Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

On Auto-Dynamic Difficulty In Videogames

Posted by simoniker on from the and-auto-dynamic-release-dates dept.

Thanks to Game Matters for its discussion of the problems with difficulty levels in videogames, as the weblog, authored by 3D Realms' Scott Miller, talks about why "games should only rarely allow players to set their own difficulty level." Miller argues: "One of the most common ways games sabotage their potential to appeal to larger numbers of players is by being too difficult... Practically everyone designing games nowadays is a hardcore player with elite skills. It's therefore easy for game designers to misjudge the difficulty of their own games." He describes 'auto-dynamic difficulty', related to Max Payne, as "...a few variables that rate the player's ability, and the player's rating (completely internal to the game) determines the damage that both the player's weapon delivers, and the enemies' weapons deliver against the player." Miller ends by pointing out: "If a player completes your game, they are much more likely to buzz about, spreading the word that it was a great game."

6 of 91 comments (clear)

  1. A better solution... by Filik · · Score: 5, Interesting

    ...is to make those parts of the game that you have to solve fairly easy, while still adding lots of extras with varying difficulty (just don't fall into the trap of rewarding the good players with items that makes it even easier for them...instead focus on fun but useless rewards)
    Personally I think it is bad that the player has the option to solve everything , so a few impossible or near impossible spots should be added as well, just to teach the player that they aren't supposed to go exploring every cranny of the map, but instead focus on their mission.
    Then again, some hardcore players will never give up until every single resistance is dealt with, however little they have to do with the mission...

    1. Re:A better solution... by danaris · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I generally subscribe to this school o f thought. I mostly play RPGs (on consoles, mostly Final Fantasies), and I consider the best reward to be a cool FMV sequence. It gives you no advantage, but it's also not a worthless item, like "proof of Nemesis" in FFX (which I've never gotten). I *hate* doing a hard sidequest and getting nothing but a worthless item for it, whether it's a certificate-type item ("you finished X sidequest") or just a moderate-to-boring regular game item.

      FMVs are a lot of fun (I love watching them, anyway, and I'm shamelessly extrapolating to the rest of humanity), and it feels like you've gotten something at least somewhat worth it, but it doesn't give you any advantage over those who didn't complete the sidequest. That's not to say there can't be sidequests that get you useful stuff that makes other parts of the game easier; I think there's definitely a place for those, too.

      However, I do think that the main game bosses/puzzles/whatever should get more difficult, significantly so. (speaking in Final Fantasy terms here because it's what I know; substitute whatever is appropriate for your favourite genre) Though it's reasonable to have a few sidequest bosses more difficult than the final boss, the final boss should definitely be tougher than all the previous regular-game bosses, and most of the sidequest bosses, unless there is a specific, given reason for him/her/it/them not to be.

      Well, there's my game-related rant for the week. Someday, I'll make my own games, and probably not follow any of my own advice! ;-)

      Dan Aris

      --
      Fun. Free. Online. RPG. BattleMaster.
    2. Re:A better solution... by Stephen+Williams · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Though it's reasonable to have a few sidequest bosses more difficult than the final boss, the final boss should definitely be tougher than all the previous regular-game bosses, and most of the sidequest bosses, unless there is a specific, given reason for him/her/it/them not to be.

      Not sure I agree with that, as far as console RPGs are concerned anyway. I'll stick to discussung the FF series because, like you, that's what I know.

      Back as far as FFIV, the FF series has been increasingly story-driven - the story is really the point of the game. That's how it seems to me, anyway. Therefore, I think that everyone who starts the game should be able to finish it, so they can see how the story ends. The main game should thus be relatively easy, with all the challenge for the hardcore crowd in subquests.

      Final Fantasy VIII and X both took this route: FFVIII using level-matched enemies; FFX by just being a fairly easy game. But both games have a fair number of optional bosses which are very difficult to beat, providing an extra challenge for anyone so inclined. (The European version of FFX has even more than the North American version: Omega Weapon has ten times as much HP, and there are evil versions of all the Aeons to track down and kill. (Or, in my case, track down and get killed by)).

      Final Fantasy IX follows your suggested pattern more; the difficulty ramps up over the course of the game; the final dungeon is particularly nasty, and the end boss is just horrible. Nice closing FMV as a reward, though :-)

      -Stephen

  2. Re:Max Payne? by Soul-Burn666 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    What is utterly annoying in some games, is not that the game is too hard, but the fact load times are between 30 secs and minute sometimes! It's very frustating.

    I think this auto-difficulty has made my MP2 play harder. I am a perfectionist when it comes to games, I don't like getting hit too much and if I do, I just play it out without care, cuz I don't mind dying. And then, when I finish a section well enough, the enemies in the next one become even tougher and tougher.... even on the first maps!

    --
    ^_^
  3. i hate to keep hyping PGR2 but it's so good... by h0mer · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Project Gotham Racing 2 has the best difficulty curve I've seen. Basic/bronze medals are very easy to get, and give you a good feel for the course. Silver medals are the sweet spot, you won't have trouble if you are good, but it's not a cakewalk. Gold medals will take some retries, and platinum medals are punishment :)

    Not to mention that you get to see your Kudos rank on Xbox Live after each course. It was a motivating factor to keep playing because I kept getting higher and higher on the lists.

    --


    I'm on top of my game like I'm standin' on Xbox.
  4. Baldur's Gate 2 by vadim_t · · Score: 3, Interesting

    It had a really nice system. You could change the difficulty setting while in the game. It changed the amount of damage done by monsters, but low settings reduced the amount of experience you gained.

    This was really nice for those annoying times you got stuck in a place. For example in my first game I made the alarm ring in the room near the dryads. Then I got damaged by the traps in the room, and overwrote my old game. Then came the golems, which quickly killed me.

    In other games this would have meant downloading a cheat, restarting the game, or perhaps loading a saved game from an hour ago. In BG2 I could just temporarily set the difficulty level to easy, kill them, and set it back to normal.

    For me in most games it doesn't happen that it's too hard in general. It's usually too hard in a specific place, because I screwed up, went to the wrong place, or especially in RPGs, had a party that couldn't deal with the enemy. It can be bad luck too, like in Morrowind, where you can be really screwed if you *have* to sleep, do it, and have a zombie wake you up and attack before you're healed.