Poll Question 045 - Would you buy and play a game that only had one difficulty setting?

Considering I’ve already played countless games without any sort of difficulty setting, yes. I think difficulty settings are a strength (if the game style supports it and there is an actual tangible difference), but not essential.

I hadn’t realized that Half-life 2 even had a difficulty setting until playing it through for the second or third time, using a mod no less.

There’s really not much to difficulty other than changing an enemy’s health value, changing the numeric damage a weapon deals, and maybe adding other things for the sake of being hard. You’re not really playing another game, you’re just making it difficult for yourself for your own enjoyment.

However, Doom I and II had some weird features to it dealing with ‘easy’, ‘medium’, and ‘hard’ settings which basically allowed you to determine what objects would be placed in a map at a certain setting. By shifting the pillars, monsters, and even the player start point, you could essentially be playing a whole other game.

When it comes to mods, I try to play it on Medium so I have both an Easy setting if the game-play proves impossible, or Hard if I want to play the mod again. If there is no difficulty setting in a game, it’s not a big deal because there’s always a mod somewhere that forces you to get only headshots.

Having, or not having a difficulty setting would not make or break my choice of games. I would look at what kind of story does it have, what kind of technologies does the game have, and what other unique aspects does the game have?

Normally I play my games on easy first to less stressfully enjoy the experience (especially on more detailed/beautiful games, then I crank it up to hard and play it again to give myself more challenge.

So, no, having only 1 difficulty setting would not be a determining factor on my purchase of a game.

I likewise play on easy firstly, normally just to get used to the maps and weapons. After that I like to ramp it up by changing to harder difficulty levels or completing more objectives. As for if difficulty levels are essential, no I don’t think do. If a developer is confident they’ve balanced the game well I’ll still play it.

Back in days when a purchased games on a regular bases I did not consider such options.
How days I am not so sure, I do get frustrated with games that are set too hard, but as long as they are fair and doable I dont mind a hard setting.

Normally with custom mods I start off on normal mode, if things get too tough I change to easy. I often go back and replay games on hard level which extends the playing life of the best games.

So I guess my response is, Yes.

I play almost all shooters on medium skill why not too hard not too easy just a middle point that doesnt ruin the fun but still offering me a challenge & i won get killed so fast i feel disappointed.
Easy skill is still alright its a good way to get the feel of the game just so ppl dont rush into it.
Hard is for those hardcore gamers who might be hardcore in multi-player & are looking for a bigger challenge.
Their might be other answers but im out to have fun with a game not complain about it

Lizard Said:

I hate games that have auto saves and you have to get to a certain place on a map to save it.

I agree. I think the player should be able to save whenever he/she wants. Not only that, but I doubt anyone would conviently reach one of these points when he/she has to get off the PC/Console at any given time for any given reason.

Anyway, onto the main point. I WOULD buy this game, in question. As long as it’s within my interests (Gameplay, storyline, genre, style wise.) I’d get it.

So, if another Half-Life game, (Who’s franchise I adore.) for example, comes out with one difficulty setting, I’d get it. If a generic military/squad shooter comes out with one setting… That’s a no-no. (Unless the game receives high praise from critics, to which I’d be interested.)

You get the idea.

I, myself, try the EASY difficulty first. If I like the game (So that it warrants reply value.) I play it through again on the HARDEST difficulty. Afterwards, if the game draws me in a few more times, I’ll probably pick the MEDIUM level from there on in.

Of course, sometimes it’s better to keep on replaying games on the hardest difficulty. After finsihing Deus Ex on ‘realistic’, the other difficulty levels are TOO easy, because I’ve gotten used to the full difficulty that the game puts out.

I might also point out, I hate static difficulty settings, where you select a setting at the start of a game, and it sticks until the end. I like games like Half-Life 2 (And Ep.1) or Oblivion, how you can change the difficulty whenever you like.

Though the lack of difficulty settings may not keep me from purchasing a game, the inclusion of such settings are a very attractive feature that all game writers should consider. HL2 has spoiled me badly enough - and the new SMOD is very exciting on the “hard” setting, even when playing HL2 user maps. LOVE IT!

Having the condition to the pole of the Game only having a “hard” setting doesn’t change my answer.

Instead I would like to expand my answer. That early on in console games, pretty much every game only had a hard setting. Go back and play the original castlevania, then play one of the recent Game Boy sequals. The new ones are much much easier than the original ones.

There is a simple reason for this. Back in the days of the NES, your game story was pretty much limited to the back of the game box, and for the few people that read the manual. To give games more play value, they were made harder, so to take more time to complete.

Later we had text and Cutscenes to tell a game story. Now they can tell a story in a game without ever having to leave the character’s perspective, ala Half Life.

And Multiplayer features in games give them allegedly infinite replay value, there isn’t a need for every game to be AS hard as possible, since more play value can be gotten out of the game through technological advancements.

I enjoyed these really hard games back in the day, they made winning feel hard earned and satisfying.

Difficulty in games is a distant second in enjoyability to game design. Bionic Commando was considered a really hard game back in the day, not because it was “impossible” but instead, because the gameplay mechanics were so very different than any other platformer of the day. You didn’t jump. You grappled between various levels with a claw arm.

The gameplay that forced me to stop, and start looking at game strategy on a case by case basis game me untold levels of fun, once I wrapped my Kindergarden head around it stopped dying.

Getting back to design however, Three of my favorite games of ALL TIME are games where you cannot die. In Day of the Tentacle, Sam and Max hit the Road, and Curse of Monkey Island, you couldn’t die, or loose. However, you had to be smart enough to figure out the giant puzzel that was the whole game, and it had a very witty, intellegent storyline to go with each game that still warrents replaying to this day.

Let me clarify the part that Philip quoted me on, saying that “So, no, having only 1 difficulty setting would not be a determining factor on my purchase of a game.” Because difficulty is only one factor of many factors that I take into consideration in determining whether a game is a good game or not.