RPG difficulty

[NJClaw]

I think FromSoftware's games do not have difficulty settings (i've only tried Dark Souls 1 many years ago for a bit but i do not remember if it had any such settings) and yet they do seem to be popular enough.

FS disguises difficulty settings as game mechanics. All their games since Demon's Souls have an easy mode in the form of online co-op, which undeniably makes everything easier. Dark Souls 2 also has a hard mode in the form of a covenant you can join in the starting area that makes the entire game harder. Sekiro has a charm you can refuse at the start of the game to activate its hard mode and a bell you can ring that serves a similar purpose. Difficulty settings are there, they are just presented as organic game mechanics instead of menu options.

 

[rusty_shackleford]

I don't think games should have menu-like difficulty options, definitely one of the things From does right along with its saving mechanism.

 

[WhiteShark]

I much prefer to have difficulty as a menu option. Once I'm in the game proper I see it as my duty as a player to take advantage of every tool offered to me. Picking "hard mode" in the menu feels like I'm setting myself up for a challenge. Refusing to use a mechanic that makes the game easier just feels like hamstringing myself.

 

[NJClaw]

I much prefer to have difficulty as a menu option. Once I'm in the game proper I see it as my duty as a player to take advantage of every tool offered to me. Picking "hard mode" in the menu feels like I'm setting myself up for a challenge. Refusing to use a mechanic that makes the game easier just feels like hamstringing myself.

I can think of very few games where difficulty settings make sense, though. Usually you get to pick between arbitrarily named modes base on... nothing. "Normal" sometimes means "normal", sometimes "baby-mode", and other times "normal but your characters won't really die". "Hard" sometimes means "hard", sometimes "normal", and sometimes "normal but enemies take 10 minutes do die". It's a pain to pick a setting when it's basically a random choice.

Off the top of my head, the only games I recently played where difficulty settings actually made sense were Divinity: Original Sin (1 and 2) and Expeditions: Viking.

 

[Bad Sector]

FS disguises difficulty settings as game mechanics. All their games since Demon's Souls have an easy mode in the form of online co-op, which undeniably makes everything easier. Dark Souls 2 also has a hard mode in the form of a covenant you can join in the starting area that makes the entire game harder. Sekiro has a charm you can refuse at the start of the game to activate its hard mode and a bell you can ring that serves a similar purpose. Difficulty settings are there, they are just presented as organic game mechanics instead of menu options.

With the caveat of not having playing FromSoftware's games, to me that sounds like -e.g.- not picking a powerful weapon early in an FPS or not trying to raise my character's skills in an RPG - both of which would certainly make the game harder, but i do not see those as "difficulty settings". If anything i try to explore and take advantage of everything the game itself offers before moving forward.

 

[rusty_shackleford]

Off the top of my head, the only games I recently played where difficulty settings actually made sense were Divinity: Original Sin (1 and 2) and Expeditions: Viking.

Only difficulty setting that really mattered in DOS1/2 was "Are you playing on tactician?" which greatly changes enemy AI, encounters, etc., Which is essentially the game being designed around two separate difficulties.

It's obvious most games are designed around one difficulty and the difficulty settings rarely do more than scale numbers. I just want a "play as the developer intended you to play this game" option for games.

 

[Reinhardt]

Hardest available first time, whatever on ng+. Nuking everyting that nuked you on first play feels gud too.

 

[Covenant]

I much prefer to have difficulty as a menu option. Once I'm in the game proper I see it as my duty as a player to take advantage of every tool offered to me. Picking "hard mode" in the menu feels like I'm setting myself up for a challenge. Refusing to use a mechanic that makes the game easier just feels like hamstringing myself.

But what if the easiest difficulty mode is so easy that it robs any challenge from the game whatsoever? Wouldn't you have had a better experience if the option to set it so easy wasn't there (and so you didn't feel like you were hamstringing yourself by avoiding it)?

It's like games that have completely OP shit available either as DLC items, or just very early in the game if you know where to go... You sometimes have to consciously avoid those things to preserve a sense of balance, and it's always aggravating to me.

 

[CanadianCorndog]

I recently played Dead Space on easy and it was actually more enjoyable that way. That type of modern AAA dumbed down game with great visuals and sound is more of a spectacle than a game so no reason to play it on hard. It's closer to watching theater than a game.
Everything else, especially RPGs, I play on hard.

 

[Berengar]

Normal or whatever the game has deemed the "intended" difficulty. Then increase it upon subsequent playthroughs or if I find I'm steamrolling too much.

 

[ferratilis]

What I played, off the top of my head:
Baldur's Gate - Core Rules
IWD - Core
Arcanum - Moderate
Deus Ex - Medium
Pathfinder Kingmaker - Challenging
Pathfinder WotR - Core
PoE1 - Hard with upscaling
PoE2 - Veteran with upscaling of critical path
NWN - Normal (or whatever it was called)
Fallout - Normal
DOS1 and 2 - Classic (although I never completed those due to getting bored)
Witcher 2 - Dark (with a mod that removes the on-screen effect; still too easy)
Witcher 3 - Deathmarch (still too easy)
DAO - Hard (afaik this is their equivalent of normal, because the game was designed for consoles as well)
so it's usually normal, or if there are four difficulties, one above normal. In a lot of games, highest difficulty usually gives more stats to enemies, I don't like dealing with that. If higher difficulty changes the encounter design, then that's worth playing, and improves replay value a lot imo. Otherwise, fighting enemies who have absurd armor or resistances is too annoying.

 

[WhiteShark]

I can think of very few games where difficulty settings make sense, though. Usually you get to pick between arbitrarily named modes base on... nothing. "Normal" sometimes means "normal", sometimes "baby-mode", and other times "normal but your characters won't really die". "Hard" sometimes means "hard", sometimes "normal", and sometimes "normal but enemies take 10 minutes do die". It's a pain to pick a setting when it's basically a random choice.

The same can be said even if there are no difficulty settings. A single difficulty game might be pathetically easy or painfully difficult. I agree with the general consensus that it's better for a developer to focus their efforts on a single difficulty, but that doesn't guarantee the difficulty will end up appropriate for everyone. I never played it, but Pillars of Eternity's detailed difficulty options coupled with recommended settings seems like a good way to handle it.

But what if the easiest difficulty mode is so easy that it robs any challenge from the game whatsoever? Wouldn't you have had a better experience if the option to set it so easy wasn't there (and so you didn't feel like you were hamstringing yourself by avoiding it)?

It's like games that have completely OP shit available either as DLC items, or just very early in the game if you know where to go... You sometimes have to consciously avoid those things to preserve a sense of balance, and it's always aggravating to me.

Perhaps I wasn't clear enough. I think we're actually in complete agreement. My point was that I'm perfectly willing to pick the hardest difficulty at the menu screen, but once I'm in the game I don't like intentionally avoiding mechanics to make the game harder for myself. Like yourself, I find it aggravating.

 

[Spukrian]

Most often I play on Normal on the first playthrough, then if it's a game I really like I dial up the diffficulty on subsequent playthroughs. Of course, there are exceptions...

 

[Nifft Batuff]

Well, it depends from the game. Usually, I start a game with "normal" difficulty. Then, if I am having a nice time in the game for some specific reason, I can also try to increase the difficulty just to extend the time I am playing the game, without spoiling it.

The fact is that I don't trust developers in any way. I have to experience the game directly to decide if some balancing is needed.

In principle, the best approach is the one I found in old games like Silent Hill or System Shock, in which you can decide the settings for different aspects of the game. For example in System Shock I used to set "combat" and "puzzles" to max difficulty, and "cyberspace" to low difficulty, that's because I didn't like the cyberspace segments and I just wanted to make that part of the game as short as possible. In System Shock there is also the option to have a time limit to complete the game. While I understand that this can be interesting for some people that like speedrunning through games, I love the fact that this is only an option. I usually like to take my time in games like System Shock, and to explore the game at my leisure.

I think this "differential" approach is much more necessary now in modern games than in old games. Modern games tends to be very formulaic, with check box list bloat in their mechanics. For example I don't think crafting is very fun or necessary in many RPG, but you find it almost everywhere, just because. There are a lot of games in which I would love to have a slide called "crafting" to set to zero. I also understand why this approach is not followed, too many options tend to scare casual gamers.

 

[Bad Sector]

I also understand why this approach is not followed, too many options tend to scare casual gamers.

It is more about testing/QA and balancing than casual gamers. There have been a few games modern-ish that allow you to customize difficulty and i do not remember ever this being seen negatively.

 

[rusty_shackleford]

I also understand why this approach is not followed, too many options tend to scare casual gamers.

It is more about testing/QA and balancing than casual gamers. There have been a few games modern-ish that allow you to customize difficulty and i do not remember ever this being seen negatively.

customize difficulty is just another term for cheat menu

 

[Nifft Batuff]

I also understand why this approach is not followed, too many options tend to scare casual gamers.

It is more about testing/QA and balancing than casual gamers. There have been a few games modern-ish that allow you to customize difficulty and i do not remember ever this being seen negatively.

customize difficulty is just another term for cheat menu

I know. Even the restart button, the pause button and the graphics resolution slider is a cheat menu for you.