Putting the 'role' back in role-playing games since 2002.
Donate to Codex
Good Old Games
  • Welcome to rpgcodex.net, a site dedicated to discussing computer based role-playing games in a free and open fashion. We're less strict than other forums, but please refer to the rules.

    "This message is awaiting moderator approval": All new users must pass through our moderation queue before they will be able to post normally. Until your account has "passed" your posts will only be visible to yourself (and moderators) until they are approved. Give us a week to get around to approving / deleting / ignoring your mundane opinion on crap before hassling us about it. Once you have passed the moderation period (think of it as a test), you will be able to post normally, just like all the other retards.

Level of challenge in RPGs

How challenging do you want your RPGs?


  • Total voters
    104

lukaszek

the determinator
Patron
Joined
Jan 15, 2015
Messages
12,618
deterministic system > RNG
 
Last edited:

JarlFrank

I like Thief THIS much
Patron
Joined
Jan 4, 2007
Messages
33,050
Location
KA.DINGIR.RA.KI
Steve gets a Kidney but I don't even get a tag.
I want CRPG to be challenging, but I usually play in the default difficulty if increased difficulty is due to HP bloat. But I don't have problems with the AI having unlimited resources in strategy games, so for TBS games I usually choose the highest difficulty.

Unlimited resources for the AI is something I abhor because it invalidates certain strategies.

In a multiplayer match, the thing you'd be going for is to raid your enemy's economy so he can invest less resources into his army. It's a commonly used and very effective strategy. Most RTS games live off it - raiding the enemy eco to prevent him from building large armies.

But when the AI gets unlimited resources, raiding their eco does nothing. You'll still have to fight full army stacks, no matter how much damage you do to their resource gathering potential, because they get free resources and you can't touch that free resource income in any way.

Usually it turns into an impossible war of attrition in the late game, when the enemy can spawn armies out of nowhere while you don't have any gold left and can't even hope to compete anymore.

AI that gets cheaty resources in strategy game is the worst. It inevitably turns the game into a grind. You just wiped out the enemy army? Don't worry, they have infinite gold to raise another one while you can barely recuperate your losses! Have fun!

While it is true, AI in strategy games is usually inferior to human player, so some cheating (additional resources or better unit stats) is a means to provide it a fighting chance.

I like how they did in in earlier Total War games. You could make the game actually challenging even with limited AI capabilities.

Yeah, AI is usually less smart than the human player, but instead of just giving them flat-out untouchable bonus income or making their units stronger, you can just give them additional income for their existing economy.

Like, hard difficulty increases the trade income by 50% and the resource gathering by 50%. It's a strong bonus but you can still harm the enemy's economy by raiding.

In a game like Total War where units aren't individual soldiers but groups, you can give enemy units +20% more men or something rather than flat-out increasing their morale, defense, attack etc. On very hard battles some Total War games give you bullshit like elite enemy units fighting to the last man even if you have them surrounded, shoot fire arrows at them, kill their general, and charge into their flanks 5 times in a row, which completely defeats the points of Total War battles which is to whittle down enemy morale until they flee. Giving them more men gives them a numerical superiority rather than a stats superiority, which a good player can deal with.
 

Snorkack

Arcane
Patron
Joined
Jan 8, 2015
Messages
2,975
Location
Lower Bavaria
Shadorwun: Hong Kong
I somehow read your statement like if adding unlimited lives into roguelikes was a must on pc
Not at all. A mechanic like you described is okay for a legacy style boardgame imo, since it would suck to be halfway through, realize you played so bad that there's zero chance to win anymore but can't restart the campaign either because you already tore cards and put stickers on the board.
In PC games otoh, such dead-ends are a non issue (or a must, even).
 

Raghar

Arcane
Vatnik
Joined
Jul 16, 2009
Messages
22,499
Yeah, AI is usually less smart than the human player, but instead of just giving them flat-out untouchable bonus income or making their units stronger, you can just give them additional income for their existing economy.

I remember they patched impossible difficulty to prevent player get 1/5 of AI income by ship raiding, thus getting MASSIVE economy boost.
 

Ebonsword

Arcane
Joined
Mar 7, 2008
Messages
2,326
AI that gets cheaty resources in strategy game is the worst. It inevitably turns the game into a grind. You just wiped out the enemy army? Don't worry, they have infinite gold to raise another one while you can barely recuperate your losses! Have fun!

I dunno, might be a good mechanic for simulating the Punic Wars (assuming you're playing the Carthaginians).
 
Last edited:

Reinhardt

Arcane
Joined
Sep 4, 2015
Messages
29,226
I usually start on highest difficulty because low level adventure is best part of rpg games. I don't care about "mage duels" or overgrown reptiles so later i can lower it if it gets annoying.
 

Zed Duke of Banville

Dungeon Master
Patron
Joined
Oct 3, 2015
Messages
11,756
challenge.png
 

Wunderbar

Arcane
Joined
Nov 15, 2015
Messages
8,809
There should be one default difficulty mode, the one the game was designed and balanced around. Too hard? Your problems, consider getting gud or playing something easier.

Then maybe some nightmarishly hard mode for autists, unlocked after beating the game for the first time.
 

Butter

Arcane
Patron
Joined
Oct 1, 2018
Messages
7,523
You can incorporate difficulty sliders right into the systems. Just create a couple dump stats and if someone wants a harder time, they max Charisma.
 

ItsChon

Resident Zoomer
Patron
Joined
Jul 1, 2018
Messages
5,381
Location
Երևան
Steve gets a Kidney but I don't even get a tag.
Underrail has one of the best RPG difficulty curves there is. Playing through the game the first time on normal, I thought it was really difficult, and I restarted like two-three times with different builds trying to get past Depot A. Once you finally get into the groove, you can get through the game while feeling a decent sense of difficulty throughout. Once you've finished the game though, going back and playing on normal is when you realize how much you've learned and how the game is now much easier. That's when you upgrade to hard and play again. I didn't think Dominating was too bad, it just requires some tricks and reloads to get through the early game, but once your build gets going, it's nothing ridiculous. Part of the way Underrail balances difficulty is by increasing the number of enemies, as well as adding later game enemies into the game earlier. This gives you a sense of difficulty without cheap stat bloat, and I think that's what games should be doing.

And it triggers me a lot when people say "just make the AI better bro". There are a lot of technical limitations behind such things, which is why making good AI that can actually challenge a player so difficult. These technical limitations aside, many of the fights that we're forced to go through in games like Underrail, AoD, or some of the IE games, would be impossible if the AI was able to strategize like a human.

EDIT: Age of Decadence had some really good fights as well. Even as a well-equipped mercenary with high spear and block, there were several fights that pushed me to the limit and required the use of all the utilities I had at my disposal, as well as terrain and questionable AI to win.
 
Last edited:

J1M

Arcane
Joined
May 14, 2008
Messages
14,616
Games should have three difficulty levels.

a) Journalist - an arcade-like screen reminding you that you have the game set to journalist mode appears during a failure state and asks if you'd like to continue; continuing revives characters and continues from the moment of defeat (allows journalists to complete their game reviews on time)

b) Correct - a difficulty level designed with intent with dedicated resources to create an enjoyable play experience; dynamic difficulty is NOT part of the equation; a minority of players will be unable to finish the game due to difficulty

c) New Game+ - a mode that skips tutorials and content designed to teach mechanics; does not require a finished run of the game to access (because you don't always have a save file handy when you go to replay a game)

Note that the game balance is the same in all three modes. Allowing for the limited resources allocated to game design to be pooled for the best result. Also, the player is not asked to spend the first several hours of the game tuning their play experience by discovering the correct difficulty.
 
Last edited:

NJClaw

OoOoOoOoOoh
Patron
Joined
Aug 30, 2016
Messages
7,513
Location
Pronouns: rusts/rusty
Pathfinder: Wrath I'm very into cock and ball torture
I want the "normal" difficulty level to be as hard as possible, even frustrating if necessary, because i know that if there are difficulty settings I will always pick "normal". I don't have problems with "hard" games, I just need something or someone to tell me what's the difficulty the game is supposed to be played on.
 

octavius

Arcane
Patron
Joined
Aug 4, 2007
Messages
19,182
Location
Bjørgvin
I want CRPG to be challenging, but I usually play in the default difficulty if increased difficulty is due to HP bloat. But I don't have problems with the AI having unlimited resources in strategy games, so for TBS games I usually choose the highest difficulty.

Unlimited resources for the AI is something I abhor because it invalidates certain strategies.

In a multiplayer match, the thing you'd be going for is to raid your enemy's economy so he can invest less resources into his army. It's a commonly used and very effective strategy. Most RTS games live off it - raiding the enemy eco to prevent him from building large armies.

But when the AI gets unlimited resources, raiding their eco does nothing. You'll still have to fight full army stacks, no matter how much damage you do to their resource gathering potential, because they get free resources and you can't touch that free resource income in any way.

Usually it turns into an impossible war of attrition in the late game, when the enemy can spawn armies out of nowhere while you don't have any gold left and can't even hope to compete anymore.

AI that gets cheaty resources in strategy game is the worst. It inevitably turns the game into a grind. You just wiped out the enemy army? Don't worry, they have infinite gold to raise another one while you can barely recuperate your losses! Have fun!

I'm not saying it's a good thing, but still preferable to HP bloat. Also, it's sad in HoMM 2 finding lots of unrecruited Titans in an enemy's castle because the AI didn't have enough money or gems to recruit them.
 

zwanzig_zwoelf

Graverobber Foundation
Developer
Joined
Nov 21, 2015
Messages
3,084
Location
デゼニランド
I like challenging RPGs, but it's important that they stay fair/reasonable (avoid hp bloat, cheating enemies, etc).

Also, the idea of dynamic difficulty is beyond stupid. If I want the game to get more challenging, I'll just delve into areas that are too high level for me or adjust the difficulty settings. If I keep dying due to poor resource management and dumb decisions, then I'd rather get out of the tight spot on my own and learn from my mistakes. If the game keeps nerfing itself whenever I make mistakes, then why should I bother learning how it works and getting good?
 

fantadomat

Arcane
Edgy Vatnik Wumao
Joined
Jun 2, 2017
Messages
37,083
Location
Bulgaria
It really depends on the game. Mostly i play on moderate and then up it do difficult. Don't like the try hard difficulty and don't bother with easy on 95% of the games. I go for the super easy mode only if the game have repetitive combat and the the difficulty is just a health blob,examples of such games are tower of time and lords of xulima. By the end of those games i just wanted the repetive bore fest to end. Games i play on the hardest are all the PB games :),thief games as expected,most of the vogel's games.....and a few others. In generally i dislike artificial difficulty like level scaling,cheating ai,R&G garbage and save restrictions. All those cretins that say "muh souls games are innovative and hard because muh checkpoints " are a bunch of dipshit consoltards that should kill themself .!.
 

zwanzig_zwoelf

Graverobber Foundation
Developer
Joined
Nov 21, 2015
Messages
3,084
Location
デゼニランド
dynamic difficulty
What do you mean by that? I believe that is a Kingmaker like difficulty where you could fine tune the difficulty settings as you go. Kingmaker have the best difficulty options i have seen in a game,really loved it.
Certain games (e.g. Sin Episodes) adjust difficulty on the fly based on how you play. If you're doing ok, the game gets harder, if you die too much, the game gets easier.
 

J1M

Arcane
Joined
May 14, 2008
Messages
14,616
dynamic difficulty
What do you mean by that? I believe that is a Kingmaker like difficulty where you could fine tune the difficulty settings as you go. Kingmaker have the best difficulty options i have seen in a game,really loved it.
Certain games (e.g. Sin Episodes) adjust difficulty on the fly based on how you play. If you're doing ok, the game gets harder, if you die too much, the game gets easier.
Not just if you hit a failure state. You see the term "rubber-banding" used in racing games where the cars that drift away from the pack are given different speeds to make the race feel closer even when one driver is better. Other games will spawn more enemies or adjust drop rates based on how many resources you have left or your current health level. Sports games will adjust the chance to score based on how much someone is winning.

It's supposed to create more exciting moments. And it probably does. When the designers test it on their children, parents, and co-workers. But as soon as a real consumer realizes what is happening it sucks the enjoyment out of the experience.
 

zwanzig_zwoelf

Graverobber Foundation
Developer
Joined
Nov 21, 2015
Messages
3,084
Location
デゼニランド
dynamic difficulty
What do you mean by that? I believe that is a Kingmaker like difficulty where you could fine tune the difficulty settings as you go. Kingmaker have the best difficulty options i have seen in a game,really loved it.
Certain games (e.g. Sin Episodes) adjust difficulty on the fly based on how you play. If you're doing ok, the game gets harder, if you die too much, the game gets easier.
Not just if you hit a failure state. You see the term "rubber-banding" used in racing games where the cars that drift away from the pack are given different speeds to make the race feel closer even when one driver is better. Other games will spawn more enemies or adjust drop rates based on how many resources you have left or your current health level. Sports games will adjust the chance to score based on how much someone is winning.

It's supposed to create more exciting moments. And it probably does. When the designers test it on their children, parents, and co-workers. But as soon as a real consumer realizes what is happening it sucks the enjoyment out of the experience.
Certain games also adjust loot based on your current equipment. What's the point of resource management if you know that the next crate will give you exactly what you want/need?
 

fantadomat

Arcane
Edgy Vatnik Wumao
Joined
Jun 2, 2017
Messages
37,083
Location
Bulgaria
dynamic difficulty
What do you mean by that? I believe that is a Kingmaker like difficulty where you could fine tune the difficulty settings as you go. Kingmaker have the best difficulty options i have seen in a game,really loved it.
Certain games (e.g. Sin Episodes) adjust difficulty on the fly based on how you play. If you're doing ok, the game gets harder, if you die too much, the game gets easier.
Not just if you hit a failure state. You see the term "rubber-banding" used in racing games where the cars that drift away from the pack are given different speeds to make the race feel closer even when one driver is better. Other games will spawn more enemies or adjust drop rates based on how many resources you have left or your current health level. Sports games will adjust the chance to score based on how much someone is winning.

It's supposed to create more exciting moments. And it probably does. When the designers test it on their children, parents, and co-workers. But as soon as a real consumer realizes what is happening it sucks the enjoyment out of the experience.
Certain games also adjust loot based on your current equipment. What's the point of resource management if you know that the next crate will give you exactly what you want/need?
Also you can't outpace the enemy if you do all the side shit,thus you can't feel like a god mowing down the underleveled enemy. That is why i really love Might and magic games.
 

RegionalHobo

Scholar
Joined
Oct 2, 2018
Messages
294
eh, let s say if a normal game offers very easy, easy , normal, hard and insane i'd go for hard most of the time

that said most of the time i have a better time in single difficulty titles, the way the experience is crafted shows, versus artificial easier or harder ones.

a good example is sekiro, even thou it does offer harder post game content i suppose
 

As an Amazon Associate, rpgcodex.net earns from qualifying purchases.
Back
Top Bottom