next »

[Brother Android]

To me, fairness (lack of randomness), frequent savability (not forcing the player to do too many insanely difficult things in sequence), and variety (gameplay/aesthetics that feel rewarding of effort) are what make hard games enjoyable.

[C.A. Sinner]

Y'know, I've been thinking about the "fairness" principle just now, and while it applies to most games, I think there are some noteworthy exceptions.

In roguelikes, Dwarf Fortress, Spelunky and other challenging games that rely heavily on random level generation and emergent gameplay, the inherent "unfairness" becomes part of the fun. An "awesome" or weird death is considered an achievement in itself.

Also, a lot of the challenge in these games comes from "luck management", i.e. putting up with what the dungeon generation algorithm throws at you. Some of those challenges are more difficult than others and some may even be unwinnable, but hey that's life!
 

[iffi]

In roguelikes, Dwarf Fortress, Spelunky and other challenging games that rely heavily on random level generation and emergent gameplay, the inherent "unfairness" becomes part of the fun. An "awesome" or weird death is considered an achievement in itself.

I think part of what makes dying fun in those games is the sheer variety in the deaths - death in those games is a whole other interesting part of the game, rather than just an annoyance or failure that sets you back earlier in the game. You can also add N to that list - although it's not random, I used to try to come up with ridiculous and fun ways to die on certain levels, such as trying to blow up as many mines as possible.

Also, in the case of Dwarf Fortress, it's not really possible to win, so losing could be a type of winning in itself.

[AMAZON]

another important thing is, keep the areas between save points manageable sized. nothing is more frustrating that being stuck on one challenge and having to go through a gauntlet of challenges you can already beat to get to it again.

I think this can be used well though. The feeling of "I better not die at that boss, or I'll have to replay this entire level again" can add some really intense drama to a game.

i honestly dont mind it as long as i dont have to replay it dozens of times because i can't beat a single part at the end of a long, tedious level. there are plenty of difficult games that dont do this (almost no nes games because an extra life system is an easy fix to the problem, though not a very good one)

[_Madk]

Also, in the case of Dwarf Fortress, it's not really possible to win, so losing could be a type of winning in itself.

Someone needs to explore this concept with an actual game. I can imagine a lot of creative stuff coming up as a result of it.

[Contrary]

I think that DF and Spelunky are random yes, but they give you fair warning and you can pretty much always go back and say "I should have been more cautious, should have used a rope, could have jumped this way, etc etc..."

[Noah!]

I don't know if this has been mentioned before, but even so, it bears repeating.

Make the player god. Like, seriously, letting the player have the feeling of unstoppability (more mobility, more firepower) is a really great way to balance out the difficulty. Plus, by giving the player more advantages, it gives you a license to throw MORE at the player to balance out the difficulty. (and really, making the player slow, big, and underpowered is a great way to run into the fake difficulty wall head-on)

Also, in the case of Dwarf Fortress, it's not really possible to win, so losing could be a type of winning in itself.

Someone needs to explore this concept with an actual game. I can imagine a lot of creative stuff coming up as a result of it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uswzriFIf_k ;-)

[_Madk]

Someone needs to explore this concept with an actual game. I can imagine a lot of creative stuff coming up as a result of it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uswzriFIf_k ;-)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Billy_Mitchell_(gamer) ;-)

[InfiniteStateMachine]

Demons Souls pulled me in like no other game I've played in over a decade. It's considered a    difficult game.

Some things to note about it specifically:

• Being observant is rewarded
• HUGE sense of accomplishment after completing an area
• Experimentation is often rewarded
• When you die, you tend to blame yourself (Blue dragon not withstanding :p)

This is one of the few (if any) games that I replayed the same level around 100 times in a row and didn't really get that frustrated.

[Noyb]

If each time I die to the boss, I replay the level and complete it noticeably faster, or reach the boss with more life or ammo, then replaying the level isn't too bad.

An Untitled Story tended to have several screens between save points and boss battles. It also had doors which only opened if the player was at full health. I found myself wishing that the level design would combine these two thoughts, and occasionally provide save points immediately before bosses as a reward for navigating the prior screens flawlessly.

[SirNiko]

I agree with this idea. Basically, once you've demonstrated that you've mastered a section of the level you are no longer required to play it.

[iffi]

I agree with this idea. Basically, once you've demonstrated that you've mastered a section of the level you are no longer required to play it.

In some cases that would work, but oftentimes being able to string together all the sections is part of the challenge.

[dspencer]

If each time I die to the boss, I replay the level and complete it noticeably faster, or reach the boss with more life or ammo, then replaying the level isn't too bad.

An Untitled Story tended to have several screens between save points and boss battles. It also had doors which only opened if the player was at full health. I found myself wishing that the level design would combine these two thoughts, and occasionally provide save points immediately before bosses as a reward for navigating the prior screens flawlessly.

The way that game was designed wouldn't allow that to work - you can teleport to any save point you see.

[Molten_]

Speaking of an untitled story, I love Matt and all, but why the hell did he make the window resize if you die? That shit was annoying.

[snowyowl]

Speaking of an untitled story, I love Matt and all, but why the hell did he make the window resize if you die? That shit was annoying.

Thus proving that no matter how epic or awesome your game may be, it can still be ruined by seemingly insignificant details. Bear that in mind when making games fun: Any screen that the player sees over and over and over needs to be as un-annoying as possible.

To answer your question: I think the original reason was because the death-screen was a different shape from the game-screen. I don't know why he didn't fix it later though.