I recently purchased the original Unreal as, to my shame, I had never actually played it up until this point. It was a bit of a landmark title for it's day and was the graphical powerhouse to beat upong it's release, though it seems to have been forgotten in favour of it's larger, multiplayer brother Unreal Tournament. But, for a mere AU$5.00, I thought 'why not?'.Now, I've been a gamer for nearly two decades and have played through some fairly difficult titles and have all but exhausted the FPS genre, so naturally I bump the difficulty level up to 'Unreal'. I like to be challenged, and I eat console FPSs for breakfast. Funnily enough, I was challenged - however, not just by the combat. The difficult adjusts the damage dealt and received, and in some places the number of opponents, however it doesn't change the level make up - and this is where I found Unreal to be the most challenging. Simply finding my way around some of the End-game levels was a lot more difficult than I had thought, and puzzles were down right head-scratch worthy. At first, I thought this was simply bad game design - a few had me stumped for quite a while - and a bit of a commentary on the progression the quality of the Video Games industry. Until I played it's sequel, Unreal II: The Awakening. While Unreal's difficulty was in it's 'puzzles' and combat, Unreal II basically handed you some guns and gave you things to shoot. I cleared Unreal in around 18 hours and was challenged quite often, however Unreal II took half that and provided literally no challenge of any kind.
Looking back at other games such as Half-Life, which was absolutely challenging - and still is, and their sequels such as Half-Life 2, which was better designed but was also a lot less challenging except for one or two moments, I feel that as time has progressed, games have gotten easier as a whole. Now, I'm not just talking about the dumbing down of game mechanics, I mean the actual challenge presented by the games of today. Looking back at the generations of yester-year, games like Sonic basically required you to memorise the entire game and be able to finish it without dying or making many mistakes. Flash forward to today, and games like Prince of Persia actually remove the ability to fail completely. Literally, you're unable not to succeed in that game. Is this something we asked for? Is this the natural evolution of our medium? In my humble opinion, no. Looking back at those older games, it was quite the achievement to finish one because of the challenge it presented. Seeing the ending sequence was the product of hours of hardwork and dedication, but boy did it feel good when you did it. If weren't good enough to be able to finish the game, you had to practice until you were. I remember weeks in front of a game called The Ninja on the Sega Master System II, and finishing it was one of the fondest memories I have as a kid because My Uncle and I spend hours memorising and practicing that game until we had it down cold. Sure, there were moments of frustration, but I'd be lying if I said it wasn't fun.This isn't just for lower-scoring games like Unreal II, however. Look at some of the biggest and best on the market, like Bioshock, and we can see this as well. Bioshock featured Vita-Life chambers, where upon death you'd be respawned instantly and off you go again. If you had half killed something, it remained half-dead while you were returned to full health and able to beat it to death with your wrench at no penalty. That is, if you died - the combat wasn't terribly difficult at it's normal setting anyway, and even at it's full difficulty the real challenge came from ammo conservation rather than from the difficulty of your opponents, a trick Resident Evil used to great effect back on the original Playstation. And yet, Resident Evil was still harder than Bioshock. There is obviously a fine line to walk between challenging and frustrating, but why are so many games failing to deliver the challenge that older games packed in spades?Maybe I'm a rare breed, but I think finishing a game should be something to proud of - something you actually have to put some effort into, however with that effort comes the pay off of the feeling of success. When I finished Unreal, I actually felt good, despite the ending being nothing more than a "you escaped - to be continued" screen. Compare this to Call of Duty 4, Bioshock or even Unreal II, where finish it generated more of a 'meh' than a fist-in-the-air-fuck-yeah! Is this the way the industry is headed as Video Games become more and more mainstream and make more and more money? Or should every person who picks up the game have a right to finish it without putting little to no effort in to it? Is the End Screen a right, or a privilege?
If this is your benchmark for being a hardcore gamer, then I am a casual gamer forever. I can't be bothered to run around that big a world when I don't want to. When I am in the mood, I will scale mountains; else, let me get to where I want to be ASAP for god's sake!
That said, some of the things that you said I agree with. After playing the latest PoP on my friend's PC, I have decided that I won't buy it. I like it, but it somehow feels so different to Warrior Within and The Two Thrones that it is a big turn-off. Especially the fact that you can't die, not even in fights. I mean, that's a bit too much. Sure, I want things to more accessible, but there must be some challenge as well.
Unfortunately, you are now in a small minority. And if things keep going this way, so will I in a few years from now. I hope not. I hope that people remain skilled enough that the games will still be a challenge to me 20 years from now.
Let's get some clarification here, shall we, since your post is all over the place and is rapidly devolving this thread.Firstly, I never said if you don't agree with me then you are not welcome to discuss the topic at hand, and need to travel on the metaphorical highway. If you're going to post in here, please ensure you use the correct the quotes, at least. I said:
Unless this is some sort of self-help group, where everyone needs to pat each other on the back, i don't need your permission to post here. When you stop being Atlas, you know, supporting the weight of the ENTIRE industry on your shoulder, I am sure we can talk again. Until you spread some credit around and acknowledge the other people exist with different opinions than yours and who want to the game industry thrive and continue being more inclusive, then run to the mods as you like.
This I can agree with. Games are more accessible than ever before. They cater to a lot of people now and stopped focusing solely on the tiny crowd that demanded they be focused on. Now, it's time to see more "niche" games, another overused quote as pointed out by Brad, show on the sides.
Perhaps I wasn't clear enough: I want there to be more gamers in the world - I'm not trying to segment anyone. Hardcore gamers are being segmented, that's my entire point.
The only thing I'm gonna say is that Viva Piñata is probably one of my favorite games(next to Okami). Now that game is hardcore. How? You get to break open living piñatas, the symbol of children's birthdays and happiness in general, with a shovel, all in the name of profit(or sadistic pleasure).
What could be more badass than that?
I am a hardcore gamer by your definition, although if i choose to play Sims 3, or Mario Kart or sit back and enjoy World of Goo instead of Civ IV, UT3, Gal Civ or X-com (which i always wind up reinstalling on my machines) or any of more dozens upon dozens of games, it's because I choose to. I am happy to have that choice. It's not because I was bored today, or don't want a challenge. It's because what I enjoy is not static. And the fact that you and I want different games, such as not spending 30 minutes running from one side of the screen to another, probably means that we should be segmented from each other. There is nothing wrong with that. That doesn't make you a "better" gamer than I, and it doesn't mean that your games are "better" than mine, it means they are different, suited to different players. There are more gamers in the market than ever before, and if these pubslihers and developers create and sell their products correctly, they don't have to sell to every WoW player on the planet.
Stardock's position is perfect; they don't make games to sell to everyone. That doesn't mean that the mainstream games are bad or that people play them are not as important to the gaming industry either. It doesn't make them casual players either. If i go out with friends and family one night to see a Hollywood movie, that doesn't mean I am not a hardcore gamer either. Sometimes, i know it's crazy, but I even go fishing! I prefer trout or bass but whatever I can catch is fine with me
Now if you are saying there are not a enough games out there that you enjoy, and that's not fair. Well then I would say I would agree. That's not fair to you or anyone who enjoys similar features. I've seen more games disappoint me than not lately myself, albeit for different reasons, but what do you want to happen, start telling companies to stop selling to the middle and make less money and sell to the extreme left and rights instead? Compared to other industry, the gaming industry is still relatively young. I think the developers and publishers are still finding their footing, and those who cater to the left and rights of curve are still figuring out how to do that and not go under. You're still a minority, and when you are minority, you are lucky to get acknowledged at all. I've been dealing with it since i started gaming. 20+ years later, games are still released without female characters, with female avatars that retain "he" scripts. You will probably talk down that importance, but it's easy to dismiss these things when you have been catered to.
The only thing I'm gonna say is that Viva Piñata is probably one of my favorite games(next to Okami).
I've been meaning to try Okami myself. It's on my list
I definitely recommend Okami, the only thing that disappointed me is that it's far too easy. Playing through the game a minimum of three times, I only died once doing one of the side challenges.
That's a bummer. I like a challenge although not a massacre. I heard there was going to be a 2nd one at some point though it looks like it is going to the DS. Nothing against handhelds but when they port games from handhelds to other platforms it doesn't seem to transfer well.
Yeah, I'm a bit skeptical about the sequel being a DS title as well. But I'll get it anyways. The more it sells, the higher the chance of a "proper" sequel.
If you want a hardcore FPS, try Red Orchestra. One shot, one kill, even with a pistol if you hit the chest or head. You can't bunnyhop, you can't run like a madman and expect to survive a machine gun emplacement, you can have your weapon knocked out of your hands (if you're lucky), or have a grenade blow off both of your hands if you're not (because you can't even pull the pin on the grenade and run for that enemy bunker).
When sniping you have to take gravity into account (well, I sometimes snipe with an unscoped rifle and the same applies), when in tank you have to work out how to angle your thickest armor so that the enemy shells bounce off. Only in that game have I actually seen people take cover when advancing.
Its difficult as hell when you first log in (partially because its also a multiplayer game), but also fun as hell when you get the hang of it.
When it comes to hardcore roleplaying games, I don't think you can apply the term to the genre in any game out of the box. Oblivion can be called such only after you install about two dozen user made mods which enable you to go really hardcore with roleplay (to the point of having your character die if you don't drink or eat enough).
Fallout 3 is the same, after installing some much needed food, drink and radioactive rain mods, you find that somehow you really have to spend all your hard earned caps on rad meds and relatively clean food... one game actually sucked me into a vicious cycle of survival, where I had to basically go and scavenge just to earn my keep and have a chance on not dying of radiation poisoning. Great fun!
Basically, hardcore today for me means realism. Games such as Hearts of Iron series, Red Orchestra, Rainbow Six etc. mainly because the difficulty does not arise from the AI getting an unfair advantage (cheating) but from the nature of the system itself. Reality makes stuff difficult - the more of it you have in your game, the more difficult, hence hardcore, it will be.
That's why they say that the most hardcore gamers play that game where you have only one life, permadeath and you can't even create a new character if you mess stuff up.
Oh, and you can't have a hardcore game on a console, except maybe an arcade or a driving game. Everything else is either too simplified or too clumsy because of the controls. Whichever the case, you simply cannot model the level of flexibility a mouse+keyboard combo gives you in shooter games (hence the autoaiming in many console shooters) or the staggering amount of controls a keyboard can get (for example when you need to prime the engines of a B-29 before igniting them so that you can actually start taxying and eventually take off )
Reminds me of SWAT 4, probably one of the more hardcore games I can recall that was difficult by design not cheat. You walk through the door and get a shotgun in the face, you're not getting up and can sitback and watch your team try and make it without you. I don't know how "realistic" it was, but do remember a fair amount of friendly fire, injuries and bad kills (aka, failed to warn properly). I would adore a SWAT 5 and kept wondering why another didn't come.
Yeah, SWAT 4 was a good, hard game. Flashbang. Don't leave home without it.
Hmmm, that's an interesting point and a strangely valid comparison - I certainly agree that I've been catered to in the past, and I won't lie and say it's not part of the reason why I find the shift in the industry to be for the worse. It's not that I don't appreciate different tastes in games myself - on my hard drive right now are Spore: Galactic Adventures, Demigod, Elemental's Beta, Unreal Tournament 3, Age of Mythology: Titans and the demo of Trine - and I stay away from what I don't like, I don't buy it and complain that it isn't the way I think it should be. I don't mean to be rude, but of course I think that my games are better than the games other people chose to play - that's why I chose to play them. Oblivion is my kind of game, and I believe it's better than anything else on the market. My sister, for example, loves Age of Mythology - she thinks it's better than Oblivion. I believe longer, more challenging games are simply better than shorter, easier games - that's my tastes, and clearly the industry has moved past them. My main point is that instead of now catering to the Casual Crowds as well as the Hardcore Crowds, I feel that it is vastly the Casual Crowd that is getting the love - like I tried to explain with my TV comparison. As you said though, perhaps I feel this way because I've already been catered to; a case of the shoe is on the other foot?
My apologies, I shouldn't have assumed you wouldn't understand the female character issue. It's just after so many years of complaining about it and getting snickers or silly explanations that justify that sort of thing, I jump to a few conclusions. Depending on peer reviews, probably going to pick up Tropico 3 which has a female avatar and a female voice but the scripts are still for male presedentes as are the traits. None of these things would have been hard for them to offer an alternative and this game was released this year. 20+ years later, they are still doing it, only this time at least its a half-ass attempt.
I think we have to agree to disagree on the better game issue though. I believe that your games are better games... for you, and that my games are better games... for me. I don't think it's comparing apples to apples because our wants are not the same. Although I will say I enjoy UT3 on a occasion and that's on my machine although it took MapMixer to make it the way it should have been in the first place. I love stratgy games the most. Tycoon games seem to be all but dead, especially business sims. I am still playing Capitalism II. City builders had a round of games in the last few years but they seemed to flatline and maybe fall of. And if city sims are going to be like City XL, which I felt was stale and lacked charater, that's 3 genres that I bought constantly for a decade falling flat.
If the games become too casual, without difficult levels to "fix", the issue, I am not going to like them either. I don't think I, you or anyone else has to settle for watered down games. And I think plenty of us hold their (publishers and developers) feet to the fire when they muck something up. There really is no fix for the masses buying something like Spore though. There is often someone who will buy something bright and shiny despite it being utter crap.
I didn't play Morrowind, but Oblivion I have played. And while it is difficult for me to say that it is the best game of all times as I am an RTS/TBS fan, it is one of the games that I have played the most. Hundreds upon hundreds of hours "wasted", if you will. The only reason I am not playing it right now is because I am afraid that I will begin playing it too much and ignore other things that I must do. An amazing game
for your taste in Oblivion! And for discussing that with me.
to you for a good discussion. It's nice when somebody broadly agrees with you
Glad to see we're all on the same page now. And yeah, there's some real improvement to be had for the industry's ability to respect girl gamers, or girls in general. On a completely unrelated note, I had a demo for some kind of tactical third person shooter back in the days when I was a wee young'in. It was way too difficult for me then, but I never got sick of ordering my men into traps or telling them to hold their posistion and proceeding to "accidentally" call in an airstrike on top of them. It's a miracle I somehow never became a griefer on actual players.
Anywho, +1 for finally being able to understand eachother.
Edit: Karma isn't working now Fail.
A better way of saying what I was trying to say; to each their own. It just sucks when 'our own' is longer around.
SPORE is the reason I made a vow never to pre-order again and wait for reviews... except Elemental, I was so impressed by Stardock's business culture that I felt the need to support them. That, and 4X Games have been a favourite of mine since the original Civilisation stole a large chunck of my childhood
I think I'm with the OP on this subject. Games are starting to feel a little squishy in the single player level of difficulty. I remember sitting with a friend and playing Gun.Smoke. Getting to level 4 was a big accomplishment (the game had 10 rounds). While I can't say I miss the linear grind-fest-endurance-test that many old games were, I do miss the challenge. I'm all for immersion and depth, but please bump up the level of difficulty in the hard modes.
As for challenging games, I would recommend the first two Oldworld games. Yes, you can't really die, but I found myself playing the game for a couple of hours and only accomplishing a little in some parts. Those games can really test your reflexes and patience.
On a side note I'm hoping for a wicked remake of Smash TV that will make me cry.
Yes, please!
"Big money! Big prizes! Iiiii love it!"
Please don't remake smash TV. If you do, I may never be able to leave my computer again.
I don't know what label I would be under for hardcore gamer or casual. I have certain games I like take Resident Evil but I am so disgusted with the last two releases of Res Evil I am not even sure where to begin in my rant. I suppose the first would be what the hell happened to the zombies? If I wanted to fight spores invaded people I would ask to play Body Snatchers. What is it not pc to say zombies now did I miss the newsletter. Also where are the puzzles you have to solve along the way as well as fight hordes of the undead. Come on just give me zombies puzzles and guns and I am a happy camper. I think L4D and this is hard to type even beat Res Evil 5 hands down. It is what Resident Evil used to be minus the puzzles to solve but hell at least I get to shoot zombies.
I am looking forward to the release of Cursed Mountain and L4D2 I do hate the fact that Cursed Mountain is on the WII. Though PC games unfortunately are becoming a dying breed in and of theirselves. I like games that can scare the hell out of me take Clive Barkers The Undying. I had friend tell me to put on the headphones turn out all the lights and play. Did that for all of about an hour and headphones came off and lights came on. That game scared the hell out of me. Those howlers just crying out in the blue a truly scary game. Also the fact you could pull up the console and type in jackass and a donkey would appear in front of you and actually take a hit or get scared to death was damn hilarious to do.
I know it is all about the ching ching the companies hear when they make games nowadays but that is just it the people who are perhaps hardcore gamers are the ones that spread word of mouth about games letting people like me who arent hardcore know about games. So if they arent happy and talking about how good a game is that means the more casual buyers arent going to buy the title and that means less cha ching.
I would like to add Silent Hill Shattered Memories looks pretty good too.
Perhaps this is something the game makers should look at. My two cents anyway.
I actually rather liked RE4. RE5 was terrible, though.
Really, how so?
You lot seem to be totaly missing the point about this hardcore/casual label stuff - its not very complicated.
There are those who play WoW more than me, or they play it deeper than me - both are more hardcore than me. Then there are those who play less than me (just played 7 hours actualy - great fun) - these people are more casual then me.
A hardcore player is not some absolutle designation, its realtive to the context. A hardcore Turn Based Stratergy guy has already gone over the hardcore/casual game style, then over the hard/casual stratergy type (Real time vs turn based) then they play it a lot and THEN they really put a lot into setting things up and getting a lot out of it (what I call playing it deep).
There are many levels of 'hardcore vs casual' and its all realtive. You might play casual games in a hardcore way or hardcore games in a casual way.
There is no definition that makes any logical sense because there are FAR to many ways to play and things to play for two diffrent labels. However the basic elements involded - time and effort (and possibly reward) are similar and thus you have these labels which fit many situations.
Now its time to go play some majesty 2!
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:
Sign in or Create Account
