So while there's ways around it (like opening up the floppy drive before it writes and then restoring your 'lost' party, making them a decade older in the process) Wizardry only saves when your out of the dungeon. In fact it autosaves and also has (semi) perma-death mechanics. And even with backups it makes the game still a genuinely nerve-wracking experience even now
Some yes some no. Modern game design as a whole is probably easier since there's a much larger casual market compared to the niche gaming circle that we used to have. Though honestly, the big part of difficulty back then was that even just saving took some time to get popularized. On the other hand, devs that actually want to make things truly difficult have more freedom to do so thanks to saves as well.
No, there are lots of difficult new games to play. The problem is games that have you select easy, normal, hard. That means the developers are not able to balance a games difficulty to be maximum fun.
Also, most people don't finish games, even if they are piss easy
Yeah. I suck at video games and always used to play on normal. But the last two or three gens have made normal way too easy. Most games let you change difficulty on the fly thankfully.
I need to get back into this game. I was having a lot of fun with it, but had two back-to-back full party wipes on floor 7 and just didn't wanted to farm Murphy's Ghosts for 2 hours again. Fricking dragons.
>nips trying to mimick Wrpg
it's always a disaster. Imagine not playing Lands of Lore instead or Dungeon Master lmao >but le difficulty
yeah me too I can shit out a completly stupid Excel sheet.
>Oh hey, skill synergies. I guess you're supposed to specialize in a single type of skill in this game. >I'll build a lightning sorceress! >20 hours later >what the frick do you mean corrupted rogues are immune to lightning
You can respec in this game or re-level a new character against things like that, but it's still a good example of artificial difficulty: >level a barbarian >go to Hell >can't attack because miss-miss-miss with 85% chance to hit >can't kill anything, even white monsters >3/4 of the skills are useless >some skills are useless to level past 1-2 points in >but if you farm for the right items, you can become the best Pindle farmer in the game
This shit is not immediately obvious and can take years to figure out
You can respec in this game or re-level a new character against things like that, but it's still a good example of artificial difficulty: >level a barbarian >go to Hell >can't attack because miss-miss-miss with 85% chance to hit >can't kill anything, even white monsters >3/4 of the skills are useless >some skills are useless to level past 1-2 points in >but if you farm for the right items, you can become the best Pindle farmer in the game
This shit is not immediately obvious and can take years to figure out
To be fair, without immunities Diablo 2 would be way too easy.
And also act bosses are never immune, only resistant so it's still possible to beat the game. And it's totally practical to just run past certain enemy groups.
Bad builds exist obviously but you shouldn't have to read an entire walkthrough before you even start playing the game
semi offtopic but I fricking hate games like that where you have to read a "BEST BUILDS" guide otherwise you're just completely fricked if you wanna do it yourself
I don't mind this, but I need to know ahead of time that it's the kind of game I'm getting into. Going part way into an RPG, realizing I fricked my build, and starting over can be fun. I just need to know ahead of time that my first playthrough or two are experimental, and not something that I should be invested in.
There's bad and non functional. Shit like make an Assassin in Pathfinder WotR. A poison based class in a game where the overwhelming majority of enemies are immune to poison.
I like old RPGs, but not the infamously hard ones.
Main issue is the difficulty generally doesn't mean "difficult", it means "RNG", as you cross your fingers every single run that you don't get forced into some stunlock instakill encounter or a bugged monster that does 255 damage because the game was made before the internet and the devs didn't know there was a bug.
A "bad" build should mean some idiot player in an RPG stuffing magic spells on their class that only gets 5 MP by the end of the game, or giving melee weapons to a ranged class, or spending all their levels on raising MP and nothing else because they don't want to bother with mana potions.
If a game allows you to make a pure Cummancer and there's an entire mandatory dungeon full of enemies that get healed by Cummancy, you should either code in a way to remove the dungeon's immunity, or add in a way for a player to respec, or make the game slightly less linear by offering alternative options for dungeons to progress through.
On a lesser note, I hate it when ARPGs have where entire stats and common build tropes become irrelevant by higher difficulties, namely the defensive stats, specifically health regen. >build to be a pure tank, invincible to everything in the first difficulty >kinda slow, but you beat the game >NG+1 >now starting to take damage, but your own DPS is basically non-existent, and the game isn't built for you to take for others, or the game has no multiplayer >slowly crawl through the game, can barely kill anything, even if you pivot to building DPS >NG+2 >everything one-shots you despite all your efforts to be a tank, all those relics and equipment and talents you farmed, all worthless >only way to survive at this difficulty is DPS meta builds
Or: >make status effect character; DoTs, paralysis, confusion, hypnosis, whatever >NG+1 >literally 100% of the game is now immune to everything, is hard to proc on, or the status effects wear off in 0.1 seconds >build dies
>Oh hey, skill synergies. I guess you're supposed to specialize in a single type of skill in this game. >I'll build a lightning sorceress! >20 hours later >what the frick do you mean corrupted rogues are immune to lightning
the main reason why I never commit to or even bother playing games that feature class building and a lengthy campaign (and a lengthier endgame).
No matter how much sense your current build makes at the moment, if you lack the kind of esoteric knowledge or divine clairvoyance the game demands then you can take that build of yours and shove it. I'm looking at you Path of Health Nodes.
there is a new remaster of wiz 1 in early access
costs 40 bucks though
https://store.steampowered.com/app/2518960/Wizardry_Proving_Grounds_of_the_Mad_Overlord/
Yeah I think so. Maybe I'm just getting old but I'm sure games used to be hard. And not in the "lmao eat rng" shit like that encounter or the "obviously you should have known to (ridiculous obscure bullshit) last dungeon idiot now you're softlocked".
I dunno, it's been a while since I played a game with good boss fights. Even nioh 2 got easy after like the second boss.
I wish I could go back to monhun feeling challenging from start to finish.
>I wish I could go back to monhun feeling challenging from start to finish.
If there's one thing I dislike in a lot of games, it's the idea that the challenge should be backloaded to "endgame" or whatever. Presumably on the misguided notion that le hardcore gamers who want a challenge won't mind putting hundreds of hours into a game to reach the difficult content.
I played ffx for the first time recently, and it was fun, but I wish it had been harder.
Like yeah I know it's got optional postgame super bosses and shit but man I just wish the actual cool bosses of the story had been harder.
I'm playing through nier automata and the only thing that has killed me so far having been fricking wild boars. It's a neat game but either I need to finish it another time before it's willing to be difficult or it just never gets hard.
/v/'s obsession with difficulty is bordering on the nonsensical. Difficulty does not equal quality and pretending otherwise is ridiculous. Almost as if some here do it just to imply that they're the real true hardcore gamers. Which is obviously ridiculous, seeing as this is an anonymous board.
If it doesn't doesn't provide the satisfaction of overcoming a challenge its just 20 hours of busywork in between pages of a shit book.
Why would I subject myself to being bored in between the scenes instead of just consuming actually good media?
I've played a million indie art games.
What they don't expect me to do is spend 15 hours killing trash mobs or holding forward while someone explains the plot to me, or fight a pathetic "boss" to receive my pat on the back.
Play Icewind Dale with Olvynchuru's Improved Heart of Fury Mod
https://forums.beamdog.com/discussion/70717/mod-improved-heart-of-fury-mode-version-4-2-0
/v/'s obsession with difficulty is bordering on the nonsensical. Difficulty does not equal quality and pretending otherwise is ridiculous. Almost as if some here do it just to imply that they're the real true hardcore gamers. Which is obviously ridiculous, seeing as this is an anonymous board.
It doesn't necessarily. The issue is that in the case of modern games, the lack of difficulty does equate to a lack of quality.
Tacked on cookie-cutter gameplay that is heavily automated and which assumes that the player completely refreshes their short term memory every 10 seconds is of low quality.
straight from "muh challonge" to "games aren't art." really checking all the boxes, aren't we?
Games can be art but only if the gameplay is actively taken into consideration. The game should at least be ludonarratively harmonious even if it is boring as sin.
Challenge is the only advantage vidya has over any other medium.
Kind of, but it's more in the fact that it is a medium with a ruleset.
The biggest problem with modern games is the illusion of difficulty, the game can introduce some overwhelming enemy doing all sorts of bullshit but the game also lets you respawn right next to it or you just have the ability to brute force it somehow, take Elden Ring for example there are enemies that can do all sorts of shit and can be a pain to fight yet I can get summoned at the end of the game and the host is an absolute fricking moron who also didn't put a single point in vigor and dies to a gentle breeze, the game can't be too hard if braindead idiots can somehow reach the end.
>Game includes a QTE that you practically can't fail but which seems like it would be precarious >Game includes a jump that is so heavily scripted that you literally can't miss it
Uncharted games basically.
Yes, but what you posted is a really terrible example of "difficulty". RNGfests aren't challenging nor rewarding, there's plenty of older games to choose from.
Play Icewind Dale with Olvynchuru's Improved Heart of Fury Mod
https://forums.beamdog.com/discussion/70717/mod-improved-heart-of-fury-mode-version-4-2-0
The biggest problem with modern games is the illusion of difficulty, the game can introduce some overwhelming enemy doing all sorts of bullshit but the game also lets you respawn right next to it or you just have the ability to brute force it somehow, take Elden Ring for example there are enemies that can do all sorts of shit and can be a pain to fight yet I can get summoned at the end of the game and the host is an absolute fricking moron who also didn't put a single point in vigor and dies to a gentle breeze, the game can't be too hard if braindead idiots can somehow reach the end.
What are your though on the dark savant trilogy? It seem like I would like it more, but at the same time I hesitate and I don't want to engage in long RPGs without knowing what I'm in for.
Wife and I have been playing and mapping out might and magic 1. It's been really fun figuring shit out and the combat is surprisingly simple but engaging.
Somebody should design a game where enemies can randomly crash your game and delete all your save files to satisfy morons who believe that dying to bullshit RNG and having to do tons of menial work to continue is proper difficulty.
Yes, but I ultimately like difficult modern games more. A lot of old games have straight up badly designed interfaces and that's the real reason most don't give them the chance. If the rights weren't a mess and we could get modern remakes of the early Wizardry games they'd still have niche appeal, but most people could push through them. Overall I prefer the EO games, not having to fight the game just to know what's going on makes delving into the complexities a lot easier. Which actually gives the potential to push systems even further. Few do but its an obtainable goal. In a lot of older games the mechanics didn't allow for ways to ramp up difficulty past start throwing waves of insta death mobs at you. If they did keeping track of what was happening probably wouldn't have been much fun.
>see post on Ganker praising Wizardry >feel excited >start the game >"You have encountered a rat" >fight it >miss >rat misses >miss >rat misses >miss >rat misses >miss >rat misses >miss >rat misses >miss >rat misses >miss >rat misses >miss
Thanks, but no thanks, I'd rather play Might and Magic VI again.
>quickload/retry until optimal rng and/or buy the guide
Wizardry is one of the earliest game series to punish savescumming, zoom zoom.
Nta but it's still 100% possible and viable to savescum
It's also how the majority of people played.
how did it punish you?
So while there's ways around it (like opening up the floppy drive before it writes and then restoring your 'lost' party, making them a decade older in the process) Wizardry only saves when your out of the dungeon. In fact it autosaves and also has (semi) perma-death mechanics. And even with backups it makes the game still a genuinely nerve-wracking experience even now
Yes. /thread
Some yes some no. Modern game design as a whole is probably easier since there's a much larger casual market compared to the niche gaming circle that we used to have. Though honestly, the big part of difficulty back then was that even just saving took some time to get popularized. On the other hand, devs that actually want to make things truly difficult have more freedom to do so thanks to saves as well.
No, there are lots of difficult new games to play. The problem is games that have you select easy, normal, hard. That means the developers are not able to balance a games difficulty to be maximum fun.
Also, most people don't finish games, even if they are piss easy
yes. from the 5th gen onwards video games became extremely easy and I think the save feature is somewhat responsible.
save feature is a good thing though, you cant argue against it 90s JRPGs sucked dick because you were only allowed to save at certain times.
Yeah. I suck at video games and always used to play on normal. But the last two or three gens have made normal way too easy. Most games let you change difficulty on the fly thankfully.
I need to get back into this game. I was having a lot of fun with it, but had two back-to-back full party wipes on floor 7 and just didn't wanted to farm Murphy's Ghosts for 2 hours again. Fricking dragons.
I know right? Wizardry 1 is legit awesome and one of the best games ever still and also frick Wizardry 1. What sadistic c**t designed this shit?
Pic related is from my last playthrough and about when I rage quit. That's the last boss on floor 10 btw
>nips trying to mimick Wrpg
it's always a disaster. Imagine not playing Lands of Lore instead or Dungeon Master lmao
>but le difficulty
yeah me too I can shit out a completly stupid Excel sheet.
Are you implying Wiz1 is a nip game?
Nips took over Wizardry
>gameplay is boring instead of fun
>gameplay is based on luck instead of reflexes and skill
Yawn. You contrarians are the most miserable beings on the planet because you are the most boring.
>Peter broke your neck
There is literally zero reason to state that Wizardry 1 is fair and balanced
>make wrong build
>oops you're softlocked now lol
yes the definition of fun every game should be like this
>Oh hey, skill synergies. I guess you're supposed to specialize in a single type of skill in this game.
>I'll build a lightning sorceress!
>20 hours later
>what the frick do you mean corrupted rogues are immune to lightning
You can respec in this game or re-level a new character against things like that, but it's still a good example of artificial difficulty:
>level a barbarian
>go to Hell
>can't attack because miss-miss-miss with 85% chance to hit
>can't kill anything, even white monsters
>3/4 of the skills are useless
>some skills are useless to level past 1-2 points in
>but if you farm for the right items, you can become the best Pindle farmer in the game
This shit is not immediately obvious and can take years to figure out
To be fair, without immunities Diablo 2 would be way too easy.
And also act bosses are never immune, only resistant so it's still possible to beat the game. And it's totally practical to just run past certain enemy groups.
>And also act bosses are never immune, only resistant so it's still possible to beat the game.
>get to The Ancients on Hell
>each one is immune to a different element
Artificial difficulty
>wrong
I think you mean bad. Bad builds should exist in games where build making is an important factor in success.
Bad builds exist obviously but you shouldn't have to read an entire walkthrough before you even start playing the game
semi offtopic but I fricking hate games like that where you have to read a "BEST BUILDS" guide otherwise you're just completely fricked if you wanna do it yourself
I don't mind this, but I need to know ahead of time that it's the kind of game I'm getting into. Going part way into an RPG, realizing I fricked my build, and starting over can be fun. I just need to know ahead of time that my first playthrough or two are experimental, and not something that I should be invested in.
There's bad and non functional. Shit like make an Assassin in Pathfinder WotR. A poison based class in a game where the overwhelming majority of enemies are immune to poison.
They actually fixed Assassin because it was so dogshit
I like old RPGs, but not the infamously hard ones.
Main issue is the difficulty generally doesn't mean "difficult", it means "RNG", as you cross your fingers every single run that you don't get forced into some stunlock instakill encounter or a bugged monster that does 255 damage because the game was made before the internet and the devs didn't know there was a bug.
A "bad" build should mean some idiot player in an RPG stuffing magic spells on their class that only gets 5 MP by the end of the game, or giving melee weapons to a ranged class, or spending all their levels on raising MP and nothing else because they don't want to bother with mana potions.
If a game allows you to make a pure Cummancer and there's an entire mandatory dungeon full of enemies that get healed by Cummancy, you should either code in a way to remove the dungeon's immunity, or add in a way for a player to respec, or make the game slightly less linear by offering alternative options for dungeons to progress through.
On a lesser note, I hate it when ARPGs have where entire stats and common build tropes become irrelevant by higher difficulties, namely the defensive stats, specifically health regen.
>build to be a pure tank, invincible to everything in the first difficulty
>kinda slow, but you beat the game
>NG+1
>now starting to take damage, but your own DPS is basically non-existent, and the game isn't built for you to take for others, or the game has no multiplayer
>slowly crawl through the game, can barely kill anything, even if you pivot to building DPS
>NG+2
>everything one-shots you despite all your efforts to be a tank, all those relics and equipment and talents you farmed, all worthless
>only way to survive at this difficulty is DPS meta builds
Or:
>make status effect character; DoTs, paralysis, confusion, hypnosis, whatever
>NG+1
>literally 100% of the game is now immune to everything, is hard to proc on, or the status effects wear off in 0.1 seconds
>build dies
the main reason why I never commit to or even bother playing games that feature class building and a lengthy campaign (and a lengthier endgame).
No matter how much sense your current build makes at the moment, if you lack the kind of esoteric knowledge or divine clairvoyance the game demands then you can take that build of yours and shove it. I'm looking at you Path of Health Nodes.
>could play Wizardry 8
>NOOOO I want to play the shitty ones!!!
there is a new remaster of wiz 1 in early access
costs 40 bucks though
https://store.steampowered.com/app/2518960/Wizardry_Proving_Grounds_of_the_Mad_Overlord/
>remake game
>oops we left all the annoying outdated archaic game design in
so why would you bother with this? why wouldnt I just play the original
Yeah I think so. Maybe I'm just getting old but I'm sure games used to be hard. And not in the "lmao eat rng" shit like that encounter or the "obviously you should have known to (ridiculous obscure bullshit) last dungeon idiot now you're softlocked".
I dunno, it's been a while since I played a game with good boss fights. Even nioh 2 got easy after like the second boss.
I wish I could go back to monhun feeling challenging from start to finish.
>I wish I could go back to monhun feeling challenging from start to finish.
If there's one thing I dislike in a lot of games, it's the idea that the challenge should be backloaded to "endgame" or whatever. Presumably on the misguided notion that le hardcore gamers who want a challenge won't mind putting hundreds of hours into a game to reach the difficult content.
I played ffx for the first time recently, and it was fun, but I wish it had been harder.
Like yeah I know it's got optional postgame super bosses and shit but man I just wish the actual cool bosses of the story had been harder.
I'm playing through nier automata and the only thing that has killed me so far having been fricking wild boars. It's a neat game but either I need to finish it another time before it's willing to be difficult or it just never gets hard.
> Monhun
> Challenging
lol
Your first monhun is hard.
If it doesn't doesn't provide the satisfaction of overcoming a challenge its just 20 hours of busywork in between pages of a shit book.
Why would I subject myself to being bored in between the scenes instead of just consuming actually good media?
straight from "muh challonge" to "games aren't art." really checking all the boxes, aren't we?
Challenge is the only advantage vidya has over any other medium.
no
I've played a million indie art games.
What they don't expect me to do is spend 15 hours killing trash mobs or holding forward while someone explains the plot to me, or fight a pathetic "boss" to receive my pat on the back.
why are you talking about MMO grinds or AAA prestige games like these have anything to do with my central thesis here?
You don't have a central thesis.
>a challenge its just 20 hours of busywork
This. You may as well do irl chores like laundry or dishes
gay
why would ninjas be working with demons?
why would ogres be working with ninjas or demons?
ninjas in wizardry are always evil, so them working alongside evil monsters makes sense.
It's $40 for updated sprites, slowed down combat, and an auto-map.
zoomers put on blast
?t=774
Wh-Why does that link look weird? Im not clicking this
Hahahahaha hell yes
The host looks like he studied organic chemistry in college and his favorite band is primus
I'd hang out with that guy or at least buy weed from him.
What's a good DRPG that allows custom portraits?
Play Icewind Dale with Olvynchuru's Improved Heart of Fury Mod
https://forums.beamdog.com/discussion/70717/mod-improved-heart-of-fury-mode-version-4-2-0
/v/'s obsession with difficulty is bordering on the nonsensical. Difficulty does not equal quality and pretending otherwise is ridiculous. Almost as if some here do it just to imply that they're the real true hardcore gamers. Which is obviously ridiculous, seeing as this is an anonymous board.
It doesn't necessarily. The issue is that in the case of modern games, the lack of difficulty does equate to a lack of quality.
Tacked on cookie-cutter gameplay that is heavily automated and which assumes that the player completely refreshes their short term memory every 10 seconds is of low quality.
Games can be art but only if the gameplay is actively taken into consideration. The game should at least be ludonarratively harmonious even if it is boring as sin.
Kind of, but it's more in the fact that it is a medium with a ruleset.
>Game includes a QTE that you practically can't fail but which seems like it would be precarious
>Game includes a jump that is so heavily scripted that you literally can't miss it
Uncharted games basically.
I finished Lion King on the Genesis when I was 8. I am the true L33T G4m3r, suck it b***hes
RNG isn't difficulty
Yes, but what you posted is a really terrible example of "difficulty". RNGfests aren't challenging nor rewarding, there's plenty of older games to choose from.
is water wet?
Games were mean to be played by smart computer nerds in those days, now it's mean for children using there mom's credit card
The biggest problem with modern games is the illusion of difficulty, the game can introduce some overwhelming enemy doing all sorts of bullshit but the game also lets you respawn right next to it or you just have the ability to brute force it somehow, take Elden Ring for example there are enemies that can do all sorts of shit and can be a pain to fight yet I can get summoned at the end of the game and the host is an absolute fricking moron who also didn't put a single point in vigor and dies to a gentle breeze, the game can't be too hard if braindead idiots can somehow reach the end.
What are your though on the dark savant trilogy? It seem like I would like it more, but at the same time I hesitate and I don't want to engage in long RPGs without knowing what I'm in for.
Wife and I have been playing and mapping out might and magic 1. It's been really fun figuring shit out and the combat is surprisingly simple but engaging.
Somebody should design a game where enemies can randomly crash your game and delete all your save files to satisfy morons who believe that dying to bullshit RNG and having to do tons of menial work to continue is proper difficulty.
Yes, but I ultimately like difficult modern games more. A lot of old games have straight up badly designed interfaces and that's the real reason most don't give them the chance. If the rights weren't a mess and we could get modern remakes of the early Wizardry games they'd still have niche appeal, but most people could push through them. Overall I prefer the EO games, not having to fight the game just to know what's going on makes delving into the complexities a lot easier. Which actually gives the potential to push systems even further. Few do but its an obtainable goal. In a lot of older games the mechanics didn't allow for ways to ramp up difficulty past start throwing waves of insta death mobs at you. If they did keeping track of what was happening probably wouldn't have been much fun.
>see post on Ganker praising Wizardry
>feel excited
>start the game
>"You have encountered a rat"
>fight it
>miss
>rat misses
>miss
>rat misses
>miss
>rat misses
>miss
>rat misses
>miss
>rat misses
>miss
>rat misses
>miss
>rat misses
>miss
Thanks, but no thanks, I'd rather play Might and Magic VI again.