[ SECRET POST #5974 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #5974 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.


01.



__________________________________________________



02.



__________________________________________________



03.



__________________________________________________



04.
[Arto]



__________________________________________________



05.



__________________________________________________



06.
[Pathfinder: Wrath of the Righteous]



__________________________________________________



07.
























Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 02 pages, 30 secrets from Secret Submission Post #854.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

[(Anonymous)]

I roll my eyes at people whining about game difficulty in the first place. I grew up on platformers like Mario and Sonic, which were absolutely unforgiving in terms of difficulty. You messed up, you died. You died too many times, game over.

These days games are about a thousand times easier what with the ability to save your game any time you want and retry boss fights/levels if you die, multiple difficulty levels, etc. How dare some games want to be an actually challenging experience.

[(Anonymous)]

modern games are designed to be played once and thrown away, that's why they're easier

if you're replaying the challenge of old games you're not buying new ones

[(Anonymous)]

and without the ability to save and retry, I wouldn't be a gamer at all, so nice gatekeep there. I don't play notoriously difficult games like Dark Souls because I know I wouldn't enjoy them - you go right ahead, have fun. a breadth of game styles and fashions is better than only having one option and it's not weakness to say, no, I actually don't enjoy Space Invaders thanks, faster and harder until you just fucking die isn't fun for everyone.

that said I'm p. sure Pathfinder is a tabletop so we can take our video game whining elsewhere.

[(Anonymous)]

+Infinity

[hey_hey_hey]

Growing up on those games is why I appreciate so-called "easy" games. Your mom bought a hard game for you, you were stuck until next year when she could afford to buy you a new game. A game is too hard or boring now, you can trade it in and move on to the next one.

[(Anonymous)]

That depended on the game. Even on the original NES, there were save points/inns (Final Fantasy), or codes you had to write down and enter to resume a game from your nearest stopping point (Castlevania II was one, I believe).

And there were also cheat codes that made you invincible too (Contra). So I don't think much has changed in 30-40 years except that the difficulty setting is now located in your menus.

By the way, and Mario and Sonic aren't that much of a flex. SMB? It had warp points. You could literally skip 80% of the game and win. And even if you didn't skip anything, it was easy to gain over a hundred lives with little effort so that you didn't die easily (hint: it involved a koopa shell and some stairs). As for Sonic, that had a code that could send you to the final boss. I know, because I did it as a kid and beat the game. Okay, maybe that last one's cheating a little, but the point is, there were ways to get around the difficulty.

[(Anonymous)]

This!

[(Anonymous)]

You're giving me flashbacks on cheat codes. Except I used to trawl ask Jeeves for random sites that game walk throughs all types out. Got me some cool stuff in Zelda,; still never cleared Level 8-2 of SMB Deluxe lol. Never did get that cheat correct,!

[(Anonymous)]

I grew up on them too, but it’s your gatekeeping that I roll my eyes at. Not everyone is physically capable of playing games the way they used to be, but they should still be able to play games.


And Mario and Sonic were “absolutely unforgiving”? At the time, they weren’t really considered that way. Maybe it was different for some people, which is fair enough, but I’ve never heard of someone referring to them with “unforgiving” or “punishing” like people do of arcade and NES/SNES games of the time. As a Castlevania fanatic, that’s what I think of when I think of unforgiving games.

[(Anonymous)]

Yeah, I have physical issues playing many video games and if I can't turn the difficulty down, I probably can't play. I may not be able to play anyway, but I appreciate having the option.

[(Anonymous)]

I'd call them "unforgiving" in the sense that you couldn't save your game and you only had so many lives/continues and when you ran out of those you had to start the whole game over.

[(Anonymous)]

There is no moral value to games being hard.

[(Anonymous)]

Well for me, it's the grinding required by a high difficulty.

If I'm going to be spending ten to a hundred manhours doing repetitive actions, I would rather have something to show for it by the end. Like a sock. There is honour in a properly knitted sock.

For something that's supposed to be entertainment? I'm just not the demographic for the git gud approach. That said, if it's your joy: go for it.

[(Anonymous)]

I also grew up on Sonic, but like... we are FREE to not turn the difficulty down-- or in fact to turn the difficulty UP, if we want a real challenge. So why all the hand-wringing and literal raging about what other people do?

Difficulty settings allow a lot of disabled gamers to actually have a gaming experience, which in my mind is a lot better than having to watch streams of a non-accessible game in order to experience it, because you're still the one playing the game. And the reason disabled gamers get to have that is that there are enough casuals who just want lower difficulty because they like a more relaxed experience, so I don't complain about anyone who wants lower difficulty. They're not robbing other gamers of higher difficulties.

[(Anonymous)]

All of this!!