Itagaki Talks Ninja Gaiden Difficulty, Sequel, DOA

Thanks to Kikizo for its interview with Tecmo's Tomonobu Itagaki regarding "Ninja Gaiden 2, Code Chronus, Dead or Alive Ultimate, DOA4 and PSP, [and] Nintendo DS development", conducted at the E3 Expo in Los Angeles. Itagaki addresses the complaints of some about Ninja Gaiden's extreme difficulty, posturing: "It was done intentionally of course. The testers who tested this game went nuts. At first it was easier, but when the testers said 'this is too difficult', I made it even more difficult", before mentioning that a Ninja Gaiden 2 is planned, and "the concept will not change", but "it will be after [development of] Dead or Alive 4", which in turn will be produced after the nearly completed Dead Or Alive Ultimate, the Xbox Live online-enabled title which "takes the first two Dead or Alive titles, adds all new environments, a novel online setup, a higher degree of interactivity in its levels, new movies, new costumes, and more."

Comments

Boasting?

[Andy Smith]

It was done intentionally of course. The testers who tested this game went nuts. At first it was easier, but when the testers said 'this is too difficult', I made it even more difficult

Interesting concept. Also known as: Bad management

Imagine the quote from a film company: We played the movie to test audiences and they said they really hated one character, so we put some of that character's deleted scenes back in.

Or how about: Here at Slashdot we get a lot of complaints about factual errors and duplicate stories. Well would ya just look at the place now...

Re:Boasting?

[illuminata]

It wasn't a matter of bad management. Itagaki knew what market he was aiming Ninja Gaiden for. Gamers shouldn't act like he made a bad decision just because the game isn't for them. Ninja Gaiden is meant for good players who want a challenge. If it's too hard for you, there's nothing wrong with playing another game.

Here's another example from the film world. David Mamet gives a test screening for his new film, but a decent portion of the audience complains because they don't understand the dialogue between characters. So, while doing the final edit, David sticks a bunch more of that dialogue into the movie because he knows that his fans will eat it up.

Re:Boasting?

[cgenman]

Interesting concept. Also known as: Bad management

Imagine the quote from a film company: We played the movie to test audiences and they said they really hated one character, so we put some of that character's deleted scenes back in.

It could very well be that the testers became complacent by the easier sections of the game. When the difficulty ramped up as high as Team Ninja wanted the testers felt the change and felt that it was too sudden / too strong. To smooth out the perception of disjoint in the difficulty curve, Team Ninja could have either made the hard sections easier, or made the easy sections harder. They chose the latter.

Considering all of the press that this game has recieved, it was the right choice. Compare this outing to the recent update of Strider... Which was truer to the source material? Which was the better game?

Imagine this quote from a film company: We played Lost Highway to test audiences and they said they didn't it, so we're simplifying the storyline and making things clearer. Sometimes it's best not to do what your audience wants.

Ninja Gaiden is SUPPOSED to be hard!

[Dark Nexus]

I suspect many fans of the original NES Ninja Gaiden games, like myself, would have been annoyed if it HADN'T been more difficult than most games these days.

The original is one of my favourite NES games of all time, even though I was never able to finish it. Just too hard. It wasn't uncommon to have trouble getting past the first area of the first world if you were new to the game.

Gamers now are spoiled by excessive (and therefore forgiving of dying) save points, and difficulty through gimmics. Once you figure out the gimmic, it tends to get a LOT easier. It's nice to see a game that's just HARD.

Re:Ninja Gaiden is SUPPOSED to be hard!

[Anonymous Coward]

Apparently you played those games with a very different mindset than you played NG today. I have never been bothered to play through even Mario of those games you listed. Yet I still managed to play through NG. Actually I'd even go out on a limb and say that once you get the feeling of the game it's not that too hard at all. (Although I did replay some parts more than 3 times before I got past them.)

While the game sure is hard the controls are really tight and I never got the feeling that the controls lagged. (Which would be fatal in a game like NG.) Once I learned the moves I could also pull off long combos and acrobatics with ease.

Regarding the difficulty I though that the game actually was well balanced. In each part of the game you go up against perhaps 3-4 different opponent types. Typically one of these is significantly easier than the other and one is harder. Each new level the easiest is swapped for a new hardest type which makes for a gradual escalation of difficulty.

Now it sure isn't a game that anyone can play. Many people will be better served with standard games. But I really prefer to play games which provide a challanging (but fair and well controlled) experience than an easy game with sloppy controls.

Case in point. After NG I played through Beyond Good and Evil. A very nice game by all accounts but the fighting interface is very mainstream. Basically you point the stick in a direction and press the button. I actually though that the final boss in BGE was harder than in NG because by the time I got to the final boss in NG I *owned* the controls. In BGE the controls are sloppy and so I never really got used to them. (They are a bit laggy and it's unnecessarily hard to control combat movements.)

Finally I will just say that today the majority of games are geared to mainstream. If people think NG is too hard then play another game instead. If you practice at it you'll get good enough to kick arse too, but it will feel like an accomplishment, because it is. I really want more games like this, because they tend to give me much more satisfaction.

Difficulty

[dstillz]

Ninja Gaiden isn't actually that difficult. It's a fighting game at the core, and repetition of combos is your saving grace.

The camera just sucks. The camera is your real enemy, especially during the pointless platforming sequences.

Re:Good game

[Liquidrage]

I'm glad you mentioned the controller.
I'm 29. I hadn't thrown a controller since Alex Kidd in Miracle World back in the Sega Master System days.
Yet, I threw it once playing Ninja Gaiden on the X-Box.

I'm OK with them not having the option to make it easier though. It was a throw back game (pun is optional). It force me to get good at the game. If you've made it through most of the game, go back and start over and it's actually not that hard. It's just instead of bring a modern "just play through, little skill required" like most games, it makes you get good. And I respect that.

People seem to miss the point

[Tuvai]

A truly challenging game is hard to come by these days, for every Ninja Gaiden, Viewtiful Joe and F-Zero GX, there are 2 dozen games that bow to eye candy and plot development over actual difficulty.
Sadly this is a curse that has been steadily gaining momentum since the PlayStation era and throughout, where the craftsmenship of demanding perfection/reactions within a 2D environment were sacrificed at the alter of style over substance. Itagaki needs to be lauded for his attidude, not criticised.

Re:People seem to miss the point

[MilenCent]

I've played two out of three of those games, so:

Ninja Gaiden: the one I haven't played. I agree with the previous post, the designer seems like a real jerk. This is a man who needs hormone supression therapy - his testosterone levels seems to be through the roof. DOA Extreme Volleyball is proof enough of this fact to me. The thing that the people complaining about "difficulty whiners," who are whining themselves in my opinion, forget is that if you fork over the cash for a game you expect to get some enjoyment out of it. The old-style painful, are-you-man-enough-for-me kinds of games are, parodoxically, usually only really enjoyed by kids who have long afternoons and summer vacations to beat their heads against this kind of thing. It's no fun to pay 50 bucks for something if you'll never see the end of level one.

Viewtiful Joe: In Kids Mode, the game actually isn't that hard, but the bosses do require being clued-in to the skills necessary to succeed in boss fights (discover the pattern, look for a weakness, exploit, exploit, exploit). The harder modes are there if the player wants to go for them; I've completed V-Rated so far. But my point is, you can play the whole game in Kids Mode, you won't feel like you haven't gotten your money's worth if you do so, and it's enough of a joy just to play around with that even if you don't beat it, you can have a good time. In short, Viewtiful Joe can afford to be hard, because it has a legitimate easy mode, and it's fun to play even if you don't care about winning.

F-Zero GX: This one's just insane. I can kind of understand that, given its need to its relationship to F-Zero AX, but really -- who besides ultimate game geeks are even going to finish this? But it does have easy modes, though you get paltry unlockables for beating them.

What matters here is, does the gamer feel like he's gotten his money's worth, even if he never finishes the game? I've seen many, many kids, and adults too, with games like Grand Theft Auto 3 who will never, honestly, finish them. Even games considered "easy," like Wind Waker, are often abandoned long before the ending (which is a shame for WW because the ending's awesome).

I would go so far to claim that at least half of all purchased copies of video games these days go unbeaten even once during their initial ownership period (before being sold, traded or given to someone else), and that number *could* be much higher, maybe 90% or more.

Re:It wasn't the game itself...

[DeadScreenSky]

I'm sorry, but I think it should be the goal of someone who creates a game to make it as much fun for everyone interested in that particular genre as possible.

Yeah, except going the lowest-common denominator route can turn off a huge part of your potential audience. I enjoyed Ninja Gaiden partially because it was challenging (though not as hard as many people complain - think tactical, gamers!). If it was easier I wouldn't have enjoyed it so much, and I am far from alone.

And you can't ignore the fact (even though you attempt to) that Team Ninja made the game pretty fair in terms of difficulty. There are what, only two parts of the game with 'instant kill pits', done largely for good game design reasons (like under the monastery - you can't just let the player jump all the way down, but you don't want the player taking falling damage for the other 99% of the game)? Compare that to a game like the Shinobi remake or your average platformer (hell, even classic games like Mario64!), which are filled with that kind of 'one mistake=death' annoyance. NG also allows you to build up as much money as you want (via various bat areas), so you can buy as much health potions as your skill level requires. Try playing something like Genma Onimusha, which has similar mechanics (lots of respawning enemies), a camera that is literally ten times or so worse, and a complete inability to buy health potions. You have to beat the game with what the designers give you - get to the last boss without enough potions, too bad. May as well restart. Even the 'bad camera' you talk about is pretty damn good, because it is paired with the ability to block 95+% of attacks with the touch of a button, and all enemies make noises so you know when an attack is coming even if it isn't visible (another thing Genma Onimusha screws up). Ninja Gaiden isn't easy, and maybe some parts could be tightened up a little or smoothed out, but it is intensely fair.

If you just started playing games recently (say the PSX era), or if you predominently play all of the recent (and easy) Nintendo games, Ninja Gaiden just probably isn't for you. There's nothing wrong with people like Itagaki making games for the millions of old school (and nowadays mostly Western) gamers that are so often ignored by most other developers. We really, really appreciate it, and the game's sales reflect that.

Wow. (Re:Boasting?)

[smcn]

I completely understand a person having a preference towards games that are harder, but insulting people who enjoy RPGs or other games that don't require masterful hand-eye coordination is ridiculous.

Games are meant to be fun, not a contest to see who's more "leet". Grow up a little.