Skip to content
Necrox wrote:I appreciate that some people like really difficult games.
Those people are not me.
I sure hope there will be an option for those people, to get all the punishment they want. But for the rest of us who don't have all the time in the world, and just want to enjoy as much of the (hopefully large) game as possible, I hope there will be a difficulty slider that goes down to the "we know you have a job and a family" setting.
I never played Wasteland - I was 8 years old and didn't know more than a few English words at the time (push, pull, open, look... spot the theme?), but I did play Fallout 1 and 2 twenty+ times, each. I feel their difficulty was just right - but perhaps an ultra-hardcore mode could be added to that.
jimbo wrote:With all due respect, 9 times out of 10 when someone comes out with the (tired, tired) 'job and family' excuse for wanting things easy and simple it turns out they were just as averse to challenge when they were 16.
TheLastBrunnenG wrote:Lose the attitude. I have a job and a family, I spend what time I can with them. It's precious to me. When I have free time, I game. I want to be able to have the possibility of finishing the game some time within a year after I get it, given that I may only have 15 minutes a day to play. If the game is brutally unforgiving and requires ages of planning and tons of replays just to complete the simplest encounters, then I want no part of it. But if the devs give me that same game and the option to select "difficulty = 3, hardcore mode = no, saving = limited save slots", then they'll have me hooked for the game, the DLCs, and probably the sequel too.
The_A_Drain wrote:You don't *have* to design for the hardest difficulty I guess that's just my opinion from my own perspective, designing at the difficulty you feel the game should be played at lets you put out the experience you want, while giving options to those who want more/less.
The_A_Drain wrote:Additionally, seeing as it's crept into this topic from the others. My opinion on restricting saves in any way is not a positive one, keep that shit to games where Death is by default supposed to be permanent...
Lucius wrote:In my opinion, all games should be designed and played at the hardest difficulty and the game designed down from there.
Edit to clarify: games today you have Hardest, Hard, Normal, Easy. I think games should be Normal, Easy, Easier, I-Win-Button.
Lucius wrote:The_A_Drain wrote:Additionally, seeing as it's crept into this topic from the others. My opinion on restricting saves in any way is not a positive one, keep that shit to games where Death is by default supposed to be permanent...
Death will be permanent by default in this game. It's the whole point to this type of party system. Whether that means we should have limited saves is an entire different discussion though.
cah wrote:What do you gain from the I-Win-Button? Bragging rights?Lucius wrote:I think games should be Normal, Easy, Easier, I-Win-Button.
That term would be more applicable to the people who expect a post-apocalyptic wasteland game with rangers, mutants and robots to be about non-combat activities.Smejki wrote:Bullying newcomers or people who just enjoy non-combat activities is stupid.
Smejki wrote:If there will be multiple difficulty levels include easy. There is no reason for doing so. Bullying newcomers or people who just enjoy non-combat activities is stupid.
tsiguel wrote:After reading the thread I'm still wondering, what is exactly low or high difficulty? Would you say Fallout 1/2, Arcanum, OG Wasteland were easy games?
Old-school games do not have a goal of making everyone feel like a winner. You have to work to deserve it. There even exists a term for that: "Nintendo hard".Fed wrote:Seriously - if somebody needs to feel ilite because he can beat the game that 75% (50%? 33%?) players cann't... Maybe he would agree to pet his ego with a big colorfull achievement?
Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 0 guests