Another example of a game that can provide a very steep challenge would be any of the most recent Mario games, like Super Mario Galaxy 2, Super Mario 3D Land, and Super Mario 3D World. At the end of each of these games, there is a brutally difficult challenge level for you to take on once you’ve cleared the rest of the game. These levels are quite hard (and maybe a little over the top), but they are also quite doable (with enough patience). Most importantly, they do not have unlockables gated behind them. I find it to be poor game design when unlockables are gated behind brutal challenges, as it creates an unnecessarily frustrating experience (especially for completionists). These kinds of brutal challenges should be optional things for players to chew on if they want to. The sheer difficulty of these kind of levels means they simply should not have unlockables gated behind them, as doing so makes those unlockables unavailable to the majority of players.
As with any rule, there are exceptions, though. In games with varying types of progressions, it might make sense to not let the player have the next upgrade until they’ve gotten the previous one mastered. This would be in cases where the upgrade requires that the player is already proficient with the previous item or mechanic. However, even this setup does not involve infuriating difficulty in most cases. Oftentimes games will have ledges or alcoves that only more skilled players can reach, which is a good thing (as it rewards players who have gotten good enough to reach them). I have seen a flaw in some games regarding player abilities, though. There have been times where I’ve gotten stuck in a game, not because I couldn’t figure out what to do, but because the only way to advance was to use a hidden ability that the game never told you about. That is poor game design, as it is not reasonable to expect players to use an ability that they don’t even know they have.
Most gamers have at one time or another played a game that started to infuriate them. The more skilled gamers will say it’s a challenge, while less skilled players will say it’s BS. This creates that divide between new players and veteran players, and that can drive new players away. This is not good, and nor is the elitism which goes right along with it. There is no reason anyone should be making someone else feel like “I’m so much better than you, since you can’t do this.” That’s not to say very skilled players are bad: they aren’t, because they don’t all do this. They can also teach us tricks and things we didn’t know before, and they have just as much right to be in the gaming community as new players. But at the end of the day, video games are supposed to be about having fun.
If a game makes you feel like the guy in the picture above, then something is very wrong with its design. This is where I think game designers still fall a bit short. They fail to adequately take into account all of the different skill levels and patience levels of players. For example, I previously mentioned that I believe its poor game design to put an unlockable behind a brutal challenge. If you do, that unlockable is therefore unreachable to the majority of players. And it clearly seems like a waste of development time and resources to make an unlockable that only 10 people will ever get. Regardless, there is no reason why this needs to be the case. Why not just have an alternate unlock method for players who need it? Well, some of the more skilled players might say things like “It would devalue achievements.” I disagree with this point of view. In fact, I think it is antiquated thinking that helps drive this unnecessary divide between new and veteran players. If another player got a given unlockable easier than you, so what? Taking the hard path was your choice, after all.
Difficulty in a video game is so important because it has a huge impact on how enjoyable the game is, who will play it, and for how long. If the game is too hard, the difficulty ramps up too fast, or the player hits a ridiculous difficulty spike, they are likely to quit if they are a newer player. More skilled players are more likely to keep playing until they succeed. Those that give up or complain might get crap like being called babies or casuals. This is uncalled for. There is nothing wrong with being a casual gamer. When people have these arguments about difficulty, I find it kind of petty and pointless. There is no reason a game can’t make everyone happy.
Nintendo has done some good things regarding this disparity in skill and patience levels among players. Some of the newer Mario games have special items that only appear after you die too many times on one level. I almost never use them, but I think it is a wonderful feature for players who don’t have the time or patience to master everything. That’s another important detail, that not all players have endless amounts of time to master crazy challenges. Super difficulty is just fine for players that are into it, but I personally like a challenge that doesn’t take 10 years to finally pull off. That’s a pet peeve of mine in video games, when they have levels that you have to try over and over and over again until you either give up or finally beat it. Those kind of levels make you feel like you’re just banging your head on a wall repeatedly. I believe that to be poor game design because it will turn off many players, who will then not experience the rest of the game (or if they do it’ll be on YouTube).
Of course, if we make some unlockables have an easier alternate unlock method, some will say “but then we’re dumbing everything down!” I think this is a false argument. Making a game fun for everyone is not dumbing anything down (as long as the hard stuff is still there for those who are getting more and more skilled, and wanting bigger, better challenges). Of course, the purpose of unlockables is to act as a reward and keep people playing longer. If you put an unlockable behind a brutal challenge, then it becomes a reward that is out of reach for most players. Creating such an unlockable seems like a waste of development time and resources, and rewards are pointless if they are unobtainable. Another issue is that rewards in video games are far too often inadequate for what you had to go through to get them anyway, especially in the harder challenges games throw at you.
This way of designing games is antiquated and needs to change. There simply isn’t any good reason for anyone to ever think a game is too hard. They should perhaps be required to make a certain number of attempts before the game helps them out (so players don’t blow through the game). But on the other hand, if a player wants to do that, then you might as well let them. It hurts no one but that player. As a designer, it is not your job to tell people how to play, but rather to create a fun experience for everyone. Some players are very competitive and that’s fine, but gaming as whole is, and should always be, about having fun more than seeing who is the best player. Games with online leaderboards support this point very well. Everyone knows that trying to reach the top of leaderboards is generally a pointless endeavor, as most people can never hope to come close to the best players in the world.
Now, I’m not afraid of a good challenge myself (I’ve beaten the challenge levels at the end of all the newer Mario games, though they are a little over the top). But I expect a challenge to be intelligently designed and worth playing. If it’s above moderate difficulty, then there should never be unlockables gated behind it… ever!! (Unless there is an alternate unlock method). Super Mario Maker‘s Expert and Super Expert modes completely fail here. However, it must be said that designing difficulty is very, well, difficult. Making a level harder than you intended it to be is incredibly easy to do. As you keep iterating on it and play testing, you get better at it. You also have the unfair advantage of knowing the whole level to begin with. But, a new player has no working knowledge to go on when they start playing it for the first time. I think difficulty is somewhat overrated. It is a fact that a game can be fun without much difficulty, and some players even prefer it that way.
In short, I think game design needs to focus on everyone more than it does. There simply is no reason why a game can’t allow everyone to play how they want, or get all the unlockables in the base game. You did pay for the game, so it’s not out of line to expect that you should be able to get all of the original content. Unreasonable difficulty with no alternate unlock method makes this nearly impossible. For example, Super Mario Maker‘s Super Expert mode draws from levels with 2% completion rate or lower. That is ridiculous when you have unlockables gated behind it. It is way past time to be taking everyone into account when developing video games and stop gating things behind stupid stuff that many players either can’t do or won’t put up with (because they don’t have the patience). In other words, game developers should use some common sense (something the world seems to have a severe shortage of these days). The fact that this article is being written by a veteran gamer sends a strong message that something is very wrong with the way some games are designed!
This opinion is reflective of the author and not necessarily those of oprainfall as a whole.
