Do you find challenging difficulty important in games?

[Yanrima~]

I think in game design, difficulty is important and a fundamental part of gameplay because it makes us think and provide further strategies and preparations for the upcoming challenge. What’s your opinion on hard difficulty and challenge in video games design?

 

[Ichiban]

if a game is too easy then it isn't really fun, the more challenging a game is the more satisfying it is to beat

 

[Biyaya]

It really depends. The last game I finished was a Telltale game, and that provides no challenge; it's a game of decisions. I enjoyed it though, and it was engaging. Sometimes having a really deep or interesting story makes a game worth it. Also, I love Animal Crossing, but how many of us are going to argue that it is a challenging game? I agree that for many genres, if there's not much challenge, the game proves stale, but there are enough exceptions that I don't want to say yes plainly.

 

[-Lumi-]

I am probably in the minority here and that largely stems from the fact that I am certifiably Bad At Games so I do not think challenging difficulty is important in games. At least not for me! I have seen people explain why they personally like difficult games and I think that's completely fair for them.

I personally am not good at games. I never have been and I don't particularly enjoy losing, dying repeatedly, or getting really stressed out about puzzles in games. I think there can definitely be something satisfying about beating a challenging level/completing a whole game! But for me the enjoyment stops around say, Mario level difficulty. Super Mario 3D World is like the maximum difficulty I can handle and even then I needed assistance sometimes. For me though, that level of challenge still remained fun. I enjoyed exploring around the levels and felt pleased with myself when I did manage to beat the levels but that's largely because I wasn't constantly dying. On the flip side I also really enjoy Kirby games which are, according to some, too easy and I can see that. I can play through a Kirby game and not really have to worry about dying (again... bad at games so even in Kirby I still die sometimes ) but I'll still have a lot of fun because the game itself is charming and enticing enough through mechanics and/or level design that I want to keep playing.

My younger sister tried to get me to play Dark Souls once and it just was not for me. I play games to relax and unwind which I personally don't get out of really challenging games. I don't want to be tense, on edge, or frustrated by the difficulty in a game because that sort of defeats the purpose of playing one for me. Due to this I am largely drawn to life sims (Animal Crossing, Story of Seasons, etc), simple platformers (Mario, Kirby, etc.), walking simulators (I love these! I love getting to explore a new environment without the risk of dying. A Short Hike and Abzu are some nice examples), point and click, and visual novels. I still get to enjoy the story and/or environment that a game has to offer which is my favourite part about playing games.

 

[Matt0106]

Definitely depends on the game. Like for Pokemon Snap and Animal Crossing, that game has no challenge involved because they're relaxing experiences (which is of course obvious). But when it comes to real story-based games, yes, I think there should be some level of difficulty. Zelda BotW executed this perfectly; it was hard in the beginning, but you get rewarded more as you learn things like parrying and flurry rush. Pokemon, on the other hand, totally crippled this notion and threw it out the window entirely. I no longer find their stories and gameplay very challenging anymore, because they purposely keep lowering the bar, despite fans asking for years for a difficulty increase.

 

[Yanrima~]

Definitely depends on the game. Like for Pokemon Snap and Animal Crossing, that game has no challenge involved because they're relaxing experiences (which is of course obvious). But when it comes to real story-based games, yes, I think there should be some level of difficulty. Zelda BotW executed this perfectly; it was hard in the beginning, but you get rewarded more as you learn things like parrying and flurry rush. Pokemon, on the other hand, totally crippled this notion and threw it out the window entirely. I no longer find their stories and gameplay very challenging anymore, because they purposely keep lowering the bar, despite fans asking for years for a difficulty increase.

I agree, gen 4 and 5 are the "golden age" of Pokemon in my opinion. I enjoy Shin Megami Tensei alot more now when it comes to "monster-catching" RPGs. And BotW is enjoyable and worth revisiting because of the challenge of exploration and preparing for more difficult enemies and shrines.

 

[daringred_]

i answered no because difficulty is only one aspect of a game and not a necessity in all genres. i like having the option, but i wouldn't want games to be difficult from the get-go or have "hard" as their default setting. easy games have never stressed me out or frustrated me. they haven't even necessarily bored me. difficult games on the other hand? they definitely have. it's never fun to die over and over again, repeat sections/levels multiple times or even just flat out lose. quite the opposite, really. at least for me. i'd happily take an easy but pretty game over a hard but pretty one any day. for me, customization, characters, design and story are much more important than difficulty. (mostly in that order.) for example, a lot of pokemon fans say that USUM and SWSH were too "hand-holdy" and easy. personally, i had a great time with and thoroughly enjoyed them. granted, i never found them particularly hard, but i wouldn't say i found them easy either. more middle-of-the-road. which is fine with me, since i value customization, characters and story more than difficulty in that franchise.

 

[coldpotato]

Yes, it is important to me to have a bit of a challenge. I don't like things to be too difficult, but if they're too easy I just don't enjoy playing.
Even with acnh which most people don't think is all too challenging, I really enjoyed the "challenge" of collecting everything there was to collect especially the more rare things like some art and DIYS.

I love playing games where I start off kind of weak, and improve myself by playing and leveling up and taking on more difficult enemies/challenges/quests.

 

[Dunquixote]

I agree with @Matt0106 and I think it depends on the game. For FFX, with the exception of the ultimate weapons quests, I definitely would’ve liked more of a challenge and have different difficulty levels. Then there are other games that were challenging enough on normal like Resident Evil 4 (which I never will play again since I don’t like scary games) and I don’t need more stress .

I think for FE3H normal (except Ashen Wolves DLC which was way too hard for normal and i did not enjoy the challenge to be quite honest ) was too easy but hard difficulty you can’t grind. That to me turns me off since I like to grind. So for this case, I want to be challenged but I still would like the option to grind infinitely (instead of the limited auxiliary battles) even though I stop grinding after awhile.

What is more important to me is the story is good and characters are solid, even though I do agree that game difficulty and whether the game is too easy or not affects the enjoyment level. I think though it would be nice for every game (unless it is something that is clearly meant to be relaxing like Pokemon snap) to have different levels of difficulties since honestly I used to not like play harder difficulties but now I’d like to now and then again depending on the game (and the option to lower difficulty level during the game with no limit).

Sorry if I didn’t answer your question well.

 

[Yanrima~]

I agree with @Matt0106 and I think it depends on the game. For FFX, with the exception of the ultimate weapons quests, I definitely would’ve liked more of a challenge and have different difficulty levels. Then there are other games that were challenging enough on normal like Resident Evil 4 (which I never will play again since I don’t like scary games) and I don’t need more stress .

I think for FE3H normal (except Ashen Wolves DLC which was way too hard for normal and i did not enjoy the challenge to be quite honest ) was too easy but hard difficulty you can’t grind. That to me turns me off since I like to grind. So for this case, I want to be challenged but I still would like the option to grind infinitely (instead of the limited auxiliary battles) even though I stop grinding after awhile.

What is more important to me is the story is good and characters are solid, even though I do agree that game difficulty and whether the game is too easy or not affects the enjoyment level. I think though it would be nice for every game (unless it is something that is clearly meant to be relaxing like Pokemon snap) to have different levels of difficulties since honestly I used to not like play harder difficulties but now I’d like to now and then again depending on the game (and the option to lower difficulty level during the game with no limit).

Sorry if I didn’t answer your question well.

Good point, every game needs an ace for its content. For example, good challenge and gameplay can remedy a not so interesting story while the games with not that hard difficulty can remedy itself with interesting lore, characters, or the game’s premise (being in a life simulation genre or farming games). But good and fun gameplay matters a lot in both circumstances. I also enjoy fe3h because it hits both gameplay and story I’ve expected when playing a game. Difficulty in my opinion, matters more in action oriented or RPG games. I enjoy both casual and challenging games.

The reason why I asked this question because I am interested in hearing other’s thoughts about difficulty and game design.

 

[VanitasFan26]

Well it is important because if you find a game too easy you'll just get bored of it and put it down, but if its challenging then you feel determined to actually try beating the game. I also feel that some games these days don't have like a Difficulty setting for people who want a easy or hard experience. For example Kingdom Hearts has 4 different settings:

Beginner: Easy for Newcomers
Normal: A well balanced out difficulty that increases from easy to hard slowly.
Proud: The game gets harder and you have to put more skill into
Critical: This is for well skilled players that want to have a real challenge and the game gets brutally hard.

Me personally I don't mind if a game is easy or hard, but I do sometimes want a bit of a challenge if I find some parts in a game being too easy and I want to challenge myself by thinking "Hmm how can I do this differently?" thats what makes it fun for me.

 

[fairysyndrome]

i think like others have said difficulty as an importance definitely depends on the game, but more than that i think what's more important than having a challenging game is like... accessibility regarding difficulty level. where like, you can freely adjust the difficulty if you want to be more or less challenged (ex. Hades' God Mode and Rune Factory 4/5's difficulty switch option) depending on where you are in the game. or if it's naturally difficult, not punishing the player for struggling (or Or if it's too difficult, not making the only other difficulty toggle a cakewalk. a friend of mine played celeste and found it too difficult, but they didn't enjoy the assist mode because they said it made things TOO easy for them. option to adjust settings to what works vs something just Being Difficult or Being Easy, depending on the game, is what i think is most important, basically.)

 

[sleepydreepy]

I think it depends on the game, but overall I would say yes since its more rewarding to me to work hard and finally beat a hard game. Plus this makes the game last longer so you don't just rush through it

 

[Belle T]

As mentioned before, it depends on the game. Some games I play because they're fun and relaxing, while others I play because I enjoy the challenge. However, I'm still going to vote no, because I think difficulty is merely a tool, rather than the ingredient which makes completing a game satisfying or rewarding. I'm going to argue that the thing that makes a game satisfying, rewarding, and fun is not how easy or difficult it may be, but the curve by which difficulty increases overtime.

Of course, this also depends on the game in question, as not all games are created with linear progression or completion in mind. Games like Animal Crossing, Stardew Valley, The Sims, etc. can obviously be excluded from this.

My go-to example for a counterpoint whenever difficulty and game length are touted as particularly important factors in a game's quality is usually The Great Circus Mystery starring Mickey and Minnie on the SNES and Mega Drive. The game is so short that I expect most players could complete it in under an hour even if they've never picked up a controller in their life, and the game is so easy that I've known even the most casual gamers and even complete non-gamers that are able to pick it up and play it to completion. As a child, this game was very handy to have around the house when you had friends that weren't really interested in video games. I'm not saying it's a perfect game, nor am I saying it's going to be to everyone's taste. But despite being short, the game has a clear arc to it. It begins and ends concisely, and never feels like it's lacking or like any particular section is rushed or unfinished. Despite not being hard at really any point, the game's difficulty does curve naturally and consistently, so in the end, the game feels like a complete package.

On the opposite end of the spectrum, games like I Wanna Be the Guy and--because I'm cliche--Dark Souls also fit well into this. These games are notorious for their difficulty, but they also follow a curve in difficulty, rather than simply being difficult for the sake of being difficult.

When games become too easy is when the player no longer feels like they've earned the victory, particularly if the narrative context presents the challenge as something greater. When Steven just gives the player Latios/Latias in Pokémon: Omega Ruby/Alpha Sapphire, it robs players of even the opportunity to attempt to catch it yourself. Or, when the epic music is blaring in the background and the game is setting the player up with an expectation of a fantastic battle that is over in three turns, the player is going to feel that the challenge was rather anticlimatic. Shantae is a series that comes to mind in this regard, particularly Half-Genie Hero. The previous installments in the series never had extremely challenging final bosses, but the difficulty curve made would make defeating them very satisfying regardless. However, in Half-Genie Hero, there is an item players can buy that essentially makes them invincible. Even worse, it's not even prohibitively expensive, meaning that the final boss is not only easier than the first boss, it means there's nothing really preventing the player from defeating it the first place, so the victory doesn't feel earned. Of course, one could always simply choose to not purchase the item, but I'm of the opinion that it's the job of the developers to create a fun and challenging experience, not of the player to impose artificial restrictions upon themselves. Besides which, we're analyzing a game's quality based on its intended mechanics and functionality, so any added stipulations added by the player are irrelevant.

Conversely, when a game becomes too hard is when the player begins to feel the only way they're able to complete it is through dumb luck or if the outcome feels entirely out of the player's hands. In these kinds of circumstances, completing the game is not necessarily rewarding because rather than being a test of skills attained over the course of the game, it just feels relentless and cruel. As a result, the player will probably feel happy that it's over, rather than happy that they overcame it. If you've ever played an RPG where the final stretch of the main story seems to be made solely to force you to use all your items right before the final boss where you actually need them, or a platformer (or old-school Metroidvania) where they throw every enemy you've ever faced right before a big boss with no opportunity to heal, this is an example of that. Since it what the focus of a recent AVGN episode, Corpse Killer is also a really good example. In that game, the player has two types of ammo, one for mowing down regular zombies, and one that is only effective on special zombies and bosses. (According to AVGN, as I've not played the game myself) The latter ammo is scarce and will likely be completely depleted on special zombies right before the player reaches the boss fight, leaving the only available options down to either waste ammo on special zombies and face the boss with full or as close to full health as possible--making the boss more or less impossible to defeat--or to tank damage from special zombies and preserve ammo so that the special ammo will be at full capacity but with very little health to use it--once again, making the boss more or less impossible to defeat. That's just sadism, and there's nothing fun, rewarding, or satisfying about it, even if you do manage to complete it.

Of course, there are other factors that go into this, as well. I think aspects like level design, controls, and even graphics to a certain extent also play a much more enormous part in a game's enjoyment than difficulty. If a game is fun to control and offers you a good variety of places to make use of your abilities, then chances are, it will be a good experience, no matter how easy or difficult it may be.

I think this response probably extends far past the scope of the original question, as the OP was probably only asking if you, individually, find a game more interesting with greater difficulty. In that sense, I guess my answer in brief could have just been no. I suppose my argument is moreso targeted at the mentality that "harder" necessarily means "more satisfying to complete." In short, I think difficulty is a part of that and can be used to enhance the feeling, but there is far more to the equation than simply "this is harder, therefore the game is more satisfying." Basically, I would compare it to cooking, where the games are the dish and difficulty is the condiments. The condiments can make or break a dish, and some people will only eat said dish if it has said condiments. But no amount of ketchup is going to mask a truly bad dish or turn a bad dish into a good one.

 

[Mairmalade]

I like having the option where difficulty can be adjusted, especially in cases where you‘re able to change or select specific aspects to make the challenge more unique rather than your standard ‘stronger enemies, limited lives, earn less money etc.‘ In Risk of Rain there’s different artifacts you can apply to each run that will make the difficulty vary considerably. I also enjoy games where the challenge makes up a lot of the experience (e.g.: certain roguelikes).

Having to repeat sections of a game can be frustrating but being able to see where I go wrong and what I can do better/learn the game is fun. It forces me to test different strategies, builds, and combos I may not otherwise use. I get into that ‘OK, one more time’ mindset rather than walking away. Of course, I still like games where I can focus on the story/collect things casually without worrying too.

 

[Chris]

I prefer when games have multiple difficulty levels. Some games I prefer to drop the difficulty on if I enjoy the story but dislike the combat gimmicks. Other games I'll play on the hardest possible difficulty because I like the challenge (and often there's an achievement for doing so).

 

[CylieDanny]

As an RPG creator, I love making them difficult, puzzle wise. Since the game I have is mainly puzzles that are difficult to understand, but that's what makes it fun.

My friend play tested my game and agreed that the difficult puzzles did make it more interesting to play. Though for I, the most important part is the story.
--
When I play other games I set the game on the highest difficulty and promptly fail, but I like difficult games. Easy games are fun too, but difficulty makes the game more intetesting

 

[.: Meri :.]

I like games with difficulty settings (where applicable—though the concept of Animal Crossing: Hardcore Mode is kinda funny)—because I know a lot of players like an extra challenge, but I'm more than happy to play a game on Normal (for turn-based games) or Easy (for action-based games, because I panic and spam buttons). I mainly play games for the story and characters, so if a game is too difficult, I just see it as interfering with me progressing the plot, as opposed to a fun challenge.

I understand the feeling of finally accomplishing something you've struggled with for a while, but I tend to find that, for me personally, the stress from before outweighs the rush from victory. I get the most satisfaction out of a mild challenge—if I have to come to a fight prepared and well-levelled, and use a slightly more complicated strategy than I would for normal enemies, and I'm able to win without things getting too hairy, I'm typically pretty happy. If I know a boss is supposed to be tough, then I like to grind a bit and get slightly over-levelled—not to a ridiculous extent, but enough so that I can get through the fight relatively comfortably. I also like to be able to beat things with my preferred characters/party, so when games basically force you to use very specific set-ups to win, I get annoyed.
For example, say, the reduced-to-level-1 dungeons in Pokemon Mystery Dungeon games. I kinda just slog through them because I love the game and I want any remaining scraps of story it'll give me; but finishing them for me feels more like the relief from finding out I passed a painful exam than "hey, that was fun!!". Part of it comes from the fact that it is partly down to luck (whether or not you happen to find useful items, or spawn near the stairs, or if Politoed/Lapras decides to use Perish Song...), but also that they can be incredibly difficult to beat as the player Pokemon, and so you'll usually have to play as a specific Pokemon you've recruited that learns good moves very early. I can see whereas someone who likes strategizing might prefer the latter, but not being able to play the same character I played for the whole game takes a lot of the fun out of it for me.

So, in short, I like a small amount of challenge in certain games, but past a certain point it stops being enjoyable for me. I'm more interested in the story aspects of a game anyway, so I'm not really bothered if a game is "too easy", but I might pass up on a game if it's known for being incredibly hard.

 

[Alienfish]

What’s your opinion on hard difficulty and challenge in video games design?

Since I'm not one playing for the challenge, I think I'd rather play an easier game for fun and enjoyment rather than overthinking hard games that I never beat anyway. If they added in multiple challenge levels, fine, but I don't get the hype on beating a game on Lunatic crazy hyper modes or whatever.

 

[MiniPocketWorld]

I think it depends on the game, but even the most relaxed games are going to have at least the challenge of acquiring a hard to get/find item/resource. I voted Yes.