Ever quit a game because of learning curve?

I have never quit a game because the learning curve was too high, as the reason for quitting. I was just wondering if there are others like me. I haven't played every complicated game, and I have certainly never played the much fabled "Dwarf Fortress", but I have played hundreds of PC games, and I love strategy games. Are there games out there that could break me, and cause me to quit in frustration?

The reason I ask these questions is because of the move toward simplicity in games. Am I a super genius compared to the average person? I doubt it, but I am curious to hear opinions on the subject of learning curve.

Trying to play Dwarf Fortress now and geeze their is alot going on. If your familiar with roguelike games its not that too much to begin playing, but their are so many things to do/you can do.

Other then that definetly not, Morrowind took a long while to get into. Around my third time trying to play (I lose interest fast then come back) it suddenly just clicked.

I play a lot of strategy games myself. Once a game has caught my interest, I will play it until I know "everything" about it.

Arma II.

Battlefield 2. I gave up at sargent. I always seemed to have crap accuracy compared to others, plus jets constantly bombed the hell out of me/shot me down. The game has a near vertical learning curve if you ask me. Ironically I'm maxed out in BF2142. I found BF2142 to be a more refined and less wonky version of BF2 and really got into it and every BF game since. Battlefield games, especially BF2, have near vertical learning curves, but once you get past it, they are a hell of a lot of fun.

Usually I'm all for a steep learning curve but there is a game I stopped playing because of it. Sorry, EVE fans but I just couldn't get over the hump. I tried. I really, really did but I just couldn't hack it. Yes, I'm pathetic.

no, I like difficulty. :)

Yup - Supreme Commander FA.

Oh, and EVE. That was partially due to boredom too.

Most of the games released by Paradox have a steep learning curve but once you get into them they're very deep. I've never quit because a game because of a steep learing curve but then again I've been called a stubborn sob more than once. From my experience though most games with a learning curve aren't that much fun, a good development team can make a game accessible to almost anyone.

EVE, X3 and EU3.

Dwarf Fortress. X3. Pride of Nations.

A lot of games I'll quit initially because of the learning curve, then go back and force myself to learn how to play them only to discover that they're really just boring games.

Indiana Jones on the NES back in the day.

None lately that I can think of...

Some of the games that take longer to learn are the most rewarding and have been the most fun for me. ARMA, Total War Series, Anno Series, etc..

*actually now that I think about it, Starcraft2 versus mode. I am terrible at that and rarely play it now hehe. I do enjoy some coop skirmish vs ai and the campaign though hehe)

Battlefield 2. I gave up at sargent. I always seemed to have crap accuracy compared to others, plus jets constantly bombed the hell out of me/shot me down. The game has a near vertical learning curve if you ask me. Ironically I'm maxed out in BF2142. I found BF2142 to be a more refined and less wonky version of BF2 and really got into it and every BF game since. Battlefield games, especially BF2, have near vertical learning curves, but once you get past it, they are a hell of a lot of fun.

The_Stand_In

This sounds more like a skill curve issue than learning curve. You knew how to play Battlefield 2, but you didn't take the time and effort to become skilled in the game.

l like challenging games.

Is that feeling of accomplishment you get.

COD MW2, though not from the learning curve, but just the rage inducing BS

Yup, EU3 and X3: Terran Conflict both require way too much initial investment with really poor documentation (manual or tutorial).

EVE online, I "think" I got the main gameplay mechanics down but I knew I barely scratch the surface.

I quit Civ 3 for a little while when i first got the game (which is odd since i was experienced with civ 1 and 2), then i gave it another shot and got really good at it eventually. I think most stragedy games can sometimes overwhelm me at first.

Dwarf Fortress. Won't even bother. That game is seriously in need of a usability makeover. MythPro1

I Remember quiting because of Difficulty curve to a lot of 90s, classic RPGs(BG, Fallout,etc).

Eventually a stuck with them, and now i love them.

X3, I think. Too little direction for my liking, but the setup seems awesome. Just need it to hold my hand more :P.

You can get through ARMA2 by playing it like a regular military shooter, you just need to have some semblance of tactics. Most of the time you're in a squad of 4 anyway so it's not like there's too much going on.

I kind of quit Total War: Shogun 2 because of the learning curve. Basically I played the tutorial when I wasn't ready to dedicate time to a game, and by the time I was ready, I had forgotten everything. I'll get back to it eventually - just have to be in the mood.

As far as non-sim games go, X3 was one I gave up on due. Like someone else said, it's not just the fact that its complicated, but the fact that its documentation is exceptionally poor. The game just throws you into a ocean and expects you to know how to swim. Also, in general I stay away from fighting games because I don't feel like memorizing combos just to be good at a game. At this point in my life I refuse to study for a video game; if I'm going to spend time studying something then I'm going to study something productive.gameguy6700

I've had a couple of friends who have, but after beating the incredibly cheap and frustrating Call of Duty: World at War on Veteran, nothing fazes me. So far I've beatn almost every game I've had, with only a few I'm working on and like one I didn't beat because it was terrible (RTX: Red Rock).

Arma II.

with_teeth26

Counterstrike. I came to CS from Quake 3 thinking I was the **** but I quit after less than an hour.. Didn't dig the no-respawn style and getting raped by snipers around every corner. It didn't seem like a balanced game IMO.

X3

Crusader Kings II and AI War: Fleet Command.

Generally, I love depth and managing large empires but those two are just faaar too deep for me. A more comprehensive tutorial might have made CK easier to learn.

Crusader Kings II and AI War: Fleet Command.

Generally, I love depth and managing large empires but those two are just faaar too deep for me. A more comprehensive tutorial might have made CK easier to learn.

Emraldo

You should take the time to learn CK2, its worth it.:)

HPS PzC (Panzer Camp) because of mass of units and slow turns this is only PBEM.

The depth is there just can take months to get thru a major camp when playing against a human.

War in the Pacific Admirals Ed - This is the most tediuos and massive wargame ever next is GG's War in the East.

WitP AE simulates the whole Pacific War during WW2 - It really is only a PBEM although there is AI.

I have heard that the war can last almost as long as the real one.

EVE was no problem to understand just real boring, same as X3 - Terran (although this one is mostly poor doc).

Dominions 3 was way to complicated and poor graphics for me.

EU3 was just too much not being explained and no idea the impact of decisions - not really complicated.

Dwarf Fortress is great just poor UI and graphics to get into it for me - the eye strain to see whats going on and the key binding is just way too much for little return for me.

I am playing Distant Worlds - Legends and this is massive like the wargames but 4x - it differs in that you can let the AI control all or none of the game so you learn gradually

I feel it gets it right although the text is small to read at times - 2526 Armada is easier and 4x as well.

There is more just cant remember atm.

Arma II.

with_teeth26

^this. Also because it runs bad even with a 570. Even bought the Combined Ops pack but it turns out that was a mistake.

Maybe EVE, but it's also because I found it to be a tad boring. I might give it another shot soon though.

Yup, EU3 and X3: Terran Conflict both require way too much initial investment with really poor documentation (manual or tutorial).

Whiteblade999

X3 Terran Conflict's manual is really good, X3 Reunion's however...

[QUOTE="with_teeth26"]

Arma II.

SPBoss

Yeah, I remember accidentally pressing a key since I was handling my hedgehog (literally) that blocked my movement to 180 degrees (I couldn't even move sideways) and I was wondering "Who the hell is even going to use that? In the game or real ******* life?".

Hell, the original Operation Flashpoint was ported to the original Xbox without any sacrifices to the control or gameplay except for the removal of 1 or 2 useless keys, which in my opinion it's Ok.

Counterstrike. I came to CS from Quake 3 thinking I was the **** but I quit after less than an hour.. Didn't dig the no-respawn style and getting raped by snipers around every corner. It didn't seem like a balanced game IMO.

thphaca

Heroes of Newerth had a really steep learning curve for me. I never really got the hang of it entirely. I don't play it anymore and I don't play any other games like it. I have a dota 2 key, but I am not playing it at the moment.

Demigod. Should have realized a 6.5 rated game = bad game.

I've started up a game like Space Empire that I got in a bundle and just killed it immediately. A game's got to have a really good hook to make me want to memorize an encyclopedia of gameplay rules.guynamedbilly

All this talk about X3: Terran Conflict is intriguing. I used to love Wing Commander Privateer. I could probably get into this game, especially if ppl quit because it's too hard. Sounds like the perfect game!SKaREO

but the game is essentially, explore, build traders, explore, build traders, explore, build traders + facilities... explore build traders + facilities + fleet, conquer???

I'll be quiting tribes ascend soon... well like now, I play once or twice a week and the balance is pretty **** because it'll cost like 300 bucks to unlock everyone, no one will have everything right away, and because its a lot slower progression to encourage purchases, no one is going to have everything unlocked any time soon, so you'll end up with horribly balanced teams constantly. Its not that the learning curve is too much, its the pay 2 win model that makes it not worth learning.