Dave hosts a small debate on the subject of players being allowed to change the difficulty level in mid-game. http://www.nintendoworldreport.com/editorialArt.cfm?artid=14928 In the last few years, I've noticed a rather unusual trend in gaming. A number of recent releases allow the player to adjust the difficulty
in the middle of the game. I haven't personally noticed this "feature" in any Wii or DS games yet, but I'm told that Trauma Center (Wii) has it. It's tempting to just lash out at this unusual design choice, but I'm actually quite divided on the subject. In light of this division, I decided to host a debate instead of writing a standard editorial. I'll be representing both the pros and cons.
Cons Dave: Well, I had better start since this was my idea. I'll just come right out with it. Allowing the player to change the difficulty in the middle of the game is quite possibly the worst idea in the history of gaming. It's essentially an admission by the developer that they're either unable to, or simply don't feel like, balancing the difficulty in the proper way.
It was barely tolerable in Devil May Cry wherein the game offers to go easier on you after a few levels of beating the hell out of you. If you make the switch, you're stuck with it until you restart the game. The problem here is that the beginning of the game is too difficult. Any sensible person can see that easy mode should have been called normal mode and should have been available from the beginning.
On the other end of the spectrum is Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion. This is, by far, the worst example I know of. Instead of the proper RPG development pattern wherein deadly foes dwindle into pests as you develop your character, every enemy in the game keeps pace with your leveling, or more commonly outpaces you. I expect that this is due to Bethesda's unrealistic expectations of your character development talents. The problem worsens if you level up excessively (easy to do with all the enticing side quests lying around). Apparently Bethesda's solution to this vexing problem is for you to turn the difficulty down a bit via a slider. Are we expected to design our own games now?
Pros Dave: Ok, you've given me a lot of ground to cover. First of all, I'm not going to defend every game that uses this dubious "feature". Just because they used it doesn't mean they used it well. That said, Devil May Cry did alright. The beginning of the game isn't impossible, and after enabling the easy-auto mode the balance feels just right. And yet, the player knows that there's more to the game if they're up for the challenge. I'll generally agree that Oblivion's slider is a band-aid for its serious balance issues, but it might be forgiven if you look at the scope of the game.
What I want to mention now is Star Wars: Knights of the Old Republic. If you'll remember, the first time we played it, we got all the way to the final boss and found him rather difficult. After at least a dozen attempts, we knocked the difficulty down to easy mode and beat the game. At that point, the alternative was probably giving up, which would have been a pretty unappealing option considering the time investment up to that point and how story driven the game is.
Cons Dave: The only reason we couldn't beat that boss the right way is because you insisted on playing "light side" the first time through. If you'll remember, when we played "dark side" afterwards, he went down easily. Obviously the game is poorly balanced.
Pros Dave: No, the game is perfect. The dark side is supposed to be the easier path. Just ask Yoda. Here's another example. When we played Fire Emblem: Path of Radiance, a game that sticks you with a difficulty in the traditional manner, you insisted on starting the game on hard mode because of our prior Fire Emblem experience and Advance Wars skills. I agreed because Nintendo doesn't usually leave dangerous hard modes lying around, so I figured it wouldn't be that bad. Consequently, in the middle of the game, things became so annoying that we got bored and went elsewhere. Wouldn't it have been nice to change the difficulty down to normal in that case?
Cons Dave: Maybe; but that was our own fault at least. If we had played the game on normal mode like we should have, we wouldn't have had that problem. I never said this idea couldn't be implemented wisely. Perhaps if a game allowed you to downgrade permanently, like Devil May Cry, I could tolerate it. However, it would be even better to encourage a player to use the right difficulty from the start. Metal Gear Solid 2, for example, displays simple descriptions for each difficulty level that try to steer you toward the correct setting among the five available.
Pros Dave: So then it's not the "worst idea in the history of gaming" after all? It sounds like you're admitting that adjusting the difficulty mid-game might not always be bad. You can't count on gamers to choose the right setting, even with prompting.
Cons Dave: I qualified that statement with "quite possibly" you know. Most ideas aren't intrinsically bad. If it's executed well enough, it could be a good idea. However, I doubt that it would ever be so. Developers should pay careful attention to the difficulty balance in their games and get it right. Very few people complain about a game being too easy if there are harder difficulty settings available. If developers appropriately name their difficulty modes, make normal mode skew a bit towards easy, and provide at least one harder level (even if it has to be unlocked), then everything should be alright. What's more, optional gameplay elements can make things easier if there's a question about the difficulty. Think Metroid's energy tanks and Zelda's heart containers.
Pros Dave: That sounds good on paper, but not every game can be designed with that kind of gameplay. That also puts players with a collecting and exploration fetish at risk of making the game way too easy. You're probably right that gamers shouldn't be able to both increase and decrease the difficulty, but I can even think of situations where that might be useful. What if you stop playing a game for some reason and come back three months later? You could set it to easy mode for a short period to get back into the swing of things.
Cons Dave That's not worth breaking the game over. Gamers will swap to easy mode when the game gets too difficult but then feel like they're cheating. If they swap back, they'll likely find the game too hard again. Game designers need to balance their own games or gamers will get fed up and go elsewhere. If you stop playing a game for a while and need to get back into the swing of things, then replay the first level before loading up your old save file. The whole point of challenge in a game is for gamers to rise to the challenge. Unless the game is poorly designed, the majority of gamers should be able to do just that.
Pros Dave: You know, you can't just make things true by stating them. Developers don't always have enough time and resources to do things properly. Anyway, I have nothing else to say on the subject.
Cons Dave: Good. I was tired of listening to you anyway.
Dave: Ahem. Well, it looks like I'm still somewhat divided on the issue. Be sure to stop by the NWR forums and let everyone know what you think about adjusting a game's difficulty level in mid-game. Here's a handy link to the Talkback thread for this article.
Topic: EDITORIALS: This Game Is Too Easy/Medium/Hard (Read 14752 times)
