trying to make them improve, and their existence does not harm good players. Let them get the true ending on easy mode. Their money is the same.

File: capsule_467x181.jpg (31KB, 467x181px)

31KB, 467x181px

I like the way games like pic related handled difficulty. You could play the easiest mode, training mode, and after a few levels would stop you and bump you up a level. After that each time you beat the game it loops back with the difficulty increased, but keeping your equipment. Then once you've got a better grasp you can start a fresh game from the increased difficulty for a more challenging experience. It makes for a nice, smooth curve without unnecessary frustration.

>>3421287
They can just go ahead and watch somebody else play it on youtube

Actually, that's what non-casuals end up doing because it's no less challenging and doesn't cost us $50

>>3421207
Man, I remember this now, and it was terrible, not being allowed to play the last levels.

What the fuck were the developers thinking?

>>3421181
Man, if your son becomes a true badass he should try Wallstreet someday, who knows man, maybe he can make some mad cash someday? >I just inspired the next Wolf of Wallstreet, but a successful one that has direct success without relying on shortcuts.

>>3421437
It's the proper way to do it, GIT GUD

>>3421213
Man, I used to think this way, sad, although it has a bit of truth to the story driven development plotwise and how tedious it can get to progress on a story by level grinding. (If the game is terrible I mean, and the hours wasted, man I'm glad my friend hooked me up on Nocturne for PS2, sadly it can't be discussed here, but the mechanics are great.)

>>3421338
Shame it's an euro shmuck with life bar mechanics and no real depth.

>>3421452
Yeah, I know what you mean, but in a way it takes some enjoyment out of the games with "fake difficulty" those with insane bullshit titles for "normal" (which is really just hard with a wronged title, deliberate or not) and then in consequence hard is "very hard", so normal isn't probably worth playing in those. so playing on easy on those would be the normal, and if it had cut down levels then it's shit.

This argument
>>3421214

Has some sense related to this.

The problem is if you're straight honest about your difficulty straight before the gamer will buy it, it might turn off potential buyers, so, a game that's being marketed right is crucial, well, that's what reviews are for usually, to avoid certain disappointment and time wasting, (and cash, so I don't waste my cash on the idea that I will "GIT GUD" on a game that will suck.)

But that's just me, maybe my opinion is shit.

>>3421437
Lots of games could be completed pretty quickly on easier difficulties. Many in under three hours, in fact.

Mostly to extend how much time you spend playing the game.

File: Well.png (68KB, 153x208px) Image search: [Google]

68KB, 153x208px

>>3420707
Who am I trying to impress?

>>3421481
>Extend

Man I despise that fact, but only when it's abused to turn you into doing useless attempts at gaining some weird item (or ending a game that it's best not even played at all) or thing that might backfire if done wrong and somehow forces you to relentlessly waste hours for you to find out there was some silly easy way to do it. (Not that there usually are easy to take workarounds, unless you cheat.) Hard gained items that have a good rewarding sense with some high usability are great though, or some worthy unlock, yet I've seen some silly games that are levels that have the same shit only to lead you to a boss fight that is practically impossible with some shit programming made to make the game feel hard but it turns out it's just a shit game, which I'm not going to mention. Artificial difficulty sucks.

>>3421551
I agree with you, but I suppose I like that about a lot of older video games. Modern game are much more tightly designed today that a lot of tricks you think would work are useless and often times you end up doing some extreme thing you thought up to progress when in fact you had to push a button on the table.

Terrible examples aside, older games were much more lax regarding how developers implemented progression. I suppose a middle ground could always work.

>>3421532
In OP's case, he's probably trying to impress Gay-mers, unless you pull off something in a game that makes your friends rejoice, for example, an impressive defeat, something worthy of mentioning, is it even necessary to impress someone with this difficulty shit, most people that aren't gamers, usually won't care about your "achievements" in games, even though a few times it gives you that warm glory feeling, not that you should care what anyone thinks or not about said achievements gamer or not.

>>3421591
This is the reason one needs to study the truly retro adventure genre point and click games and such, and a few other old intrinsic games when doing modern games, while also considering flaws in new games, to have that balance when developing gameplay.

File: wildest-dream-because_480x360[1].jpg (72KB, 480x360px) Image search: [Google]

72KB, 480x360px

>>3421532
Yourself. The only good reason to do anything.

>>3421441
I'm very pleased with him for learning this particular lesson even earlier than I'd hoped. It was from Skylanders Swap Force. He'd get bored and mess with the menus. He discovered that in that particular game there's a different enemy associated with each difficulty. Chompy for easy, greeble for normal, flame golem for hard and Kaos for nightmare. He doesn't want to be that shitty fucking chompy.

>>3421620
Right on the money. At the end of the day most video games are designed to be fun, and while there are groups of players who want challenging games, there needs to be a line crossed between boring and simple to absolutely ridiculous.

Although admittedly, even the idea of a video game designed to be fun is subjective. A video game could be designed to be anything, but I'd hope that most are made in mind to be fun.

>>3420716
Thread is over guys.

<<<<< [Catalog]

>>3420747
Often a good game will have more intricate and fast paced gameplay on hard mode, or if an RPG has selectable modes for some reason, hard mode will be the one that arbitrarily has more content.

>>3420962
idk man, in star ocean 2 for example, universe mode is basically that, but in the lower modes you basically don't even need to make use of half the game systems that universe mode forces you to utilize.

>>3421616
Naw I actually spent last night playing Streets of Rage 2 and died on stage 7 every time. Put it on easy and didnt even need to use a continue. Then I started this thread. Normal felt more fun because it wasnt even a challenge on easy mode.

>>3421467
>it might turn off potential buyers
and it should. Not every game is for everyone. That sword cuts both ways, mind you. People seeking mad difficulty won't be mislead by a leisurely game, and people interested in plain gaming won't be mislead by games that try to chew you up and spit you out. What good would those sales be anyway? All you do is compromise what your game stands for, and piss off your actual target demographic just to appease people you don't really care about.

I'd like to add, some of my favorite games I have yet to complete in any meaningful way. Part of what I love about them is that they respect themselves and their own difficulty. They chew me out regularly, but it's fine. It's the game's way of saying "you're not good enough yet. If you like, keep practicing, we can have a good time together while you do". That's much more fun to me than any difficulty setting could ever provide. Because with them, I constantly sit and wonder, is this the game? Or am I playing some "tuned" variant (tuned up or down), that the developers just put in there for people?
It's not useful to recommend to me to just play normal, as it's well established that developers tend to shift around the difficulties. When you only get normal, hard and very hard, what's normal? Easy by a different name? The actual game? Why are there the distorted variants available? And then stuff happens that's already mentioned in the thread, the game openly mocks you for making a choice. Why offer that choice to begin with, if it's not a real choice, if the game will make sure it communicates to you, that it's not happy about your choice? I'd rather fail in the game on my own terms, instead of being told the game thinks it's too good for my wimpy difficulty selection. It's just rude, and wasting my time.

>>3421729
There's a difference between fun and tedious, and remember, people tend to be masochists too, I guess the masochists consider punishing stuff fun, example insane permadeath rogues, offering challenge these games *tend* to be tedious to even bother with although the rewards for completing any stage beyond the first stages turns quickly addictive, so the reward area of the brain loves this kind of masochism even if it's still that.

I have to admit I used to be a dumbshit for videogames that require skills but since I also have a slightly small motorskill issue I'm not the best at reactions, so I thought I'd never really be good for games that require quick impulse, I've gotten slightly better and I do love my 2D action platformers, so whatever the fuck, my friends give me great pointers and every day I get a bit betters, I've felt the improvement for playing even long ass boring RPG's, considering I bore quick with repetitive tasks that feel autistic in some sense (no offense, RPG's that are created well don't even feel this way, even if a bit repetitive.)

>>3421916
It should, but then again do developers want a loss in hype sales? Maybe not. This is why the industry is suffering, they should stick to what the developers believe in to deliver to the gamers a good deal out of it, and also what the gamers wish for, not only what they want and gamers want out of it.

>>3421832
Then that's fake difficulty for you. because easy isn't a challenge so your normal is probably the easy mode, and who knows if the hard is just insanely retarded continue settings.

>>3421979
>do developers want a loss in hype sales?
they should. I'm not interested in games made for the sake of selling well. I'm interested in games made well, and I strongly believe not every games must be playable by everyone.
There are plenty games that are almost completely inaccessible to me, and it's fine. They're mad fun for a specific set of people. There's so much choice out there, I don't need for every game to account for my taste. I appreciate the games that do, even if they may not be interesting to the aforementioned specific set of people, but I'm also glad there are games for these people, that won't waste my, or their time.

>>3421998
Thankfully, there is variety.

Also,they should indeed face the risk of estimated loss in sales when launching, but then that's not good for any company that's starting now is it, regardless you have a point, and a good one at it.

>>3422012
>that's not good for any company that's starting now is it
It can be. If a company makes clear what their games do and don't do, they can attract a very dedicated fanbase. Fewer but reliable sales are not a bad thing

>>3422021
Yeah, this also happened with Scientology.

In modern AAA games I do. Harder setting are just less damage dealt/more damage taken. What's the point?

>>3422085
>This, fucking this, doesn't change the game, just makes it more challenging.

>>3422085
You managed to use as an example one of the few cases in which making the difficulty harder actually has a point.
Higher difficulty = higher challenge.

That's the point.
Unless it's an RPG, what are you complaining about?
More damage taken means that clearing the game will be harder. That's the point of having a higher difficulty at all.

>>3422110
>higher challenge

I don't see it that way. AAA games are made so accessible even with the extra damage ration skewed the game is still easy, just longer. Bioshock Infinite, everyone said play on 1999 mode or whatever it was called. All it did was make the game longer. No AI changes, no new enemy types. It is a waste of time.

One of the few games that does the mode based difficulty is Halo. Legendary adds new AI skills, different enemies, stuff like that.

If playing on harder difficulties just means more time wasted, what's the point?

>>3421021

Yeah, if I'm unfamiliar with a game I always start on normal to get a sense first.

As far as picking easy, I do it for games that don't have especially good gameplay that I'm playing for another reason. For example, I played through Planescape Torment recently and the fights themselves were basically just something that got in the way; if I wanted to play a CRPG for combat there are far better options. So I just set it to easy and breezed through it because I was there for the story.

>>3421457
>oh no, it's different from my delicate weeaboo sensibilities

>>3422126
Halo 2 on legendary co-op mode was glitched on a certain level at the beginning stages, we couldn't get past an alien invasion in a space station, me and a friend, I played it without co-op and ACTUALLY pulled it off, then we could resume co-op on the next level, that's how absurd difficulty is on co-op, and it was insanely difficult because of the AI, maybe hard was a bit enjoyable considering it might be less tense, I need to replay those again once I get an xbox supplemental hard drive for 360, a usb hard drive won't let me use it as cache memory, the games won't emulate on the console without one either, but they run great if the console is compatible with that particular game you try to launch.

>>3421207
They were thinking "If you like it, try harder, and earn it."

>>3421265
Sorry that your diaper gets soiled when things aren't going your way.

>>3421230
The unskippable cutscenes? I don't agree, but, something in it's place would be agreeable.

I do hate when it's too easy to cut and they don't warn you about it, some modern games like FF XII you can in fact skip scenes but they made it a little tricky so you don't skip them by accident, so it's an optional thing, regardless that you're a good player or not enough to beat the game, there's a lot of hatred for the game anyways, and these kind of games inspire similar hatred for locking abilities to gain game time instead of snoring on a 30 minute scene you've seen already.

>>3421975
Frankly I'm not sure what they get out of it, maybe it is for the reasons you stated. That's one thing I love about video games though, and that is the fact that there is something for everyone. Unless you're completely disinterested in the medium you will always find something for you, guaranteed. Whether its a short platformer or a tedious RPG.

And no offense taken. I love RPGs, but you can easily tell when a game is going to be worth your time, regarding the genre that is. Rarely is it fun to grind, but like I said, there's something for everyone. And my reaction times aren't very good, either, so I hear you on that.

My apologies for the late response.

>>3422712
If I got to talk more with you, I'd try and develop a game with you, if you have a spare email you're willing to put here please do, no worries on the late response.

>>3422779
[email protected]

I'll let you know off the bat my programming and asset creation skills are atrocious, but if you ever need a discussion regarding balance or maybe even need a hand in QA, ill be more than willing to help.

It was nice talking to you.

>>3421452
I never really thought the GIT GUD argument worked when you realize the higher difficulty just makes you weaker/makes the enemies damage sponges.

>>3422908
while I do not disagree with ther point, the theory behind it is, that higher damage makes it easier for you to get hurt, and weaker weapons exposes you for a longer duration to that dangerous environment. What people call "tedious" in that context is a humblebrag, suggesting they can evade enemy action for an arbitrary long time. In such cases, difficulty does not change much. If you can't consistently evade it though, the longer the fight lasts, and the harder the enemy hits, the more likely you end up in trouble, which directly relates to difficulty

>>3420707
Always put it on easy to let little kids try

>>3420730
Games are products, you pay to enjoy them
if playing on hard diminishes your enjoyment, then you need to switch it lower in order to get your money's worth
likewise - if the game is too easy, vice-versa

File: George-Mallory-Because-its-there.png (591KB, 750x563px) Image search: [Google]

591KB, 750x563px

>>3421665

>This is pure romance, call it what else you will, and every man
recognizes its touch. It leads into jungles and over deepwaters and up
through the high thin reaches of the air. Its glamorous trail goes through
the doors of moving-picture houses and up one flight to the chop suey
restaurant. It beckons to all that is strange. It is inherentin the "dares" of
childhood. It makes the timid boy divefrom the pierhead, and it sent the
British Royal Geographical Society's and the Alpine Club's expedition
nearer the sky than any man had climbed before without taking unto
himself wings.
The first expedition sent
>baggage and stores. Pack animals, mostly yaks, were used across the plain and up the slopes
as far as the glacier. Beyond that point the work was done by fifty porters,
men from the native State of Natal, whose splendid strength and
endurance hold out the hope of establishing camp at a still greater height.
Other things besides time, money and executive ability were
demanded of the expedition; the utmost quality of the climbers, for
instance. Perfect physical condition is, of course, essential, for under the
- 3-
most favorable conditions the strain of effort inthose awful altitudes is
such that normal fitness is not regained for months after the ordeal. Good
heart and lungs are the most importantprerequisites. Even perfect organs
would not avail

>>3421213
Yeah, you don't.

If you can't git gud you should fuck off out of this board.

File: 46763745799c7bc82f941469695932_4558_6.jpg (243KB, 500x333px) Image search: [Google]

243KB, 500x333px

>>3424071

I like high stakes difficulty, meaning that enemies deal a lot of damage but so do you. I love games that are build around the player dying on the first hit they take. More enemies are acceptable, stronger enemies are preferred, stronger as in dealing more damage, not as in becoming damage sponges.

I hate grindy gameplay and will avoid it. I'll either play on easy and rush through the game, build a glass canon if possible or just don't play the game at all.

So yeah, easy is acceptable if the devs are incapable of doing high difficulty right.

Touhou if you've never played Touhou or if you suck at Touhou

Valkyrie Profile for the cool dungeons

>>3426679
So Hotline Miami and Hell or Hell in the DMC games?

>>3421207
All part of the fun. No internet to ruin it for you, every game a mystery. Back then a 2 hour long game was a lot longer than 2 hours. You had to peel back the layers.

If there's literally no difference other than difficulty and I wanna beat it fast to get on another game. If there's anything story wise different then it's not acceptable.

>>3421207
playing twisted metal two beating minion and the game being like lol you actually suck dick and were not even letting you play the rest

>>3426679
> I just want to succeed or fail quickly
I can see this as a respectable position

>>3426734
He means like Bushido Blade I think

>>3420707
>Is it ever justifiable playing a game you own in a manner that is fun to you?

Yes, OP, it is.

>>3428676
>a game you
is that a requirement?

>>3421062
>needs to grind in anything that is more recent than famicom rpgs
Are you a potato?

>>3421062
>the "hilarious" pancake spell was so important that it got a place on the box

god damn this game

>>3420707

Only if you directly play medium and hard aftwards to experience the maximum game feeling

>>3421021
>Generally I play normal mode because it's often the most 'optimized' difficulty setting. Hard mode if it feels to me like gitting gud will actually be a worthwhile investment.
this is the correct answer

starting on hard is sometimes counterproductive to gitting gud because the game beats the shit out of you faster than you can learn what you're doing wrong

easy mode usually just sucks

honestly it's surprisingly rare for the difficulty settings to be seriously mislabeled

>>3421437
Spotted the entitled Millennial

>>3420707
If you only want to play till Mutoid Man.