View Single Post

Default 

April 16th, 2010, 09:19
Originally Posted by Malk View Post
If I understood correctly, you're saying it's best if either the game is really close to the artistic vision or if it's as far away from it as possible? Doesn't make much sense to me.
No, that's not what I'm saying.

I'm saying I prefer games to be as close to the artistic vision of the developers as possible.

Is that hard to grasp?

Hard difficulty should play exactly like how the developers intended their game to play ("closest as possible to their artistic vision"). So, if you want to experience it the way it was meant to be, choose hard. But, if that's too hard for someone, I don't see a problem in letting that individual to change the difficulty.
No, I don't think it should.

I think there should be one difficulty level - the correct one.

Anything else will require metagaming, and it will compromise the vision (if there is one, beyond simply making money). That's why we see it fail so often.

I'm sure you don't see a problem, but I do.

I'm no programmer, but it doesn't sound too hard. Just make the smartest AI you can, name that "hard" level of difficulty, then take away some of the its tactics and call that "normal".
It doesn't really require programming skills to understand, but probably a lot more experience with gaming than the average gamer has. That, or simply an understanding of what difficulty levels mean and how they affect development, and how they affect the player's experience - within the game and in terms of metagaming.

I understand your point of view, but I (and I'm probably in a majority) don't really like to challenge myself. I do, however, like to be challenged, so I'm all for predefined difficulty levels.
I really don't think you understand, and it has nothing implicitly to do with challenge.

It has to do with "purity" for lack of a better word.
DArtagnan is offline

DArtagnan

DArtagnan's Avatar
Waste of potential

#17

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Denmark
Posts: 13,928