TSA writes: Difficulty in video games is a controversial topic, and for years there have been two sides to the argument. There are those people who want to ensure difficult games remain difficult, so that developers retain their freedom of expression and the game is enjoyed the way it was originally intended. On the other side there are those who say video games should be opened up to an even wider crowd, introducing more options to adjust how a game plays depending on someone’s skill level.
The Souls-like genre remains popular, along with FromSoftware's classics there are many contenders. But which are the best Souls-like games?
Hmm... In my opinion, the 7 best are the 6 made by FromSoftware (DeS, DS1, DS2, DS3, BB and ER), then Lies of P. But each to their own.
Still DS1? You don't feel it's been surpassed yet?
Demon's Souls has the remake of course, but DS1 has surely been outdated?
I think that the DS1 remake is better looking than DS2. The interior lighting matched with the low resolution textures in DS2 is very garish, IMO.
Besides graphics, what do you mean by DS1 being "outdated"? I'm someone who played through Elden Ring and just recently played through the DS series, and as far as gameplay went, there were all very similar.
I haven’t played many but Bloodborne and NIOH1 are on top of my list.. had a blast with these 2
For world design and interconnectedness (that's a word, right?) DS1 is yet to be beaten.
Parrying has been creeping into more games, with almost every high-profile title of the last few years featuring it in some way. Why?
i understand the authors frustration i'm not the best at parrying in games. not that i can't complete a game that requires it but it is a definite harder thing for me than other kinds of techniques in games. which might be the main reason it's so heavily added in games nowadays. want to make your game challenging without having to do a lot of work? just add a parry boss. (what i mean by parry boss is a boss you have to beat by parrying such that their attacks will kill you otherwise)
I always think it's fine as long as such games also have the roll/dodge panic button. But I understand the will to parry, it seems so cinematic in a fight when you pull it off.
There are many ways that a game developer can choose to raise the difficulty in their games — but which ways are the most effective?
A great example on how to do difficulty in a video game is DOOM ETERNAL. Started playing on ULTRA VIOLENCE but then I started playing on NIGHTMARE after a couple hundred hours of playing on UV . What makes DOOM ETERNAL fun, is on Nightmare, the enemies are very aggressive ,but they give you the tools to defeat difficult enemies , you just have to learn how to use them .
Doom Eternal was so tough, but it felt so amazing to finish that game, even when the enemy feels unfair and gang up/box up into a corner.
Personal dislikes are bullet sponges and bosses with regular enemies thrown in. Just make the boss hit harder if it's too easy.
I think Helldivers 2 really gets it right. If enemies are easy, they swarm. If they're high level, they tend to have good defense and need strategems to take down...or bait.
I never feel too angry if I die by swarm because it is usually my fault for not checking my 6. I don't even mind dying if a teammate drops a bomb on the swarm that is gutting me.
I don't like cheap deaths. When the game allows you to progress only to hit you with an enemy that is suddenly immune to all the things you've unlocked and mastered is just dumb. If the game doesn't do hit boxes right and you get killed in lame ways it is dumb.
The screenshot is from Elden Ring, a game I really enjoyed, but the scaling was silly. I didn't do the Eligtree til late game so it was goofy difficult. I thought the Elden Beast was rather cheap. Not a fun skill based match, but just cheap enemy. There was no sense of, "oh it defeated me because I did this or I did that" like all Souls/Borne games.
1. Intelligent opponents that don't have some set, optional strategy to win and requires more critical thinking.
2. Game provides players with the knowledge and tools about a game world to stand a chance (or at the very least, the opportunity to gain the knowledge and tools).
3. Don't insist on enemies having much more health than the player arbitrarily. Sometimes, you'll have more durable enemies who are armored or inhuman which I would say is fair. The best approach to this I can recall in recent memory is Naughty Dog games: You're extremely vulnerable without armor and can get picked off pretty easily, but your enemies are pretty beatable with the right weapons and strategies where you can't just brute force it. That said, ammo is in short supply, so you engage at your own risk.
4. Depending on the type of games, make resources more scarce without necessarily making enemies bullet sponges. It simply means you'll have to choose your battles carefully and have damn good aim. Like Uncharted. If you're not good at headshots, Crushing is a rough time.
No.
No.
I thought all these " game journalists" were real Gamers like most of the articles suggests if that's the case then wouldn't be asking for this.
Celeste and the Souls-series are 2 different types of games though.
This is why we have reviews, If the game looks too difficult for you, don't buy/play. Why waste development time on making it accessible? Remember the feeling of dying 20+ times on bosses (toughing it out to perfect your strategy) and finally killing'em.
You remove accomplishments when you are curating your own easy mode experience.
The game should have whatever the devs want it to have. Not every game has to be made for everyone. If it wants to be a challenge, let it be. if that's too much for you, the game isn't for you, play something else.