Where games more difficult back in the day?

yes actually and many were longer as well ,

lets look at a old fps like goldeneye

-yoiu get an objectives screen but thats it, theres no arrows or waypoint helping you figure it out 

and you have a health bar ,so you could not just run blazing ,especally on the higher difficulty setting and theres one level in particular that is hard on any given difficulty -egyptian plus you were given an insentive to complete levels in a certain ammount of time -now adays you dont recieve anything for beating the game  -except a fake trophy or useless number, 

back in the day also mario had no save option , 5 lives and its game over ,back to world 1-1 

the only genre i believe that hasnt changed besides sports and racing is rpg, those are still quite hard ,and long -yet scarce compared to snes ps1 ps2 era

but fighting games platformers adventurer/action and fpses were harder and much more longer and had many options eg-ai in multiplayer -split screen , the last game i seen with split screen and bots was pd0 

after that quantum of solace wii .goldeneye and 007 legends and cod are the only fps combatgames with split screen , gow has co op but ya games were longer and more diffcult

yes actually and many were longer as well ,

lets look at a old fps like goldeneye

-yoiu get an objectives screen but thats it, theres no arrows or waypoint helping you figure it out 

and you have a health bar ,so you could not just run blazing ,especally on the higher difficulty setting and theres one level in particular that is hard on any given difficulty -egyptian plus you were given an insentive to complete levels in a certain ammount of time -now adays you dont recieve anything for beating the game  -except a fake trophy or useless number, 

back in the day also mario had no save option , 5 lives and its game over ,back to world 1-1 

the only genre i believe that hasnt changed besides sports and racing is rpg, those are still quite hard ,and long -yet scarce compared to snes ps1 ps2 era

but fighting games platformers adventurer/action and fpses were harder and much more longer and had many options eg-ai in multiplayer -split screen , the last game i seen with split screen and bots was pd0 

after that quantum of solace wii .goldeneye and 007 legends and cod are the only fps combatgames with split screen , gow has co op but ya games were longer and more diffcult

mariokart64fan

i think it depends game to game

genre etc

but in general, yes i think older game were way more difficult

Overall, I would argue that games were a lot harder especially the further back you go. In an attempt to appeal to a wider array of people, devs have began creating games that are far easier than a similar game from the previous gen (as similar as you can be that is).

It does often seem to be the case, though I'm playing both FF7 and Ni No Kuni right now, and FF7 is definitely the easier of the two (when it comes to battles, anyway). :P

sp player difficulty irrelevent

go play multiplayer if you want a challenge

They had to be during the 2D era. Games then were incredibly short, so the difficulty made them seem longer than they actually were, and tested your skills instead of letting the game be a cakewalk.

It took me over 3 years to be the first Contra, but now I can beat it in less than half an hour.

I look back and I discover that games from the past seem to be much harder than those since the PS2 era. I am not talking about hard game just because of odd or bad design which some people do like and sometimes does turn up well, no, I am talking about the games that tried to make the player use their brain, test their reflexes, and gave you satisfaction. While I am on the subject, I also have noticed there is a severe lack of difficulty settings in a lot of games compared to then or way to edit the game to make it harder or easier like extra lives, no armor etc. For example, in some games this gen currently there are games that have Easy and normal modes that are virtually the same thing except they would make it so you could not use a few items and/or weapons BUT, they make you overpowered that did not matter, when you get them in normal mode, it almost balances it out entirely, making the slightly less invincible character still be practically invincible. Back then, there were games that tested your mind, and could extend gameplay based on that alone if right. Only horrid hard modes in games the last few gens actually seem like a challenge as it seems you can run through in around 1-6 hours in almost every other game flawlessly, and when you beat it you feel nothing. Does anyone else feel this way?Canon-Gatorade

A big reason why games were harder the further back you go is developers had so much less to work with and they needed to find a way to make sure you extend your gameplay and not beat the game within an hour. Take a look at Castlevania for example. 6 levels and that is it. How in the world can you make a great rememberable game with just 6 short levels? Careful level design that is what.

But as time goes on developers are able to put more cinematics into their games to lengthen the time. The PS1 really brought in full force the FMVs and Audio Dialogue. The PS2 starting bringing some truely amazing visual experiences like Final Fantasy X. (Those FMVs hold up really well today even) And now today games are truly more about the story experience and less about the careful level design and difficulty, but don't lose hope if you don't like "easier" games. Demon Souls, Dark Souls, and Amnesia are still kicking player's butts. 

But to me the big thing about games today as they were back then is death isn't as punishable. Before death would bring you all the way back to X point which usually is 1 or 2 points in a designed level and forces you to fight all the way back to get a chance again. While today death just brings you back a few feet and maybe a slap on the wrist. That to me is the big difference on why games were harder/easier. The penalty of failure is greatly reduced so you don't care if you try to run guns blazing because if you die you immediately pick up where you left off and then just try again something immediately different.

[QUOTE="mariokart64fan"]

yes actually and many were longer as well ,

lets look at a old fps like goldeneye

-yoiu get an objectives screen but thats it, theres no arrows or waypoint helping you figure it out 

and you have a health bar ,so you could not just run blazing ,especally on the higher difficulty setting and theres one level in particular that is hard on any given difficulty -egyptian plus you were given an insentive to complete levels in a certain ammount of time -now adays you dont recieve anything for beating the game  -except a fake trophy or useless number, 

back in the day also mario had no save option , 5 lives and its game over ,back to world 1-1 

the only genre i believe that hasnt changed besides sports and racing is rpg, those are still quite hard ,and long -yet scarce compared to snes ps1 ps2 era

but fighting games platformers adventurer/action and fpses were harder and much more longer and had many options eg-ai in multiplayer -split screen , the last game i seen with split screen and bots was pd0 

after that quantum of solace wii .goldeneye and 007 legends and cod are the only fps combatgames with split screen , gow has co op but ya games were longer and more diffcult

Canon-Gatorade

If you are saying FFXIII is an easy game I would have to casually disagree with you lol

No, difficulty varies from game to game just like it did when video games were young.

And some 'difficult' games such as Ninja Gaiden and almost any title from Atari aren't actually difficult at all they just aren't programmed very well.

[QUOTE="Canon-Gatorade"][QUOTE="mariokart64fan"]

yes actually and many were longer as well ,

lets look at a old fps like goldeneye

-yoiu get an objectives screen but thats it, theres no arrows or waypoint helping you figure it out

and you have a health bar ,so you could not just run blazing ,especally on the higher difficulty setting and theres one level in particular that is hard on any given difficulty -egyptian plus you were given an insentive to complete levels in a certain ammount of time -now adays you dont recieve anything for beating the game -except a fake trophy or useless number,

back in the day also mario had no save option , 5 lives and its game over ,back to world 1-1

the only genre i believe that hasnt changed besides sports and racing is rpg, those are still quite hard ,and long -yet scarce compared to snes ps1 ps2 era

but fighting games platformers adventurer/action and fpses were harder and much more longer and had many options eg-ai in multiplayer -split screen , the last game i seen with split screen and bots was pd0

after that quantum of solace wii .goldeneye and 007 legends and cod are the only fps combatgames with split screen , gow has co op but ya games were longer and more diffcult

NodakJo2010

If you are saying FFXIII is an easy game I would have to casually disagree with you lol

Really? What makes that game difficult?

Game difficulty hasn't changed, they have just become more accessible which gives us the perception that they are easier, but hey, those other 4 difficulty options are there for a reason.

No, difficulty varies from game to game just like it did when video games were young.

And some 'difficult' games such as Ninja Gaiden and almost any title from Atari aren't actually difficult at all they just aren't programmed very well.

Blueresident87

[QUOTE="NodakJo2010"]

[QUOTE="Canon-Gatorade"] Was there any actual game released within awhile that actually had lives? That's another thing I forgot to put in the OP, everything seems to give you way too much help. I understand having no lives and having placed checkpoints, but a lot of games just kind of put you in the same spot, and some have it so the difficulty automatically goes down if you lose a lot. But how about shooters Mariokart fan? not FPS games but other types of shooters that were usually known for being hard? I still think some of those are ok, and Rpgs seem to do well I agree, games like Oblivion, Star Ocean, Witcher, etc. are still pretty balanced in difficulty. But I think they are starting to decline, look at games like Fable 3, Two Worlds, FFXIII, lS and more.Blueresident87

If you are saying FFXIII is an easy game I would have to casually disagree with you lol

Really? What makes that game difficult?

Oh you know...the old RPG cliche where bosses destroy you unless you grind for an X amount of hours. Right now I'm in that Tower part and finally got to the top only to find out that the boss has a move that nearly 1 hit KOs everyone in party.

[QUOTE="Blueresident87"]

[QUOTE="NodakJo2010"]

If you are saying FFXIII is an easy game I would have to casually disagree with you lol

NodakJo2010

Really? What makes that game difficult?

Oh you know...the old RPG cliche where bosses destroy you unless you grind for an X amount of hours. Right now I'm in that Tower part and finally got to the top only to find out that the boss has a move that nearly 1 hit KOs everyone in party.

Games from the 80s.

Lololol.

And games in the 16-bit era,those were pretty hard too(many of them anyway)

[QUOTE="Blueresident87"]

No, difficulty varies from game to game just like it did when video games were young.

And some 'difficult' games such as Ninja Gaiden and almost any title from Atari aren't actually difficult at all they just aren't programmed very well.

Canon-Gatorade

Yes they were, but it isn't the developer's fault. They were so limited by technology back then and they barely knew what they were doing.

sp player difficulty irrelevent

JigglyWiggly_

Good joke.

[QUOTE="JigglyWiggly_"]

sp player difficulty irrelevent

NirdBerd

Good joke.

most modern games do it fine
there is no point in making the sp difficulty frustrating
there are extremes though, klonoa 2 which i know you have played

impossibru to die

as long as the difficulty isn't rediculous, it's fine

people who want super meat boy difficulty for all their sp games don't realize there's something called multiplayer

ofc that's even easier because 90% of players are permbad

Well, yes.

The NES had quite hard games and the old arcade games were even harder.

Ever since it's been going downhill in terms of difficulty as games have been getting easier and easier with time.

I think it tells a lot that a game like Dark Souls is now considered a "hard" game while at some point in the past it would be "normal difficulty" at best...