|
In general, are videogames becoming more
difficult? Well, it all depends on who you ask, because after all,
difficulty is a matter of opinion. In my opinion, videogames are
becoming progressively easier over time. In this article I'll tackle
the issue of videogame difficulty in its many forms and how this
affects the gaming community.
When I think about the difficulty of videogames today,
my gut reaction would be, yes, they are becoming more difficult. Many
other gamers agree with me. However, that's just looking at the surface
of the situation – the gaming controller. Gaming controllers have
become much more complex since the days of the
Atari.
Comparatively speaking there is much more advanced technology housed
within present controllers, and many more buttons. A non-gamer will
always choose the less complicated looking controller. The more buttons
and the more complicated the device looks, the more daunting the task
becomes. "You hand somebody a game controller and it's like you've
handed them a live gun or a hand grenade with the pin taken out," said
former Sony Executive Phil Harrison at GDC 2008 (Martin, 2008)."
A perfect example of this would be the Nintendo
Wii remote. The Wii remote was intentionally designed to have as few
buttons as possible in order to appeal to as many people as possible,
not to mention the form factor which resembles a TV remote. For many
people out there, specifically non-gamers, complicated controllers give
off gut reactions that are telling them "that looks too difficult to
play". Joakim Sandberg, creator of the PC game Noitu Love 2,
said "In terms of controller layouts and catering to the old audiences,
it can be hard for people who don't play to get into it, which I
suppose is why the Wii is succeeding" (J. Sandberg, personal
communication, June 17, 2008). Much like my own gut reaction, these
perceptions of difficulty are often unorganized and biased -- but
that's not stopping the non-gamer from making those snap decisions. To
them, gaming with a complicated controller might appear to be a near
impossible task.
When I step back and critically analyze the
difficulty of videogames today, not just on the surface, but the
gameplay, without a doubt, games are becoming much easier. But to
understand that, you first need to understand what the "easier" is
being compared to. Back when people were going to the arcades to play
games such as Pac-Man, Galaga, and Space Invaders,
those games were designed to be endless, not completeable or beatable.
Typically, there was no end, no conclusion, no end credits, just the
satisfaction of a high score. Games that can't be completed -- that
sounds downright evil! It is evil, but in retrospect, it's also
extremely clever! From a business stand point, an unbeatable game means
unlimited cash revenue. It's an infinite product, and if you make that
product fun, yet difficult, customers are more likely to keep playing,
especially if the cost of admission is 25 cents.
But as videogames developed and translated from
arcade gaming to home gaming, the quarter concept no longer applied.
This didn't happen overnight however. The majority of early console
games still had that "arcade feel". The Nintendo Entertainment System
(NES) was one of the first gaming consoles to truly make an effort to
switch from an arcade feel to a modern-day feel, while also bringing
this new concept to the masses. In part, this was due to technological
advances, such as on-board cartridge memory. This led to the concept of
"game saving". Instead of completing a game in one sitting, I could now
leave the room, eat some pizza, pay the bills, go to sleep, and come
back the next day to finish what I started. Ah the luxury!
Despite
the popularity of videogames at the time of the NES, this was
ultimately a new hobby, one that was blossoming, changing, and
evolving. I remember when I was a young kid playing the NES. The
difficulty of most NES games was just too much! So difficult, that I
remember subscribing to Nintendo Power Magazine, buying strategy
guides, turbo controllers, and even calling the notorious tip hot-line.
Because of the infancy of the medium, gaming had no clear formula of
how a game "should" be played or even what to expect. Anyone who
remembers playing an NES can tell you, it's a hugely mixed bag! How was
I supposed to know that Battletoads was going to be near impossible to complete? Joakim Sandberg, creator of the PC game Noitu Love 2,
had this to say: "You could argue since it was the dawn of games they
were also difficult for lack of product testing and developer
experience … I think games have been made easier for that reason" (J.
Sandberg, personal communication, June 17, 2008).
Strategy
guides, and gaming magazines during the early days, were your key to
successfully completing a videogame. Think about this for a moment --
really think about it. Now ask yourself this question, when was the
last time you used a strategy guide, or a gaming magazine to get
through a videogame? You more than likely don't use either of those two
methods anymore. But now you're saying, well that's a weak argument.
Why would someone use a strategy guide or a gaming magazine when they
could alternatively use the Internet? Very true, but just because
people use sites such as GameFAQ, doesn't necessarily mean they need
to. Is the average videogame today really so difficult that you have to
turn to the Internet in order to complete the core game experience? Not
likely. A lot of people turn to the Internet for the quick solution to
an otherwise solvable problem. In fact, the Internet provides so many
options for gamers today that some might even say it spoils the
experience. With sites such as Wiisaves.com and PS3gamesaves.net, now
gamers don't even need to play the game! If all you wanted to do was
skip to the end or unlock everything instantly, you could! Convenient?
Yes. Removes the difficulty/challenge? Yes, and that's my point.
To further emphasis my point, a recent Triple A (AAA) blockbuster game called Alone in the Dark,
lets players skip to a further point in the game without playing what
had happened previously. When I first saw this play mechanic, I was
both surprised and offended that a AAA game would so blatantly remove
the challenge. I couldn't help but think "what's stopping me or anyone
else from abusing this option?" This should be seen as a huge red flag
to the gaming community and a possible sign of things to come! Kian
Bashiri, creator of the flash game, You Have to Burn the Rope, added:
" … AAA-titles are getting more streamlined and
"dumbed" down in concept to appeal to as big an audience as possible.
And this is definitely a terrible thing for gamers. Of course, it's all
about business; making games today is extremely expensive and therefore
they won't take chances." (K. Bashiri, personal communication, June 18,
2008).
So what about instruction booklets? We need
those, right? Not necessarily. Videogame genres are becoming so
formulated that you rarely need to crack open an instruction booklet.
Let's take the First Person Shooter (FPS) genre for example. If you
play any FPS, chances are the next time you play a different FPS,
you'll be able to figure out how to play it within a matter of minutes.
This holds true for many game genres: sports, RPG, MMORPG, etc. I want
to avoid the phrase, "if you've played one, you've played them all",
but honestly, that's what it feels like. Let me emphasize, I am in no
way saying that all games in a specific genre are the same. I am,
however, saying that too many games feel the same, and play similarly.
This is both good and bad, as it lets the player jump into the game
much quicker, but it can also make the game feel generic in form.
This
also brings me to my next point -- in-game tutorials. As a gamer, I
feel like in-game tutorials are being shoved down my throat. You'd have
a hard time finding a game today that didn't include some form of
in-game tutoring. It makes the inclusion of instruction manuals all the
more useless. As far as I'm concerned, limited use of in-game tutorials
is a good thing. I'd much rather know what the heck was going on than
shooting in the dark. However, game developers are too frequently
abusing the inclusion of in-game tutorials. When should the gamer be
allowed to think critically, instead of being told what to do? This is
a question every developer should strongly be asking themselves before
even considering in-game tutorials. Being able to discover, explore,
and use critical thinking are all themes that in-game tutorials
frequently hinder. I also find it extremely frustrating when in-game
tutorials deter me from a game's storyline. I enjoy being fully
immersed in a game's story and I hate when pop-up boxes remind me that,
no matter how deeply engrossed I get, it's still just a game. This is
especially frustrating in cinematic intensive games, where in-game
tutorials are the equivalent to a person interrupting, or seeing the
bright light of an open cell phone at a movie theater. Dave Fillion, of
DXF Games, said:
"I think if you're going to make one, have
it be optional or skippable. Nothing's worse than having to play
through 10 stages of tutorial again whenever you start a new game … If
more games were made where the tutorial was optional, I don't think
many people would complain." (D. Fillion, personal communication, June
18, 2008).
So why do developers insist on using in-game
tutorials? There are many reasons for this, but the bottom line is that
videogames are expensive to make. They cost a lot, because they require
a lot of man-power in development. With so much labor behind the
development of their game, they want to make sure gamers can complete
their game. In-game tutorials make games easier to play, and by making
games easier, it allows you to do just that -- finish their game. Too
much time, effort, talent, and money was spent, for you to not complete
their game, and with the average cost of video games costing roughly
$50-$60, providing an easier experience is crucial to keeping the
customer happy. You'd less likely feel cheated after spending all that
money, if you could experience the entire game with ease. Q-Games
President, Dylan Cuthbert, acknowledged, " … most people can make it to
the end of the game. In fact, the gamer of today almost expects as a
given to be able to complete every game he plays" (D.Cuthbert, personal
communication, June 18, 2008).
Do people want easier
videogames? Well from a business stand-point, yes. In fact, a huge part
of Nintendo's recent marketing strategy is to reach out to a more
casual gaming audience. This is done by developing games that are
typically less difficult, simpler, and appeal to a broader or
non-traditional audience. With this strategy, Nintendo has proven that
there is indeed a market for simpler video games. Other companies such
as EA have noticed this profitability trend and followed suit. Just
last year, EA announced a new gaming division called EA Casual
Entertainment, which will focus on "highly accessible games"
(Bardinelli, 2008). When asked about the casual gaming trend, Dylan
Cuthbert, President of Q-Games responded, "I think as more and more
casual gamers learn to enjoy games you will naturally see a rise in the
number of games developed to suit that audience across all markets" (D.
Cuthbert, personal communication, June 18, 2008). So, the casual gaming
trend is definitely a force to be reckoned with. Casual gaming is on
the rise and it won't be stopping anytime soon.
In the end, the videogame industry is a billion
dollar industry. That's a whole lot of money floating around! All
aspects of game development are all strongly influenced by money, and
rightfully so – it is a business after all. It's that business aspect
that's making games easier in general. In order to make as much money
as possible, you need to appeal to as many people as possible. However,
it's like the concept of teenage car ownership. If your parents bought
you a car, you wouldn't appreciate it, but if you earned the money
yourself to buy the car, then you'd truly appreciate it. This analogy
can be applied to easy videogames. Games that are too easy, don't allow
gamers to fully experience ideologies such as, reward, personal
achievement, replayability, addictiveness, and appreciation. Difficulty
can be a good thing, and I wish the gaming industry had more of it, but
it's like I said before – difficulty is a matter of opinion.
|
