Design When is a game too hard?

Wainggan

Member
... I learned how to shell jump in Mario. I think that should give you an idea on what I'm planning to do lol

Yes, I know how to make it so the first level is easy and all that, but when does a game become so hard that people give up?
I hope that makes sense...
 

woods

Member
there are as many answers to that question as there are players ;o)

i like a good challenge and i like to earn the epic prizes that i get..... if everyone has this rare(insert epic weapon here).. its no longer rare is it
if it was easy, everyone would be doing it.
and there are plenty out there that consider collecting resource in a survival game too "grindy" to be enjoyable.. boring does not equal hard..
cant get past X level because ... bullet hell! well cant rush in there blind and expect not to get shot. you gotta pay attention to the attack patterns and stuff..
tho for me, when the ratio of progress/difficulty drops too far it is no longer "fun"

some people will call things harsh and painful...
i call them firm but fair ;o)
 

Yal

šŸ§ *penguin noises*
GMC Elder
It's a very subjective concept (e.g. people still refuse to play Souls games since they don't have a difficulty slider, but you usually have a higher deaths-per-level rating in Super Meat Boy) but I think "too hard" boils down to an insufficient amount of progress for the effort the player is prepared to expend.

Just to codify this even more: games generally have a system where you try to bypass "obstacles" (e.g. enemies) given a certain "mistake allowance", e.g. a healthbar, with "checkpoints" at regular intervals which will permanently save your progress (which means that any obstacle before that checkpoint is permanently cleared) and usually refill your mistake alottment. Running out of mistake allowance will make you lose all progress and restart from the previous checkpoint.

Games deal with lowering difficulty in different ways:
  • Extra checkpoints: The total amount of obstacles that must be cleared within your allowed mistakes is lowered. Thus, you can make more mistakes without losing progress.
  • Grinding: Increasing stats or getting more abilities increases your mistake allowance, by either making you kill enemies faster (reducing the time you spend in risk of making mistakes) or by increasing health or other resources directly.
  • Easier enemies: Making enemies easier either reduces the time you risk doing mistakes, or makes them less likely to be made.
  • Giving the player more health / resources: This increases mistake allowance directly. (For consumable resources, it's important to remind the player they HAVE the resources, and encourage them to use them).
And let's look at some games that are hard and figure out why they're hard, exactly:
  • Dark Souls: Low mistake allowance (enemies deals a lot of damage), far between checkpoints
  • Donkey Kong Country: High risk of mistakes (enemies/traps that are hard to avoid), generous mistake allowance (extra lives and bonus games hidden everywhere, many temporary checkpoints) but very far between permanent checkpoints, setting you back considerably if your mistake allowancy runs out.
  • Super Meat Boy: Low mistake allowance (you instantly die and restart a level on any obstacle), high risk of mistakes, but very generous checkpoints (every level is followed by a permanent checkpoint, and they're short)

Tying this back to the original thesis... not making mistakes takes effort, so making mistakes less likely, allowing more of them, or not losing progress on exceeding your mistake allowance all lowers the effort-per-progress ratio, making the game easier.
 

Wainggan

Member
It's a very subjective concept (e.g. people still refuse to play Souls games since they don't have a difficulty slider, but you usually have a higher deaths-per-level rating in Super Meat Boy) but I think "too hard" boils down to an insufficient amount of progress for the effort the player is prepared to expend.

Just to codify this even more: games generally have a system where you try to bypass "obstacles" (e.g. enemies) given a certain "mistake allowance", e.g. a healthbar, with "checkpoints" at regular intervals which will permanently save your progress (which means that any obstacle before that checkpoint is permanently cleared) and usually refill your mistake alottment. Running out of mistake allowance will make you lose all progress and restart from the previous checkpoint.

Games deal with lowering difficulty in different ways:
  • Extra checkpoints: The total amount of obstacles that must be cleared within your allowed mistakes is lowered. Thus, you can make more mistakes without losing progress.
  • Grinding: Increasing stats or getting more abilities increases your mistake allowance, by either making you kill enemies faster (reducing the time you spend in risk of making mistakes) or by increasing health or other resources directly.
  • Easier enemies: Making enemies easier either reduces the time you risk doing mistakes, or makes them less likely to be made.
  • Giving the player more health / resources: This increases mistake allowance directly. (For consumable resources, it's important to remind the player they HAVE the resources, and encourage them to use them).
And let's look at some games that are hard and figure out why they're hard, exactly:
  • Dark Souls: Low mistake allowance (enemies deals a lot of damage), far between checkpoints
  • Donkey Kong Country: High risk of mistakes (enemies/traps that are hard to avoid), generous mistake allowance (extra lives and bonus games hidden everywhere, many temporary checkpoints) but very far between permanent checkpoints, setting you back considerably if your mistake allowancy runs out.
  • Super Meat Boy: Low mistake allowance (you instantly die and restart a level on any obstacle), high risk of mistakes, but very generous checkpoints (every level is followed by a permanent checkpoint, and they're short)

Tying this back to the original thesis... not making mistakes takes effort, so making mistakes less likely, allowing more of them, or not losing progress on exceeding your mistake allowance all lowers the effort-per-progress ratio, making the game easier.
That is super helpful! Thank you!

Edit:
I bet you could make an equation for this... but I can't because I'm not smort lol

Here is my idea for an equation
(T*D)/(H)^2
T = Time between checkpoints(in seconds)
D = Deaths per checkpoint
H = Helpful items per checkpoint

The equation could be used to calculate the average difficulty of a game
For example:
For Celeste(disclaimer: I speedrun this game, so it is pretty easy for me), it could be something like
T = 500(rough guess, its just the average)
D = 30
H = 0
So the output would be 1500 difficulty points
For Mario Wii(Not very familiar, but I play occasionally)
T = 70(idk) (edit: I forgot there are checkpoints in the middle of levels lol)
D = 2
H = 2(the amount of powerups per level)
Output would 35...
For Super Mario(I know the speedrun route and I was pretty good at Mario 35, but I am pretty sure I am incorrect about the values)
T = 74(there are checkpoints, but they are invisible)
D = 7(The later levels get pretty hard)
H = 2
Output 130
Lmao I never player this game, but I love how diabolical the level design of this game is, and I watched a lot youtube videos of people playing it(I'm poor lol)
T = 1200 (There are checkpoints, but not in the traditional sense. Rough example, but after you climb over the first tree, you reached the first checkpoint. You won't fall behind that tree again)
D = 80 (idk, you will fall several times before you reach one of these checkpoints)
H = 0 (there is no way to fly)
96000
 
Last edited:

Rayek

Member
Probably not an answer that you seek, but: it depends on the gamer type and their motivations to play games.

For example, I generally increase the difficulty of a game to the highest or near-highest level. I love games with a high difficulty, and love games with instant-death. I am less interested in games that allow me to just continue seconds after I died, without any real consequences.

To play such a game means the game must interest me in other ways. For example, Halo I play with my best friends in co-op. I don't really like to play it by myself.

On the other hand a game like Generation Zero I very much like to play solo. Very difficult to survive, and death is unpleasant, the robots unforgiving.

To understand how hard your game should be, learn about two things:
  1. the target gamer type(s) that you intend to cater your game for, and;
  2. understand that 'dying' in a game could be turned into a game feature.
Options like extra health, extra check points, level length, extra lives, bonuses, unlimited reruns/spawns - to me these solutions to balancing out the difficulty level of a game seem stop-gap measures and more an indication of a flawed game design. Perhaps not in all cases, but still - it seems rather lazy.

At the very least it is rather unoriginal. Allow the game to adjust the difficulty according to the player (hard to balance, but if done right very rewarding and the game remains a challenge throughout - even during replaying). Or tie death to a unique game feature. For example, Rogue Legacy.

Death could also become 'fun'. Moon Knight had terrific death situations. I played that game just to discover the many ways to die. Or rewind time to avoid death altogether - Prince of Persia Sands of time.

learn more about gamer types and their motivations here:

While we have to be careful about categorizations of users, it can still be quite useful.
(ps I seem to be a Gladiator type)

They have an interesting GDC talk about the topic.
 

Wainggan

Member
Probably not an answer that you seek, but: it depends on the gamer type and their motivations to play games.

For example, I generally increase the difficulty of a game to the highest or near-highest level. I love games with a high difficulty, and love games with instant-death. I am less interested in games that allow me to just continue seconds after I died, without any real consequences.

To play such a game means the game must interest me in other ways. For example, Halo I play with my best friends in co-op. I don't really like to play it by myself.

On the other hand a game like Generation Zero I very much like to play solo. Very difficult to survive, and death is unpleasant, the robots unforgiving.

To understand how hard your game should be, learn about two things:
  1. the target gamer type(s) that you intend to cater your game for, and;
  2. understand that 'dying' in a game could be turned into a game feature.
Options like extra health, extra check points, level length, extra lives, bonuses, unlimited reruns/spawns - to me these solutions to balancing out the difficulty level of a game seem stop-gap measures and more an indication of a flawed game design. Perhaps not in all cases, but still - it seems rather lazy.

At the very least it is rather unoriginal. Allow the game to adjust the difficulty according to the player (hard to balance, but if done right very rewarding and the game remains a challenge throughout - even during replaying). Or tie death to a unique game feature. For example, Rogue Legacy.

Death could also become 'fun'. Moon Knight had terrific death situations. I played that game just to discover the many ways to die. Or rewind time to avoid death altogether - Prince of Persia Sands of time.

learn more about gamer types and their motivations here:

While we have to be careful about categorizations of users, it can still be quite useful.
(ps I seem to be a Gladiator type)

They have an interesting GDC talk about the topic.
I love horribly difficult games, honestly, I would never make an easy game. They're no fun!
The game I am working on is going to be a "traditional" platformer with bullet-hell elements.
There will be long levels with some checkpoints in between. When you reach one, you regain all your lost health. There are no health pickups between checkpoints.
I'm a bit conflicted about putting in lives... on one hand, I can encourage killing enemies which could be a fun, on the other, it could really frustrate the player...
I really want the player to die a lot(Castlevania on the nes lets go), without being frustrated and giving up(opposite of Castlevania on the nes lets go)
I think my solution is going to be to just don't do anything. If the game is super tough but fair, I think the player will keep playing

Thanks for the reply!
 
Top