Easy Mode？

[WhiteRose]

I just finished reading in an article in which the author stated that she has learned to love "easy mode" in games because it makes it so that the games don't take so long. She quoted the example of an RPG, and having to re-do twenty minutes worth of content if she loses on a boss or if she gets unlucky with the RNG. It really made me think about why I choose to play games, and games in general, so I figured that it'd bring up my thoughts here on CP and see what the rest of you think. I'm looking forward to hearing the opinions of people not only from the aspect of people playing games, but also those making them. Though I can understand her thought, here are my thoughts on the matter:

This turned into a bit of a wall of text, so I've put it in a spoiler so as not to assault your monitors with my verbosity. (I apologize in advance for the slightly unRose-like rant. I guess it's true when they say that people are passionate about their hobbies. )

Spoiler: ShowHide

I find it a little silly that someone would complain that a harder difficulty makes the game longer. Surely, there must be a point where there must be at least some difficulty, or else it is no longer even a game at all. Imagine a game where, if one were to select the easiest difficulty, the game would just simply say "Congratulations! You win!" and shut off the console. I certainly wouldn't ever consider "playing" a game like that. Suppose, then, that someone is playing the game for the story. In this case, maybe the "easy" button would just skip through all of the "hard" gameplay, and just play all of the cutscenes in the game in order. You get your story, there's no chance that you're going to lose, and everything is fine, right? Though this might be somewhat enjoyable for a few games with truly fantastic stories, it wouldn't even touch the actual feeling and atmosphere that those same moments have after having played the role of the character - particularly any challenging aspects of being such a character in such a situation. The challenge of a game is what separates it from just being an interactive movie.

Now, on the other hand, I can understand choosing to play on normal difficulty rather than hard or impossible or insane or whatever the case may be difficulty. It provides enough of a challenge that the game is still a game, but you don't need to spend hours practicing or number-crunching mechanics in order to move forward. Now, I can understand, if one is looking for a challenge, taking the harder route - having to do that extra strategizing or having to spend those extra minutes of practice are simply taking the challenge of the game and moving it forward to a new level. Of course, if someone has trouble with these harder difficulties and finds them frustrating rather than fun, by all means they should adjust the difficulty to the point where it reaches the level of challenge that is steep enough to make one need to use their skills at the game at an acceptable level whilst still having fun.

I, for one, never cheat on a game unless I have worn out every other aspect of it and have additional things to gain by doing so (for example, accessing areas or content that normally is not available except through hacking, glitching, cheating, etc.) It actually makes me sad to see people who cheat through games, particularly games that I really enjoy. I can't even put my finger on exactly the reason; maybe I just take my games too seriously. But it's awful, after playing through a classic like Zelda:OoT or a more modern masterpiece like Mother 3 or Persona 4, seeing someone who is cheapening their own experience of such a work. Sure, they are getting all of the same story, same characters, and so on, but they're missing out on the real gameplay! Even just small cheats like unlimited money in an RPG in order to get rid of grinding remove so much from the experience - in this case, balancing limited funds to decide where upgrades are most needed, and perhaps even having to do without some of the more expensive items unless one has the time to grind out the extra gold. Granted, playing on easy mode is usually not quite the same as outright cheating, but in many cases, it isn't far removed (one example that comes to mind is Megaman Legends, where easy mode starts the player with the strongest weapon in the game, which is only obtainable on such a mode. It's so powerful that there's never a reason to use a single other people of equipment throughout the whole rest of the game, because you can beat anything by holding down the shoot button for five seconds or less.)

On a less-ranty and more introspective note, perhaps it all comes down to why people choose to play games. The end result, with probably very few exceptions, is to have fun. Some people might find that fun in blasting through their enemies by mashing a single button without having to spare a thought for strategy, whereas others might find the fun in the planning and careful execution itself. People are just inherently different - one person might enjoy spending time to build a snowman, and another might have more fun simply pushing the snowman over. In conclusion, (does this sound like an essay yet?) it seems to me that the people who play on easy mode are either 1. physically or mentally lacking the capability of playing the game as the developer intended, and thus in need of a dumbed-down version to be able to get any sort of enjoyment from the game at all, or 2. finding their joy not from the game itself, but from the baser human desire to "win." They love the flavor of winning, even if that winning was in the same vein as a preschool game in which everyone is the "winner" so as to not upset any of the four-year old children. Those who play games on a higher difficulty - at least normal - are hoping to enjoy the game in the way that the developer intended and having fun by actually playing the game, whether that be through mastering reflexes, coordination, or game mechanics and strategy. One might argue that they play on easy because they don't enjoy the game enough that they want to devote time to actually learn to play it, to which my response would be to simply put the game away - return it to the store if you must - and go find something that you will enjoy enough to actually play.

I'd love to hear your thoughts on the matter, as well. Does anyone here prefer to play on easy mode? If so, I firstly apologize for likely insulting you, (it was nothing personal) and secondly, invite you to share why you choose to do so.

[Spoofus]

I personally pick easy mode in certain games to experience the story of them (mostly for FPS games)
I think rpgs really shouldn't have a difficulty setting, what is the point of leveling up in easy mode if you can kill a boss in one hit.I think that takes some of the fun out of it that way.Also I love how people complain about Dark/Demon Souls being too tough for them and they should patch in a easy mode setting. The developers intentionally made to gradually increase in difficultly on purpose they mention that it keeps the player on their toes, and that i immerses the player more into the game and it's world instead of blindly going through it.

I do believe some type of games could work well with an easy mode, as well as the harder difficulties they provide in certain games it can be a fun thing to do. For example I been playing Torchlight 2 on Hardcore, Very Hard mode and I am enjoying it oddly enough. The whole you permanently loose your character on death keeps me focused and alert to everything in the game.I am fine with having the option to choose a harder difficulty as long as there is no easy mode but that is my opinion mostly for rpgs and the like.

[Blizzard]

This:

2. finding their joy not from the game itself, but from the baser human desire to "win."

As I have been making casual games for years now, I can confirm that. It goes even further than that. In casual games you have to keep dialogue and text to a minimum. People will literally complain with stuff like "too much text to read" even if a game has barely a quarter of the text that any half-assed adventure game from the 90's had. Even worse, in games with in-app purchases that literally cut down the time required to beat the game, people actually pay for it. Imagine that, first the pay for a game (or not, doesn't really change the point) and they PAY AGAIN so they DON'T HAVE TO play it.

We often use literally the english term "rewarding" to describe some of the features we implement. e.g. "That particle effect when you find a hidden treasure chest is very rewarding.", because this is what people really want. In an older game we had a tutorial at one point and while it was a good tutorial for the game, some people didn't like it or found it confusing. I mean, you probably have to have an IQ of room temperature to not be able to click where the game points an arrow at, but I won't go further into a discussion about this. My point here is that after we added just a few bullshit phrases like "Fantastic!", "Great job!", "Magnificent!", "Awesome" in the first tutorial message right after a segment has been finished, suddenly people inexplicably felt that the tutorial was much better even though literally nothing was changed.

The same goes for achievements. Even though I personally believe that mandatory achievements are retarded, people love them. Some might even go for the optional and more difficult achievements, but people generally love the feeling of being rewarded for something they have done. Extra Credits made an episode about the Skinner Box a long time ago and even though it is just a cheap way to make people keep playing, it works, especially in MMOs. http://www.penny-arcade.com/patv/episode/the-skinner-box

As for me personally, I usually play games on a normal difficulty setting, because today's games often have a hard mode that's actually more difficult than the hard modes that games used to have. When you're a kid, have nothing better to do and love a game, you're gonna play the hard mode. You don't care about time and frustration.
e.g. I played through the new Devil May Cry on several difficulties, because I liked the game. But I didn't go through the extremest mode where you die with one hit and all enemies have normal health, it was just too much. One thing is that I knew how much frustration it would cause me and the other was that I got bored after 20+ hours of playing. Now matter how fun it was to bash all enemies with various weapons, it got repetitive. I had unlocked all upgrades already and most of the concept art, but I would have to spend another 10 hours probably to get the rest so I just stopped playing.

Since the quality of games (not graphics!) today also seems to have dropped, I don't want to bother playing through a game several times. It's just not that good. Sure, I like to play through a game for the gameplay and story, but playing it through again on a higher difficulty while I didn't enjoy it that much is really pointless.
e.g. I also played Megaman Zero 4. First I started playing the game on easy and then I realized I am missing out on a lot of content. I looked up online how things are structured and it turns out that you get the best stuff and all content only on the highest difficulty setting, but you have to unlock it first by beating the game on normal. So I beat the game on normal, but by the time I was done, I didn't feel like playing anymore. Not only that it wasn't engaging enough to make me replay the game on a higher difficulty (and I'm playing it on an emulator with save states which makes things much easier!), it bored me enough that I didn't want to play ZX and the sequels anymore either (I planned on playing through all of them initially).

There is also another side to this as games often just create difficulty through obscurity or by punishment (Extra Credits also has an episode about that: http://www.penny-arcade.com/patv/episode/when-difficult-is-fun ) instead of making it a challenge. Old games often had good challenges on higher difficulties, today it seems that lots of them seem missing the point. Why are there so many custom challenges in games out there? Because of this. Why did I play Ocarina of Time with 3 hearts back when I was a kid? Because I knew the game in and out and I thought it would be fun. Why am I playing through Majora's Mask these days and preparing everything for my own run of the 3-Day Challenge? Because it's fun to test your skills and knowledge against a goal, it's fun to beat a difficult challenge because it makes a good old game that you loved more engaging in the present. I might try the 12-hour challenge of Final Fantasy 9 to get Excalibur 2, Steiner's best weapon after I'm done with Majora's Mask. Or maybe not, I always loved RPGs for playing them through 100% rather than doing crazy speed runs so I might not really enjoy a 12-hour challenge to get to the end as fast as possible.

[SBR*]

I think rewards are something that is inherent to gaming. Why do you do that insanely difficult quest that will take you days? To get that amazing sword, of course! I find it interesting indeed how simple compliments could boost a tutorial that much, Blizz.

Back on topic, I don't think everybody who plays on easy does it because they just want to 'win'. One can enjoy the gameplay mechanics, the environment and the game overall without having to be challenged by difficult objectives. Saying that this is because of their lack of mental or physical capabilities or because their baser human desires want them to 'win' sounds only elitist to me. After all, a game can be enjoyable without it being an extremely challenging one, regardless whether this is due to the difficulty settings or not. To the hardcore gamer, it may be less enjoyable, of course, for they like themselves a challenge. But the casual gamer could just relax and enjoy the game without putting too much effort into it. They play the game in order to relax after a hard day of work, without having to think that hard.

Others may just not be patient enough to grind those extra levels needed for beating the boss in that RPG. This was me as a young kid (combined with my limited mental capabilities as a kid). I loved OoT with a passion - perhaps because it was one of the first games I ever played -, but I could not for the life of me find out where I had to go next at some point and I did not have the patience/experience to find it out. That's when I started using a walkthrough. After that, I found it very convenient to use one and kept using it. In fact, I completed the entirety of Great Bay including Great Bay Temple and Ikana valley including Ikana Castle and Stone Tower in MM using a walkthrough. Nowadays, I slightly regret it. However, back then it didn't ruin the immersion for me at all, but that probably has to do with my being a kid. Even nowadays, there are times when I use a walkthrough, but that is mainly when I'm stuck at a point of which I know I should not be stuck at, i.e. when it's not a puzzle or anything similar.

[Blizzard]

Actually it's worse than that. Casual players hate being "held by the hand" while playing, because then they feel like they are being patronized. But they also hate it when a game is too hard. So basically you have to make it easy without them noticing that it's easy. And we're not talking about stupid people here, I was mentioning casual gamers. Saying that all casual gamers are stupid would be saying that all older women (which is a major portion of all casual gamers) are stupid which is obviously untrue. The problem lies somewhere completely else. They don't enjoy playing games that much, they just do it to pass the time. And making something like an easy difficulty mode for them is just an attempt to broaden the market. It's making games for people who don't play or maybe who don't even like games. And the best way to sell it is to make it "shiny", rewarding and with a bunch of collectibles, because that appeals to basic human desires (shiny = entertainment, rewarding = need to be praised for achievements, collectibles = instinctual need to collect as in ancient times there were hunters and collectors). In a way it's the same thing as selling sex or using sex to sell stuff with sex being the basic natural desire that is being tapped on. But this is already going way too deep into the rabbit hole.

I didn't say anything against walkthroughs. As a matter of fact, sometimes I like to use them through in order to improve my experience. e.g. There is an old game I want to play, but I don't want the unnecessary frustration so I just play it through 100% using a walkthrough. I do this rarely, mind you, but I still like to do it, because it allows me to compensate for design flaws of a game. I did that just recently with Wild Arms. I played Wild Arms 2 many years ago and I have fond memories of it so I wanted to play the prequel. Somewhere in the middle I got annoyed that I wasn't properly told where to go to next, so I picked up a walkthrough. I wanted to play it through 100%, but the game wasn't engaging enough that I would grind for X more hours to be able to beat to optional bosses. Luckily I was playing with an emulator, because the boss battles were very unbalanced and if I had died not using an emulator, I would have to replay the entire dungeon leading up to the boss. The game was adding "difficulty" where there was none. It wasn't really difficulty, it was just an attempt to lengthen playtime.

Older games did that a lot. They would often makes things difficult or put save points far apart in order to increase playtime. You can notice an obvious reduction in difficulty between NES and SNES games. SNES games defined a difficulty that was probably used in the next decade, because I didn't notice games getting much easier until after 2000. In the last generation of console I think most games have become too easy and usually don't require much skill to be beaten. But that's not necessarily a bad thing. I believe that a veteran gamer should have normal challenge when playing on Normal and a real challenge when playing on Hard, usually requiring to beat the game on Normal first in order to get better and know the environment/enemies. Easy should be reserved for people who don't play games that often. The problem is that they are all trying to sell games to people who don't play games so Normal plays as if it's on Easy so that people don't feel that they suck at games (which they do). Eh, it's a mess.

A good example of making games difficult in a bad way was Mass Effect 2. I started playing it on Hardcore (I think that was what the highest difficulty setting was called) a few years ago, but I switched to Normal later, because there was a quest where you literally didn't have enough ammo to kill all bad guys. I'm not kidding, I kept trying for about 2 hours and got so good that I knew exactly where each enemy would be, what strategy to use, how to keep my team members alive as long as possible to deal maximum damage, getting 90%-95% of my bullets to hit their weakpoints (headshots mostly), use my bionic skills to inflict extra damage and it simply wasn't doable. When I got fed up and switched to Normal, I realized that I could kill maybe a third, maybe a half of all enemies in the mission before I died on Hardcore, so I basically never would have gotten to finish that quest on Hardcore. So it was literally impossible to beat on Hardcore, because those huge machines are immune to bionic skills and I literally didn't have enough bullets to kill all of them. And if I tried to kill all humans with bionic skills, my allies would die off early (very early) and I would be left alone with the huge machines which I can't beat because of a bullet sufficiency. Way to go.

EDIT: Eh, I wrote a lot of stuff here. My main point is that games are made easy so they can be sold to people who don't play games. Imagine you could go snowboarding without having to practice for years and actually getting good at it. Instant gratification and instant stimuli, this is how our world works currently and what sells.

[winkio]

I have an entirely different point of view on this subject, so hopefully it gives you guys something to think about .

I have played enough video games, and gotten good enough at them, that the only thing that the difficulty setting determines is my playstyle.  In an FPS at lower difficulties, I have the freedom to run around guns blazing and kill groups of 10 enemies at once.  At higher difficulties, I have to play more campy, hiding behind cover and only engaging one or two enemies at a time.  In adventure RPGs like Zelda, at lower difficulties I have the extra health and items to explore secret areas and try shortcuts and tricks.  At higher difficulties, I have to stay focused on reaching the next save point, and I can't afford to try something that has a chance of taking half of my health, or wasting my precious arrows.

So which difficulty do I like?  The answer is both.  Normal/Easy is amazing for the first playthrough, for that 100% run.  It lets you focus on the enjoyment of discovering all the cool things the developers put in the game instead of having to slow down and tip-toe your way through areas.  Once you run out of new things though, Normal/Easy is pretty much pointless.  Hard difficulty forces you to get a deeper understanding of the game's mechanics.  In general, the better the game mechanics, the more fun hard mode is to play.  While playing hard mode on some games can feel like a chore because the mechanics aren't very interesting, on others it is way more fun than the 100% completion.

So here's a scenario that some of you may be familiar with, taken from Super Mario Galaxy.  The first time you play a boss mission, you have 3 HP, and can make mistakes and figure the boss out without too much trouble.  However, later on there is a special version of the boss mission, where you have to go through the entire thing with 1 HP, meaning that you can't get hit once.  This requires the player to learn the pattern of enemies in the level, and how to avoid the attacks of the boss.  While obviously more difficult, this special mission is a lot of fun, because you get to learn unique enemy behaviors, and then find a way to reliably exploit them.  In this case, I argue that the increased difficulty actually gives the player more content, because they completely discover the enemy behaviors and the tactics necessary to overcome them.

So here is my point overall.  If a game has a lot of content, but not that much depth (ex. Prince of Persia: Sands of Time), then only easy mode is appropriate, because the player won't get anything extra out of hard mode.  If a game has a lot of depth, but not a lot of content, then only hard mode is appropriate (ex. Starcraft), because the player will get bored of easy mode too quickly.  If a game has both, then both difficulties are appropriate (ex. Mario Galaxy).

[Blizzard]

I thought I mentioned something along the lines what you just explained, but I just realized that I didn't, lol! I agree, a harder difficulty can definitely give you more content and easier modes are much better for a 100% run, even though this doesn't apply to every game and often depends on the game mechanics. e.g. If you're really good in a game and barely get hit, then low health in a harder difficulty mode definitely makes sense, keeping your on your toes and providing more excitement and fun.

[Zexion]

I usually like to play on normal and easy because I don't like to fricken spend 2 hours trying to kill a boss juuust because I haven't grinded enough to hurt them D:

[Blizzard]

This is a problem specifically in RPGs, we're talking in general here. e.g. I played through Metal Gear Solid 2 on all difficulties. The last one called Extreme was nuts. One hit by missile rocket and you're dead. And at the end you have to fight against all 27 Metal Gear Rays that the bad guys stole. It was a battle of epic proportions and probably even more frustration, but it was so awesome. I handed their ass to them, to all 27.

[WhiteRose]

Thanks for your thoughts. I completely agree with winkio on the "different playstyles" aspect, and it's really interesting to hear Blizz's perspective as a professional game developer.

Going along with what winkio is saying, I agree that having multiple difficulties turns the game into almost two completely separate experiences. Personally, with only a few exceptions, I usually play games through on normal the first time. I guess my problem isn't with easier (normal as opposed to hard) difficulties, but with choosing the easiest difficulty by default - normal difficulty is normally forgiving enough that one should be able to still try new playstyles, find secrets and shortcuts, get 100% completion, and so on. However, in line with your thoughts, I also suppose it depends on the challenge that someone is seeking. For example, I could see someone who hates FPS games but loves exploration playing through Metroid Prime on easy simply for the challenge of hunting down 100% power-ups, secret areas, scan logs, and so on. Because they type of challenge they want isn't at all affected by the difficulty, which only changes the difficulty of the combat rather than the actual "game" within the game that they are looking for. In this case, the combat is simply something that has to be done in order to move ahead with the real game. For me personally, with regard to this particular example, I would consider the combat to be a part of the enjoyable challenge of the game, and that it gives more "flavor" to the exploration elements, so I would opt for normal mode (for the record, after beating the game once on normal, I decided to go to hard mode for my second run through, with the additional goal of getting 100% completion. However, I did have to use a walkthrough for some of the last few powerups that I missed. *headnod to Blizz and SBR**)

[winkio]

I realize that what I am about to say is going to sound quite arrogant, but bear with me.

For me, normal mode and easy mode are close enough together that I use the same playstyle for both.  If I am using the same tactics, why does it matter if an enemy takes 2 hits to kill or 3?  If I am clearing a room full of enemies with guns blazing, why does it matter if there are 6 of them or 11 of them?  If the difficulty on normal is already so low that combat is just a simple annoyance, then why not play on easy, to decrease the amount of time spent on it?  While you are at it, why not activate cheats and/or take shortcuts to help discover new things faster, and skip the boring repetitive stuff?

You are building up 'Normal' difficulty like it is somehow more legitimate than 'Easy' difficulty, that taking all of the challenge out of a game takes away the fun of it.  Perhaps that is true for you, but it does not hold true for gamers that are either more or less skilled than you.  For me, falling in the more skilled category, I don't get any tiny bit of challenge out of Normal mode anyways, so it feels exactly the same as easy mode, yet I can still have fun with either.  For other, less skilled gamers, they may find easy mode to have the same level of challenge that you experienced in normal mode, and to them, normal mode may feel like an intense challenge.

Some of you will likely not approve of this, but when I played FFVII, I played through the main storyline until I reached the end, and then I used cheats to get my character to max level, and max out all my materia.  I did this because after 20 or so hours, combat was pretty much boring and stale, and the only enjoyment left was completing all the side quests/secret bosses, etc.  With max level characters, I could end battles instantly, and didn't have to worry about healing and managing equipment, all game mechanics that I had already mastered, and already gotten tired of.  I still think that was the right decision, and I still enjoyed the game a lot over all.

On the other side of the coin, I play games like Starcraft and Metroid Prime at the highest difficulty and go for completion on my first run.  In this situation, I feel like mastering the deep game mechanics is part of 100% completion, and adds a lot to the experience.  This is starting to tie back in to my last post, so I'm just going to end by saying that I evaluate game difficulties for what they are, I don't approach a game with any preconceived notions.  If I am having fun with the mechanics, I will keep the difficulty high.  If I am having more fun exploring, I will lower the difficulty without a second thought.  There is no elevated meaning to either of those decisions.

[SBR*]

I like to sort game difficulties into four different categories: easy, challenging, difficult and impossible. Easy means I don't have to put any effort into it, challenging means it's a challenge but doable without too many game overs and difficult means it's a real challenge and I'd probably die very often during a playthrough, while impossible means it is too much for my skill level; it would take hours to complete just one level and a playthrough would not be enjoyable anymore at all. On the other hand, an easy difficulty may be enjoyable if I don't like the combat mechanics too much but still want to explore and follow the storyline. The actual in-game difficulties fall into these categories. Which category they fall into depends on the game and your skill level.

Most of the time I play in the challenging difficulty, but if I were to play, say, an FPS - a genre that doesn't appeal too much to me -, I would perhaps consider playing in easy, while I would probably a Zelda-esque game in difficult difficulty.

[Blizzard]

For me, normal mode and easy mode are close enough together that I use the same playstyle for both.  If I am using the same tactics, why does it matter if an enemy takes 2 hits to kill or 3?  If I am clearing a room full of enemies with guns blazing, why does it matter if there are 6 of them or 11 of them?  If the difficulty on normal is already so low that combat is just a simple annoyance, then why not play on easy, to decrease the amount of time spent on it?  While you are at it, why not activate cheats and/or take shortcuts to help discover new things faster, and skip the boring repetitive stuff?

I actually agree with you. There are games where I started cheating (usually emulated games), because I didn't want to bother and was only interested in the story. But it really diminishes the entire experience. It's like having a cake and eating only the filling. But this is really for specific games that are stupidly difficult.

There is one thing, though. While I might enjoy a game on Normal, giving me a decent challenge (because I play games to actually play them), the Easy difficulty would make it too easy. If I beat a boss and lose 3/4 of my health, that was obviously a challenge. But if I get barely hit and finish him with 90%+ health, he's obviously too easy. And that starts to annoy me, because it stops being engaging if I don't even have to pay attention to the game anymore. But that's because I am somebody who plays them, not a casual gamer. Casual gamers don't really care about engagement, challenge or experiencing a game, they care about killing those 5 minutes with Angry Birds until the subway arrives and the fake rewards that make them keep playing.

You are building up 'Normal' difficulty like it is somehow more legitimate than 'Easy' difficulty, that taking all of the challenge out of a game takes away the fun of it.  Perhaps that is true for you, but it does not hold true for gamers that are either more or less skilled than you.  For me, falling in the more skilled category, I don't get any tiny bit of challenge out of Normal mode anyways, so it feels exactly the same as easy mode, yet I can still have fun with either.  For other, less skilled gamers, they may find easy mode to have the same level of challenge that you experienced in normal mode, and to them, normal mode may feel like an intense challenge.

No, no, you got me wrong. I think that an Easy difficulty is a great thing. New gamers and children are offered an easier way into gaming that way. And maybe even the occasional casual gamer who starts playing hardcore. They can enjoy everything without the frustration of losing over and over. My point was that the Normal setting is how games are supposed to be played and that this Normal setting has become too easy in the past years to conform casual gamers, at least in some games (but still too many). And I have definitely not become better over the years as I don't play as much. I actually died once my current playthrough of Majora's Mask. Sure, I am using an Xbox 360 controller, I haven't gotten used to it yet completely and I had to assign the C buttons in a weird way, but the fact that somebody (such as me) out of form thinks that the Normal setting has become too easy, should actually raise some concerns.

I'm just trying to say that with Normal being the setting how the game is "supposed to be played", it is too easy nowadays. Going in guns blazing with 6 or 11 enemies does make quite a difference. If you are good, if you can take down 20 of them, of course it won't make any difference. But if you lose half your health on only 6 of them, then 11 will definitely be a challenge.

Some of you will likely not approve of this, but when I played FFVII, I played through the main storyline until I reached the end, and then I used cheats to get my character to max level, and max out all my materia.  I did this because after 20 or so hours, combat was pretty much boring and stale, and the only enjoyment left was completing all the side quests/secret bosses, etc.  With max level characters, I could end battles instantly, and didn't have to worry about healing and managing equipment, all game mechanics that I had already mastered, and already gotten tired of.  I still think that was the right decision, and I still enjoyed the game a lot over all.

Sure, why not. I did the exact same thing with FF9 on my 2nd playthrough. I didn't want to spend another 20-30 hours leveling my chars like an idiot so I cheated, beat Omega and the game. It was fun. If you already got bored of FF7 at the end of your first playthrough, I totally understand you. I probably would have beaten the boss first without cheating and then blasted his ass with cheats to see how much damage I can do, lol!

On the other side of the coin, I play games like Starcraft and Metroid Prime at the highest difficulty and go for completion on my first run.  In this situation, I feel like mastering the deep game mechanics is part of 100% completion, and adds a lot to the experience.  This is starting to tie back in to my last post, so I'm just going to end by saying that I evaluate game difficulties for what they are, I don't approach a game with any preconceived notions.  If I am having fun with the mechanics, I will keep the difficulty high.  If I am having more fun exploring, I will lower the difficulty without a second thought.  There is no elevated meaning to either of those decisions.

I guess it depends on the type of game and how engaging the game is in general and for a person specifically. No game is like the other.

EDIT:

Most of the time I play in the challenging difficulty, but if I were to play, say, an FPS - a genre that doesn't appeal too much to me -, I would perhaps consider playing in easy, while I would probably a Zelda-esque game in difficult difficulty.

This.

[SBR*]

You guys seem to have a different definition of a casual gamer than I do. To me, casual gaming means not taking the biggest challenge, but just enjoying the game for what it is, while hardcore gaming is imposing extra challenges on yourself (added difficulty settings or even something like speedrunning). In other words, you can play a game like Zelda casually, but in that case you won't go for all the extra skultullas, heart pieces etc. If you assume my definition, much of what you guys say about casual gamers, e.g. casual gamers don't actually play the game (

But that's because I am somebody who plays them, not a casual gamer.

), sound very elitist indeed ("filthy casuals").

[Spaceman McConaughey]

I love casual games, as they're pretty great time-wasters (in short bursts).
I also love me some hardcore games, and stuff of that short. Whoop, whoop, penis.

Anyways, I have a feeling I am going off-topic:
Easy mode is a'ight. I always start a game on normal if I play it for the first time, though.

[Blizzard]

@SBR: I am using the "definition" of people playing mostly game like hidden objects games. http://www.bigfishgames.com Go ahead, play some of them and a part of your soul will die when you see what people consider "difficult" these days.
I think I read somewhere recently that the casual game market has twice as many players as the hardcore market. A casual gamer is somebody who plays casual games and casual games are a well defined genre of games. There are games that are technically not casual games (or maybe they are?), but casual gamers still play them (such as mobile games, Angry Birds is a great example of this). I am not talking about people sometimes finding time to play games, because I fall into that category and I am most certainly not a casual gamer.

EDIT: In general I don't really like playing casual games, because they make me feel stupid as if I'm a retarded 7-year old or a senile 77-year old (no offense to both groups) and I get bored easily by the repetitive gameplay.

[SBR*]

I am using the definition of people playing games casually, e.g. not hardcore 100% MLG-pro 1337 gaming. I personally find that definition much more fitting for the word casual. I wouldn't call someone who only plays Angry Birds a "gamer", but "someone who occasionally plays Angry Birds".

EDIT: I guess casual and hardcore are just relative terms. In the speedrunning community, casual basically has the definition I'm using (e.g. "I'm gonna do a casual playthrough of SM64 before I'm speedrunning it"), while in other cases casual may refer to Angry Birds-like games.

[WhiteRose]

Some of you will likely not approve of this, but when I played FFVII, I played through the main storyline until I reached the end, and then I used cheats to get my character to max level, and max out all my materia.  I did this because after 20 or so hours, combat was pretty much boring and stale, and the only enjoyment left was completing all the side quests/secret bosses, etc.  With max level characters, I could end battles instantly, and didn't have to worry about healing and managing equipment, all game mechanics that I had already mastered, and already gotten tired of.  I still think that was the right decision, and I still enjoyed the game a lot over all.

I can definitely understand having played through the game to the extent that you had "had enough" of the mechanics and just wanted to check out some of the rest of the content. Personally, and perhaps I'm weird this way, one of my favorite parts of the game is often the end-game RPG experience, with maxing out characters, grinding for rare stat-boosting items, and completing side quests to get ultimate equipment. After reading through a lot of your responses, I think that one of the reasons that I find cheating so upsetting is because of a hint of competition that naturally arises - it makes me bitter to see people in the same place I am without having done any of the hard work. Logically, this is silly of me to think, especially when it comes to a single-player RPG like FFVII. I don't like competitive games; I won't even play a game that is based on competing with other players. Often times, I don't even like cooperative games - I just like enjoying the experience on my own. But deep down, there's some natural human part of me (likely the very same part that feels so rewarded after all of that grinding and so on,) that feels jipped when I see someone cheating. I'm sure there's all sorts of psychological stuff going on in my mind somewhere.   Having the chance to read all of your responses and analyze things this way has definitely given me a different perspective both on difficulties and on gaming in general.

At risk of getting slightly off-topic, sometimes I feel that there is a metaphorical edge of a cliff when it comes to analyzing why games are fun. If I overanalyze too much, games look more and more like a waste of time, and experiences that I previously found fun (such as maxing out characters in Final Fantasy,) lose that feeling of fun, causing me to just want to shut down the game and find something more productive to do (which always ends up, while possibly being more productive, being just a lot less fun than I was having in the first place. What's the point of being productive if you never have time for some fun? )

[Blizzard]

If I overanalyze too much

Let me guess: You don't do that just with games, am I right?

[WhiteRose]

If I overanalyze too much

Let me guess: You don't do that just with games, am I right?

Yeah, you're right; I tend to overanalyze a lot. It's a bad habit. XD