This is actually pretty insightful for me right now... sometimes i wonder if making a hard game as the only option is the way to go.
I think at all the times that doesn't give you a choice, like Binding of Isaac, Super Meat Boy and totally get away with it.
Maybe theres a way of doing this without making the player feeling like its actually his fault that he "died"?
The player should always feel like it is his fault he "died". Anything else is bad game design. If it's not his fault, who's fault is it? There is only the player and the game (ignoring multiplayer for the moment). If the player is not at fault then the game must be. Who wants to play a game that "kills" you even when you do nothing wrong (i.e. are not at fault)?
This isn't to say that games should all be hard. On the contrary, a game that is too hard risks having the player decide that it's the fault of the game that they are doing badly.
A certain level of difficulty is neccessary to convey the desired experience to the player. This is inherent in the nature of games. A game with no challenge is not a game at all. It is, at best, a toy.
Damn, i think i made some kinda of typo, i meant to say: "Making a game where the player feels like it's his fault when he dies."
But yeah, i still wonder how really hard games just get away with it, a.k.a Flappy Bird or Super Meat Boy. (and im sure there are others out there)
Community
