Comment

I prefer games that use reactionary difficult (idk what the proper term is) where the difficulty changes based on how well you do.

Kicking too much ass? Here’s more enemies and they hit harder.

Getting gangbanged at every turn? Fewer enemies and they’re easier to kill.

This seems like the best way to make sure everyone playing has a fun experience

Sort:hotnew top

avatar@lemm.ee ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago
I don’t know if I want to be punished for doing well

source
rivalary@lemmy.ca ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago
I’m the complete opposite. I don’t want to feel like the game is letting me win. I want to earn it, at least a little.

source
simple@lemm.ee ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago
I hate that. Nothing is more enraging than dying and having the loading screen say something like “hey, you suck, do you want to go back to normal difficulty?” No, no I don’t. Difficulty is part of the enjoyment fot me, having a feature that takes it out of my control would be a turnoff.

source
Xatolos@reddthat.com ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago
This has a bad tendency to backfire badly. Really badly.

A lot of players like to do “save summing” (save often and reload if it doesn’t go well). With doing this, the game only moves forward when you are winning, so the game gets harder and harder since it thinks you are really “good” at the game. It ends up making players quit in frustration from the gaming being too hard and “unfair”.

This was a huge issue for (mostly PC) players of the original Max Paine, since people weren’t aware of this auto adjusting difficulty.

Resident Evil didn’t have this issue because of limited saves (and when you died, it would offer to load the save for you, so it could monitor your death count.)

source