What happened to the ability to 'fail' at a game?

Discuss and discover all the great games of yesteryear!

Moderators: mknott, NickThorpe, lcarlson, Darran@Retro Gamer, MMohammed

User avatar
nakamura
Posts: 7582
Joined: Tue Apr 07, 2009 2:32 pm
Location: Bournemouth
Contact:

Re: What happened to the ability to 'fail' at a game?

Post by nakamura » Mon Oct 07, 2013 4:12 am

HalcyonDaze00 wrote:
Times have changed but some refuse to change with them
spot on
Indeed. Gaming has regressed.
http://judged-by-gabranth.blogspot.co.uk/
Antiriad2097 wrote:I have a general rule of thumb that if Nakamura likes something, it's not for me ;)

User avatar
mr gryzor
Posts: 147
Joined: Tue Jul 16, 2013 2:50 pm

Re: What happened to the ability to 'fail' at a game?

Post by mr gryzor » Mon Oct 07, 2013 12:14 pm

Dark Souls having the reputation of being a brutally difficult game tells you all you need to know about how pathetic the majority of modern games/gamers are.

Difficult? Why..Because there isn't a checkpoint every 2 minutes??!! Please.


I cant stand self entitled,"i purchased this game,Its MY right to complete it" gamers.
The spawn of the Sony Playstation.
C64-Atari ST-PC Engine-Sega Megadrive-SNES-Neo Geo-Sony Playstation-N64-Dreamcast-Gamecube-XBOX-Nintendo Wii-XBOX360-XBOX ONE

User avatar
koopa42
Posts: 5903
Joined: Thu Dec 08, 2005 8:48 am
Location: Playing the victim apparently?

Re: What happened to the ability to 'fail' at a game?

Post by koopa42 » Mon Oct 07, 2013 12:30 pm

People need to realise (like it or loathe it) that they have to take some responsibilty for their gaming choices. If there is a save feature? you don't have to use it do you? Don't whine that it's there, just don't use it and get on with the gaming. I swear there are too many wanna be gaming martyrs out there.

As for gaming 'regressing' ???? Laughable

User avatar
HalcyonDaze00
Posts: 4621
Joined: Wed Apr 02, 2008 6:20 pm

Re: What happened to the ability to 'fail' at a game?

Post by HalcyonDaze00 » Mon Oct 07, 2013 12:34 pm

koopa42 wrote:People need to realise (like it or loathe it) that they have to take some responsibilty for their gaming choices. If there is a save feature? you don't have to use it do you? Don't whine that it's there, just don't use it and get on with the gaming. I swear there are too many wanna be gaming martyrs out there.

As for gaming 'regressing' ???? Laughable
correct,

as for gaming "regressing", you have to remember that he is a big fan of nintendo and jrpg's, with nintendo being in a bit of a pickle and jrpg's being on the bones of their arse for a good few years it's understandable he would think that.

User avatar
Nemesis
Posts: 1967
Joined: Sat Jun 13, 2009 9:55 am
Location: Norwich, UK

Re: What happened to the ability to 'fail' at a game?

Post by Nemesis » Mon Oct 07, 2013 1:33 pm

mr gryzor wrote:Dark Souls having the reputation of being a brutally difficult game tells you all you need to know about how pathetic the majority of modern games/gamers are.

Difficult? Why..Because there isn't a checkpoint every 2 minutes??!! Please.


I cant stand self entitled,"i purchased this game,Its MY right to complete it" gamers.
The spawn of the Sony Playstation.
I must admit that I haven't seen these self entitled gamers who demand that they can complete a game they buy. What I see is gaming for all, whereby the developers give you the choice to play at whatever level you desire. I believe this is a good thing as not everyone is an elite gamer. Surely, those people who demand that games are returned to 8-16 bit era style of balls hard difficulty are no better than the ones who demand an easy ride?

Then, there's the "it's all the Sony Playstations fault" argument that gets tossed into the ring. I don't recall too many Playstation 1 games being a walkover. In fact I can't remember completing that many apart from games like the Ridge Racer series which I put some serious time into. Not forgetting that there were other consoles & computers about at the time. I personally believe that if people are determined to blame Sony, consider this. Nintendo pulled out of that deal for Sony to produce the CD rom peripheral for the SNES that led them to create the PSone. Therefore, Nintendo is to blame for the current state of gaming today! :wink:
Oh and if you want to do little social experiments on our forum don't post about them on your own you plum - Darren@Retro Gamer

User avatar
Nemesis
Posts: 1967
Joined: Sat Jun 13, 2009 9:55 am
Location: Norwich, UK

Re: What happened to the ability to 'fail' at a game?

Post by Nemesis » Mon Oct 07, 2013 1:34 pm

nakamura wrote:
HalcyonDaze00 wrote:
Times have changed but some refuse to change with them
spot on
Indeed. Gaming has regressed.
How & in what way?
Oh and if you want to do little social experiments on our forum don't post about them on your own you plum - Darren@Retro Gamer

User avatar
sscott
Posts: 13157
Joined: Wed Aug 29, 2007 3:26 pm
Location: Sheffield

Re: What happened to the ability to 'fail' at a game?

Post by sscott » Mon Oct 07, 2013 2:03 pm

Misery wrote:
Prof Mango B Coconut wrote: Mine is probably not quite straight either. My idea of a good time is Doom on Nightmare difficulty using only the pistol and punch weapons. It took me about 3 months to beat the game, but god did punching the Cyberdemon to death feel good.

Yeah, same here. Been playing that alot lately myself. Though I lack the undying patience necessary to punch things to death with just the normal fist, so I always grab the berserk packs before I do that. Some things take way too long to kill even with that though. The Cyberdemon..... no, not happening in my case. He's pretty easy, but he takes long enough to kill with something like a shotgun as it is. Be more exciting overall though if enemies would fire more rapidly than they do.

Modern FPS games are bloody boring and slow by comparison. All the stupid cover and sniping and blah blah blah. My preferred tactic in damn near everything is just to charge at things.
And you can still charge at things if you wish, while many FPS games are linear by nature you can still employ different tactics. My time is limited and I can't spend 3 hrs playing the same bit, as usual though, if you are really enjoying a game you will persevere. If you are slogging through a game to get to the end then tough sections will get on your nerves.
Image

User avatar
dste
Posts: 7099
Joined: Wed Nov 11, 2009 4:55 pm
Location: Northumberland

Re: What happened to the ability to 'fail' at a game?

Post by dste » Mon Oct 07, 2013 4:30 pm

I do sometimes miss the difficulty of games past but at the end of the day my circumstances have changed and I just don't have the time to sit and play through something like TMNT on the NES.

On the other hand though I do find that some games these days can be rather on the easy side. The recent Tomb Raider for example, I was advised to at least play it on normal (which I was going to do anyway) as easy was too easy. Apart from a couple of bits that were my own fault I found normal to be too easy as well. Something like Arkham Asylum is just right on normal and made me want to play the game on hard for the extra challenge.

I think it's fine if the difficulties are set to what they say they are but I probably wouldn't bother playing a game that had arrows telling me where to go as that would just drive me mad.

Regarding save points. I think that they are one of the best things created in gaming, especially for when you get older and have less time.
Game Over Yeah - My Blog
Game Over Yeah - Facebook
Megamixer wrote:I never find it relaxing! Trying to hold onto my rings and not get hit by things is stressful!

User avatar
GigaPepsiMan
Posts: 2692
Joined: Wed Nov 11, 2009 5:06 pm

Re: What happened to the ability to 'fail' at a game?

Post by GigaPepsiMan » Mon Oct 07, 2013 5:18 pm

Emulators and Save states are absolute god sends when playing old games. I try not to use them when playing skill based games but there are quite a few old adventure games and RPG's that would have been impossible for me to progress in without.

User avatar
gman72
Posts: 8018
Joined: Thu Aug 28, 2008 9:41 pm
Location: UK. Norfolk

Re: What happened to the ability to 'fail' at a game?

Post by gman72 » Mon Oct 07, 2013 5:43 pm

Ive been playing Disruptor on the PS1 tonight.
Its fairly brutal to be honest. I think you have limited lives but when you do die you are transported all the way back to the start of the level. There is a mid way continue point but it can only be used twice. :shock:
“To gain your own voice, you have to forget about having it heard.” —Allen Ginsberg, WD

User avatar
HalcyonDaze00
Posts: 4621
Joined: Wed Apr 02, 2008 6:20 pm

Re: What happened to the ability to 'fail' at a game?

Post by HalcyonDaze00 » Mon Oct 07, 2013 7:47 pm

Regarding save points. I think that they are one of the best things created in gaming, especially for when you get older and have less time.
agreed

User avatar
GigaPepsiMan
Posts: 2692
Joined: Wed Nov 11, 2009 5:06 pm

Re: What happened to the ability to 'fail' at a game?

Post by GigaPepsiMan » Mon Oct 07, 2013 7:53 pm

I think we are in an age now where challenges are something you set on yourself or are optional in the game (like achievements or something). For example who here only plays their arcade games one credit or to a set number of credits? I often do, I always start over when I game over a fighting game and I normally set myself a number of credits for shooters and games like metal slug for example seeing how far I can get on 10 credits in donpachi.

This kind of mentality has become a thing too, speed running has always been around but it's absolutely exploded over the last few years, it's great, before the speed runs became big a game like metroid or resident evil only had the lure of an A rank or special costume too keep you playing and once you got them there was nothing else to do, now people do it to try and get the world record because there is a huge audience for it.

User avatar
Misery
Posts: 2236
Joined: Mon Dec 26, 2011 5:52 pm

Re: What happened to the ability to 'fail' at a game?

Post by Misery » Mon Oct 07, 2013 8:41 pm

mr gryzor wrote:Dark Souls having the reputation of being a brutally difficult game tells you all you need to know about how pathetic the majority of modern games/gamers are.

Difficult? Why..Because there isn't a checkpoint every 2 minutes??!! Please.


I cant stand self entitled,"i purchased this game,Its MY right to complete it" gamers.
The spawn of the Sony Playstation.

Agreed, mostly. And that's true of most "difficult" games these days. At least Dark Souls was decent though. But I did get bored with it after a time.

I've nothing against save points though.... provided they're actually done right. Most older games however never NEEDED them because they were so short. Something like Blaster Master would murderize many modern gamers, but it's not like you need a 30+ hour marathon to beat it if you're at the right skill level; it can be beaten in the time it takes to watch a simple movie. Levels are short and a full playthrough just isnt very long at all. This is the case with almost all such games back then.

sscott wrote:
Misery wrote:
Prof Mango B Coconut wrote: Mine is probably not quite straight either. My idea of a good time is Doom on Nightmare difficulty using only the pistol and punch weapons. It took me about 3 months to beat the game, but god did punching the Cyberdemon to death feel good.

Yeah, same here. Been playing that alot lately myself. Though I lack the undying patience necessary to punch things to death with just the normal fist, so I always grab the berserk packs before I do that. Some things take way too long to kill even with that though. The Cyberdemon..... no, not happening in my case. He's pretty easy, but he takes long enough to kill with something like a shotgun as it is. Be more exciting overall though if enemies would fire more rapidly than they do.

Modern FPS games are bloody boring and slow by comparison. All the stupid cover and sniping and blah blah blah. My preferred tactic in damn near everything is just to charge at things.
And you can still charge at things if you wish, while many FPS games are linear by nature you can still employ different tactics. My time is limited and I can't spend 3 hrs playing the same bit, as usual though, if you are really enjoying a game you will persevere. If you are slogging through a game to get to the end then tough sections will get on your nerves.
Part of the problem for me is that the majority of those sorts of games are entirely built around the concepts of cover or sniping or more cover or things of that nature. It works out for Doom because Doom is a pure run-n-gun style; you dont use cover, there's no sniper rifles, and there's LOTS of crap flying all over the place to dodge. The gameplay was never meant to be slow and methodical; it's built around speed and chaos. Charging at things is interesting in that game because there's crap flying everywhere, much of it can *really* hurt if it hits you, there's no such thing as a close-range instant kill knife stab or something like that, and enemies often take about a zillion hits to kill..... and chances are there's like 20 of them. And those hits you take MATTER: No regenerating health, and many levels for Doom dont contain many health packs (and you may have to backtrack through the whole level to get to them). Playing a pure rush-down strategy in that sort of game is at least a decent challenge.

As modern FPS games go.... they dont exactly encourage anything of that sort. There's nothing to dodge, not many enemies, enemies are dumber than a sack of hammers.... and so on. There's little point in me charging at something if that something is not a real threat and is not lobbing waves of fireballs at me or something. If the charge works simply because the game is easy, then I'm already bored. Particularly when the player has regenerating health. Even with a bit more challenge though the generally slow-moving gameplay would kill it for me anyway. Though, to be fair, I think basically EVERYTHING is slow.


....one way or another though I just dont do that genre anymore anyway. I just watch friends play these, and the comedy ensues, though they'll pester me into playing whatever game it is for a short time every now and then.

User avatar
ToxieDogg
Posts: 8356
Joined: Thu Dec 22, 2005 8:54 am
Location: Vice City, a.k.a. 'Liverpool'

Re: What happened to the ability to 'fail' at a game?

Post by ToxieDogg » Tue Oct 08, 2013 4:07 am

dste wrote:Regarding save points. I think that they are one of the best things created in gaming, especially for when you get older and have less time.
The problem with that being is that the younger generation, who do have loads more time to play games than us have learnt some really bad habits because of it and it's massively skewed their perception of how challenging games should be. And these are the games developers of the future.

Although on saying that, I do agree with Koops and that is that on most games you're not forced to use save points, they're completely optional.
Sig pic temporarily removed...The Magnificent 7 will ride again 8)
Lost Dragon wrote:The 1st rule about Feedback is..

You do not give Feedback!

User avatar
mr gryzor
Posts: 147
Joined: Tue Jul 16, 2013 2:50 pm

Re: What happened to the ability to 'fail' at a game?

Post by mr gryzor » Tue Oct 08, 2013 4:31 am

Nemesis wrote: I must admit that I haven't seen these self entitled gamers who demand that they can complete a game they buy.

Well you need to open your eyes because there is an entire generation of them.
The type of gamers that seem to think that the games story is more important than gameplay (Which it NEVER EVER EVER should be.imo)
With the story comes lots of cut scenes,with the cut scenes come bigger development teams,with the bigger development teams come more wages and bigger budgets.
The games get bogged down by the damn story,and because they're so story driven the developers want the consumer to see all those big,useless,fmv cut scenes-Which in turn results in games that are insultingly easy.

And yep,i stand by my original point.....they are very much the spawn of the Playstation.
The type of people that got into gaming in the mid 90's because of Sonys console.The generation that never played on arcade machines,and were so mummy cuddled by Japanese rpg's and no fail single player story driven games that just 7 short years ago the concept of actually competing against other human gamers online was an alien concept to them.
C64-Atari ST-PC Engine-Sega Megadrive-SNES-Neo Geo-Sony Playstation-N64-Dreamcast-Gamecube-XBOX-Nintendo Wii-XBOX360-XBOX ONE

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 10 guests