Can't Lose
In effect, it means many modern games are impossible to lose. When was the last time you actually saw a 'game-over' screen? Even relatively retro styled games are now so paranoid about forcing players to re-do anything they liberally litter auto-saves across the experience.
There are many benefits to this system. Longer, more involved games are possible, and players of any ability now stand a good chance to finish a game regardless of length. Even difficult sections can be attempted numerous times without fear of being penalised in any way for failing. Fearless trial and error is now a legitimate way to progress through many games.
I worry that many modern titles have gone too far: without punishment for failure, there is no jeopardy, skill becomes unnecessary and playing becomes a far more passive experience. Even choosing 'hard' difficulty doesn’t make much difference, as there isn’t any increased punishment for failure. It just takes you longer to grind through towards the next checkpoint. I’m not saying that we should universally return to the sadistic coin-op method, but without any jeopardy the great thrill of beating a game is lost.
The problem is that this is a vicious circle: gamers become used to having a virtual safety net, so object when it’s taken away, even if it means a more involved experience. And on the flip side, because of endless auto-saves, developers need to worry less about gamers dying due to something 'unfair'. A poorly-designed section that favours blind luck over skill would be unforgivable in a game of the 1990s, but in today’s titles they’re far less inconvenient. As a result, between gameplay that requires auto-saves and gamers that are used to them, anything other than nice regular checkpoints (or an equivalent quick-save) is usually objected to.
Mollycoddle
That’s not to say all games fall down this spiral: a great many indie titles don’t mollycoddle the player. It’s even present in a precious few recent Triple-A titles, such as Dark Souls, which took a refreshingly old-school approach. It’s combination of fair but difficult gameplay with sparse checkpoints has been lauded as brave and daring, but in reality it’s just returning to what made games of old such a thrill to beat. I think we need far more titles like it: games that don’t feel the need to apologise if you die, games that don’t run around behind you with a cushion, and games that aren’t afraid to punish you for failure. Failure should be something you fear, not a minor inconvenience. I want more games to kick off the stabilisers and actually give the impression they don’t want you to win. A game should be an adversary to overcome, not a friendly grandparent teaching you how to ride a bike.
Obviously some games should be more forgiving than others. Skyrim wouldn’t have been much fun if you had to restart every time a bear ate you, but there are far too many titles that purport to offer you a challenge and then go out of their way to help you overcome it.
Should games be less forgiving, or do you like having your hand held like a big baby? Plus, post your Toki highscores below, and see if you can beat the game quicker than my eight-year-old self (no continues allowed!)
In effect, it means many modern games are impossible to lose. When was the last time you actually saw a 'game-over' screen? Even relatively retro styled games are now so paranoid about forcing players to re-do anything they liberally litter auto-saves across the experience.
There are many benefits to this system. Longer, more involved games are possible, and players of any ability now stand a good chance to finish a game regardless of length. Even difficult sections can be attempted numerous times without fear of being penalised in any way for failing. Fearless trial and error is now a legitimate way to progress through many games.
I worry that many modern titles have gone too far: without punishment for failure, there is no jeopardy, skill becomes unnecessary and playing becomes a far more passive experience. Even choosing 'hard' difficulty doesn’t make much difference, as there isn’t any increased punishment for failure. It just takes you longer to grind through towards the next checkpoint. I’m not saying that we should universally return to the sadistic coin-op method, but without any jeopardy the great thrill of beating a game is lost.
The problem is that this is a vicious circle: gamers become used to having a virtual safety net, so object when it’s taken away, even if it means a more involved experience. And on the flip side, because of endless auto-saves, developers need to worry less about gamers dying due to something 'unfair'. A poorly-designed section that favours blind luck over skill would be unforgivable in a game of the 1990s, but in today’s titles they’re far less inconvenient. As a result, between gameplay that requires auto-saves and gamers that are used to them, anything other than nice regular checkpoints (or an equivalent quick-save) is usually objected to.
Dark Souls
Mollycoddle
That’s not to say all games fall down this spiral: a great many indie titles don’t mollycoddle the player. It’s even present in a precious few recent Triple-A titles, such as Dark Souls, which took a refreshingly old-school approach. It’s combination of fair but difficult gameplay with sparse checkpoints has been lauded as brave and daring, but in reality it’s just returning to what made games of old such a thrill to beat. I think we need far more titles like it: games that don’t feel the need to apologise if you die, games that don’t run around behind you with a cushion, and games that aren’t afraid to punish you for failure. Failure should be something you fear, not a minor inconvenience. I want more games to kick off the stabilisers and actually give the impression they don’t want you to win. A game should be an adversary to overcome, not a friendly grandparent teaching you how to ride a bike.
Obviously some games should be more forgiving than others. Skyrim wouldn’t have been much fun if you had to restart every time a bear ate you, but there are far too many titles that purport to offer you a challenge and then go out of their way to help you overcome it.
Should games be less forgiving, or do you like having your hand held like a big baby? Plus, post your Toki highscores below, and see if you can beat the game quicker than my eight-year-old self (no continues allowed!)
RELATED ARTICLES
MSI MPG Velox 100R Chassis Review
October 14 2021 | 15:04
Want to comment? Please log in.