Are there any difficult PC games?

Difficult games on PC?

ARMA, just about any roguelike (I like Nethack), I wanna be the guy, X-COM (especially Terror of the Deep (I dont know about you guys, but I found the easiest setting on that game to be harder than most "hard" console games)), SHMUPs, EVE Online, any game made by Paradox interactive. I am sure I can come up with more but that will do, I linked the games that are freeware.

Maroxad

So X-Com is coming up alot. Have you played alot of the "difficult" console games I'm referring to compare them? What would you compare X-Com to for the consoles?

[QUOTE="NEStorianPriest"]

Regardless of how they get there, the end result is a difficult game that demands precise action. That isn't the question. The question is why are PC games not showing up on these lists, considering their made be reviewers who play multiplatform games?

XaosII

And thats where the difference in most PC game's difficulty. Most difficult PC games are not heavily focused on split-second reflexes (though there are definitely exceptions).

They likely aren't showing up on lists because the reviewers probably havent played them. We've been listing you games and you simply ignore the games listed because you havent even heard of those games, let alone played them. Chances are a multiplatform gamer hasnt touched many of the games listed due to their nicheness.

Try playing a few of the games mentioned and draw your own conclusion.

CSS (from a twitch perspective) is harder than any console game. So it depends where you look; PC has 'extreme' versions of console games (like BC2/CSS)

LOL console gaming, where hardcare gaming lives. Stalker games are incredibly hard, and I've only played on normal.

So X-Com is coming up alot. Have you played alot of the "difficult" console games I'm referring to compare them? What would you compare X-Com to for the consoles?

NEStorianPriest

I have played demons souls, I also tried a bit of Killzone 2, which while challanging was nowhere near as hard as Ghost Recon. I will agree with you that SHMUPS are hard, but they also exist on PC.

Actually Demon's Souls was a very easy game where damage is effortlessly healed, enemies are slow and begging to be killed, and boss patterns are easily learnt.

Maroxad

Here was my first battle in X-Com

My soldiers walk out, one of my guys get shot down. My guys keep missing. More of my soldiers die. Gah. Stop missing. Finally some alien got hit. I won the battle in the end but with half the crew dead.

I re-read your list of "challenging games". LOL

SFiv is on PC (if you consider that challenging, personally it was a cakewalk)

I didn't even bother to show gratitude? The tone of your phrase was that I should be doing so. So why ese mention it?

NEStorianPriest

That you didn't bother to show gratitude to the examples posted, ignoring every single one of them. You don't have to, neither is it required. It was mearly a humble observation from yours trully. Now don't try to elaborate again, , i don't have the energy left to respond in a more simpler way.

Challenge is going to be very different depending on the type of game, for you to base the opinion that quick response to the game design is more difficult on consoles, you would first need to experienced the examples posted.

Men of War: Assault Squad. A very challenging game. I could barely win skirmishes on easy.

serious sam first/second encounter

max payne

x3 terran conflict

STALKER series

Red Orchestra

starcraft series when you get into multiplayer

quake III arena for multiplayer

[QUOTE="Maroxad"]

Difficult games on PC?

ARMA, just about any roguelike (I like Nethack), I wanna be the guy, X-COM (especially Terror of the Deep (I dont know about you guys, but I found the easiest setting on that game to be harder than most "hard" console games)), SHMUPs, EVE Online, any game made by Paradox interactive. I am sure I can come up with more but that will do, I linked the games that are freeware.

NEStorianPriest

So X-Com is coming up alot. Have you played alot of the "difficult" console games I'm referring to compare them? What would you compare X-Com to for the consoles?

X-Com.... is uncomparable.

There are a million ways for a game to be hard. Easy ones, like lessening player hp and giving more to opponents, for instance... And more elaborate ones, forcing the player to be imaginative. You can't say that one form is "harder" than the other.

However, I claim that on PC, you will find examples of many different kinds of difficulty. In my experience, less so on consoles. Doesn't mean I don't enjoy the good old challenge of a 2D Mario platformer. However, I give higher praise to the difficulty found in games like Supreme Commander, X-Com, Civilization, Diablo, etc.

It just seems to me that those game's difficulty challenges me on more fundamental levels... And their replayability is astounding.

In the end, it's just a matter of preference... I don't understand what you're after in this thread. You sound like a guy who loves music asking another guy why he prefers astronomy.... And refusing his reasons...

have yout tried some of the portal challenges? I decided to go back to portal what with portal 2 being released soon and I remeber just being stuck on some of the more advanced stages, also trying to do the achievements for using only a certain amount of portals or steps was crazy. maybe not the hardest game, but it really challenged me mentally instead of the other hard games which punished me

[QUOTE="Maroxad"]

Difficult games on PC?

ARMA, just about any roguelike (I like Nethack), I wanna be the guy, X-COM (especially Terror of the Deep (I dont know about you guys, but I found the easiest setting on that game to be harder than most "hard" console games)), SHMUPs, EVE Online, any game made by Paradox interactive. I am sure I can come up with more but that will do, I linked the games that are freeware.

NEStorianPriest

So X-Com is coming up alot. Have you played alot of the "difficult" console games I'm referring to compare them? What would you compare X-Com to for the consoles?

I don't think there is something to compare it to. Because the difficulty from the X-COM games comes from the complexity of it's elements. Difficulty of console games usually comes from unforgiving game desing or twitch reflex based gaming. On PC it's usually some super realistic simulation or strategy/tactical game that you have to study a manual to understand the basic stuff.

Probably that is why PC has simulations and strategy games and consoles lack simulations and the only strategy games are basically JRPGs with some kind of board-like turn based combat, and in it's place are full of Action games and Action Adventure games that almost have nothing on adveture but are full of action.

[QUOTE="NEStorianPriest"]

I didn't even bother to show gratitude? The tone of your phrase was that I should be doing so. So why ese mention it?

Lucianu

That you didn't bother to show gratitude to the examples posted, ignoring every single one of them. You don't have to, neither is it required. It was mearly a humble observation from yours trully. Now don't try to elaborate again, , i don't have the energy left to respond in a more simpler way.

I like yourcondescending attitude.I don't need your permission on censure. If I want to elaborate I can.

Challenge is going to be very different depending on the type of game, for you to base the opinion that quick response to the game design is more difficult on consoles, you would first need to experienced the examples posted.

I see little evidence of anyone claiming PC is more difficult of having done the same. Only a few.

This.

Play it and suffer :P

Getting it to run - the game

I see little evidence of anyone claiming PC is more difficult of having done the same. Only a few.

NEStorianPriest

You need to play them, to experience them, otherwise your opinion is not valid for the simple reason that you have no base of comparison trough your perspective. You would require your own perception of what is and what is not more challenging, simply because there are different form of 'challenge' in games, hence the fact that you would need to experience, first hand, these different forms to base a opinion around.

[QUOTE="Maroxad"]

Difficult games on PC?

ARMA, just about any roguelike (I like Nethack), I wanna be the guy, X-COM (especially Terror of the Deep (I dont know about you guys, but I found the easiest setting on that game to be harder than most "hard" console games)), SHMUPs, EVE Online, any game made by Paradox interactive. I am sure I can come up with more but that will do, I linked the games that are freeware.

NEStorianPriest

So X-Com is coming up alot. Have you played alot of the "difficult" console games I'm referring to compare them? What would you compare X-Com to for the consoles?

Okay, if you want a simple hard game. Go play Stalker: Clear Sky on the hardest difficulty and beat the game. Then come back(with proof :P) and tell us that PC games are easier than console games.

I've played tons of different games on both systems, and PC games generally have a much higher learning curve than console games. Thus they are usually harder to master, because even Stalker is brain surgery compared to a lot of console games and it's a more simplistic PC exclusive than a lot of the exclusives the PC does have.

[QUOTE="NEStorianPriest"]

Ahhh. So PC gamers ask console gamers why they like doing things a certain way and expect a response, but I don't have that luxury. eh? Interesting.

Mograine

You don't have the luxury of criticizing when you are uninformed.

No name calling, If you don't like it don't post.

NEStorianPriest

Did you not just call someone a glib on page one?

[QUOTE="NEStorianPriest"]

[QUOTE="Maroxad"]

Difficult games on PC?

ARMA, just about any roguelike (I like Nethack), I wanna be the guy, X-COM (especially Terror of the Deep (I dont know about you guys, but I found the easiest setting on that game to be harder than most "hard" console games)), SHMUPs, EVE Online, any game made by Paradox interactive. I am sure I can come up with more but that will do, I linked the games that are freeware.

glez13

So X-Com is coming up alot. Have you played alot of the "difficult" console games I'm referring to compare them? What would you compare X-Com to for the consoles?

I don't think there is something to compare it to. Because the difficulty from the X-COM games comes from the complexity of it's elements. Difficulty of console games usually comes from unforgiving game desing or twitch reflex based gaming. On PC it's usually some super realistic simulation or strategy/tactical game that you have to study a manual to understand the basic stuff.

Probably that is why PC has simulations and strategy games and consoles lack simulations and the only strategy games are basically JRPGs with some kind of board-like turn based combat, and in it's place are full of Action games and Action Adventure games that almost have nothing on adveture but are full of action.

I agree with your reasons regarding the disparity of difficulty between the two platforms. However, I think it is possible that one method of accomplishing a task can be more difficult, even if the methods and the tasks are compeltely different.

It seems to be that PC gamers think console game design is simple and cheap, and that PC game design is complex and deep. So, it is still possible that excelling at a simple cheap game could be more or less difficult than excelling at a complex and deep game. My supposition is that it is the former.

The reason being is that more PC games are geared to problem solving and management, which can be accomplished with a high intelligence. Many difficult console games are based on hand eye coordination, reflexes and speed.

A smart person with poor reflexes is going not going to do well with console games. Exlcuding the big FPS game players (read casual gamers) most adult gamers (adult gamers make up the largest demographic) are already intellegent. The hobby attracts intellegent people. So the deciding factor would be reflexes. Console games are rooted in arcade gameplay, and emphasize unforgiving design and quick reaction/decision making skills.

So that's my position. Given the opportunity, I think more console players would excel at PC games, whereas the converse would not be true.

So what are your thoughts?

[QUOTE="NEStorianPriest"]

No name calling, If you don't like it don't post.

gmaster456

Did you not just call someone a glib on page one?

Um, calling someone glib isn't name calling. Glib is not an insulting adjective.

[QUOTE="NEStorianPriest"]

Ahhh. So PC gamers ask console gamers why they like doing things a certain way and expect a response, but I don't have that luxury. eh? Interesting.

Mograine

You don't have the luxury of criticizing when you are uninformed.

I can criticize if I feel it's necessary without asking your permission. Also, the point of is thread is to have a discussion, i.e., to become more informed.

So far I'm seeing a lot of PC gamers being rude and condescending. It's uncalled for. Some have been open to discussionand imformative and that's what I'm looking for.

Rainbow Six: Raven Shield (tactical shooter, you won't make it trough the first mission on the highest difficulty. End of disscusion, no 'but'.)

Gothic 2: Gold (punishingly hard RPG)

Total War series (complex strategy game, impossible to finish without careful planning)

Counter Strike/Counter Strike Source (needs months and months on end to be decent)

Call Of Cthulhu (survival horror, incredibly hard after a wile, dense atmosphere)

STALKER (shooter, open world, incredibly hard and hard to get into)

Izometric RPGs (Fallout 1&2, Baldur's Gate 1&2, simply brutal on higher difficulty levels, near impossible)

Far Cry (towards the end is pretty much impossible, just impossible)

Unreal Tournament 2k4 on Godlike (unplayable)

Lucianu

. Glib is not an insulting adjective.

NEStorianPriest

[QUOTE="NEStorianPriest"]

. Glib is not an insulting adjective.

gmaster456

Ok really? Glib means easy, informal, offhand. It's not synonymous with being a douche. That wasn't what I meant, which is why I chose that word instead.

You can't change the definition of a word to suit your argument, or to try to make me look bad. It doesn't work.

I agree with your reasons regarding the disparity of difficulty between the two platforms. However, I think it is possible that one method of accomplishing a task can be more difficult, even if the methods and the tasks are compeltely different.

It seems to be that PC gamers think console game design is simple and cheap, and that PC game design is complex and deep. So, it is still possible that excelling at a simple cheap game could be more or less difficult than excelling at a complex and deep game. My supposition is that it is the former.

The reason being is that more PC games are geared to problem solving and management, which can be accomplished with a high intelligence. Many difficult console games are based on hand eye coordination, reflexes and speed.

A smart person with poor reflexes is going not going to do well with console games. Exlcuding the big FPS game players (read casual gamers) most adult gamers (adult gamers make up the largest demographic) are already intellegent. The hobby attracts intellegent people. So the deciding factor would be reflexes. Console games are rooted in arcade gameplay, and emphasize unforgiving design and quick reaction/decision making skills.

So that's my position. Given the opportunity, I think more console players would excel at PC games, whereas the converse would not be true.

So what are your thoughts?

NEStorianPriest

The problem with your theory is that it is basically based of nothing. How can you discredit the possibility that reflexes and speed isn't just something that requires practice and the will to go on? The same with complex games, like I said you just need to basically study a manual or tutorial and the will to continue. How can you reach the conclusion that a smart person (which you basically said, being smart comes by default with time) can't have reflexes but a person with reflexes can easily be smart? :?

From your posts I have to wonder, have you actually played one of those hardcore Simulators or Strategy games or a Roguelike RPG? Because it seems that you are completely lost from what you post.

Hmm, I see a bit of insulting going on here. Lets keep this civil guys :) Insulting has no place in debates and if you refrain to insulting it is generally a sign of weakness.

To answer one of your observations, that PC games hardly make it on hardest games of all time lists is simply because said games are generally unknown to the mainstream audience, and dont seem to get a lot of attention by the media, sometimes even forgotten. There are a truckload of hard games out there on PC and on consoles, though most hard games do not actually get a lot of media attention, which is why Demon's Souls and Fire Emblem are generally considered hard. Which is why the media calls games like Demon's Souls and Fire Emblem hard.

Mainstreamwise however, I have found PC games to be harder however. For example, WoW is one of the easiest MMOs out there, yet the raids there require excellent coordination between 10-25 people.

[QUOTE="NEStorianPriest"]

I agree with your reasons regarding the disparity of difficulty between the two platforms. However, I think it is possible that one method of accomplishing a task can be more difficult, even if the methods and the tasks are compeltely different.

It seems to be that PC gamers think console game design is simple and cheap, and that PC game design is complex and deep. So, it is still possible that excelling at a simple cheap game could be more or less difficult than excelling at a complex and deep game. My supposition is that it is the former.

The reason being is that more PC games are geared to problem solving and management, which can be accomplished with a high intelligence. Many difficult console games are based on hand eye coordination, reflexes and speed.

A smart person with poor reflexes is going not going to do well with console games. Exlcuding the big FPS game players (read casual gamers) most adult gamers (adult gamers make up the largest demographic) are already intellegent. The hobby attracts intellegent people. So the deciding factor would be reflexes. Console games are rooted in arcade gameplay, and emphasize unforgiving design and quick reaction/decision making skills.

So that's my position. Given the opportunity, I think more console players would excel at PC games, whereas the converse would not be true.

So what are your thoughts?

glez13

The problem with your theory is that it is basically based of nothing. How can you discredit the possibility that reflexes and speed isn't just something that requires practice and the will to go on? The same with complex games, like I said you just need to basically study a manual or tutorial and the will to continue. How can you reach the conclusion that a smart person (which you basically said, being smart comes by default with time) can't have reflexes but a person with reflexes can easily be smart? :?

From your posts I have to wonder, have you actually played one of those hardcore Simulators or Strategy games or a Roguelike RPG? Because it seems that you are completely lost from what you post.

I didn't sayi just comes to you over time. I don;t know how you got that. Point it out to me and I will correct it if necessary.

I said that most gamers are by default smart. Since console games cater to speed, quick reflexes and unforgiving gameplay, PC gamers would be at a disadvantage on consoles because most PC games are more about problem solving and management. Also, they have a different UI to adapt to, while many gamers are already familiar with a keyboard. So I feel that console gamers have an edge were they playing games on both platforms.

Oh and yes I played roguelikes on the PC. Not much strategy though, so I am very much open to opinions on those.

Most of those old console games that are so hard, are due to terrible game design. I was there, I played them, I know. Were you TC?millerlight89

Despite my meager post count, I am a veteran gamer. I am 34, worked in various rental and retail outlets growing up (played a lot of games for free) and have played literally hundreds upon hundreds of games. So yes, I was there. I also played PC steadily from Commodore to Windows 95 and after, onlysporadically. My opinion is that console games were always more demanding of my skills.

I didn't intellegence jsut comes to you over time. I don;t know how you got that. Point it out to me and I will correct it if necessary.

I said that most gamers are by default smart. Since console games cater to speed, quick reflexes and unforgiving gameplay, PC gamers would be at a disadvantage on consoles because most PC games are more about problem sovling and management. Also, they have a different UI to adapt to, while many gamers are already familiar with a keyboard. So I feel that console gamers have an edge were they playing games on both platforms.

NEStorianPriest

But, fact remains, you are uninformed regarding PC games because you haven't experienced any examples posted here. To have a valid basis of comparison, one must experience both. You haven't. And as a matter of fact, you are generalizing in a very unpleasent way. Most, if not all, PC gamers play a multitude of genres, not just RTS games.

Are you only comparing consoles gamers with RTS gamers?

Look at the screenshot thread, for a example of what people play (though still generalizing) and look at the countless forms of action games available. Counter Strike is a mear one example out of dozens.

And you still, have ignored every example.

[QUOTE="glez13"]

[QUOTE="NEStorianPriest"]

I agree with your reasons regarding the disparity of difficulty between the two platforms. However, I think it is possible that one method of accomplishing a task can be more difficult, even if the methods and the tasks are compeltely different.

It seems to be that PC gamers think console game design is simple and cheap, and that PC game design is complex and deep. So, it is still possible that excelling at a simple cheap game could be more or less difficult than excelling at a complex and deep game. My supposition is that it is the former.

The reason being is that more PC games are geared to problem solving and management, which can be accomplished with a high intelligence. Many difficult console games are based on hand eye coordination, reflexes and speed.

A smart person with poor reflexes is going not going to do well with console games. Exlcuding the big FPS game players (read casual gamers) most adult gamers (adult gamers make up the largest demographic) are already intellegent. The hobby attracts intellegent people. So the deciding factor would be reflexes. Console games are rooted in arcade gameplay, and emphasize unforgiving design and quick reaction/decision making skills.

So that's my position. Given the opportunity, I think more console players would excel at PC games, whereas the converse would not be true.

So what are your thoughts?

NEStorianPriest

The problem with your theory is that it is basically based of nothing. How can you discredit the possibility that reflexes and speed isn't just something that requires practice and the will to go on? The same with complex games, like I said you just need to basically study a manual or tutorial and the will to continue. How can you reach the conclusion that a smart person (which you basically said, being smart comes by default with time) can't have reflexes but a person with reflexes can easily be smart? :?

From your posts I have to wonder, have you actually played one of those hardcore Simulators or Strategy games or a Roguelike RPG? Because it seems that you are completely lost from what you post.

I didn't intellegence jsut comes to you over time. I don;t know how you got that. Point it out to me and I will correct it if necessary.

I said that most gamers are by default smart. Since console games cater to speed, quick reflexes and unforgiving gameplay, PC gamers would be at a disadvantage on consoles because most PC games are more about problem sovling and management. Also, they have a different UI to adapt to, while many gamers are already familiar with a keyboard. So I feel that console gamers have an edge were they playing games on both platforms.

Because I see you talk about speed and quick reflexes of console gamers and then you see a match of Quake 3(or Quake live)and it is way more insane that a console game could ever achive,especially with a controller.

Having familiarity with a mouse/key is one thing,mastering it though....it´s something completely diferent,much harder than to master a controller with so much less buttons.

[QUOTE="Lucianu"]

Call Of Cthulhu (survival horror, incredibly hard after a wile, dense atmosphere)

STALKER (shooter, open world, incredibly hard and hard to get into)

Far Cry (towards the end is pretty much impossible, just impossible)

Rougehunter

The first time I played Far Cry I couldn't finish the last level in a volcano(?) either. But years later I played it, and the game wasn't hard it was just the way I approached it the first time, passed the final level in one or two tries, don't remember correctly but for sure nothing hard.

Call of Cthulhu is a port from a XBOX game and it is not hard. Actually it starts harder because it starts as a real Action Adventure could get stuck with some puzzle or some missing element you have to search for, and it ends being easier because it ends up being a shooter with enough ammo.

STALKER is just hard at the beginning because you have nothing. After that it gets easier, it is almost like a JRPG, at some point you will be full of medkits, ammo and weapons that even you will have to drop stuff because you can't carry it all.

Those UT2K4 bots sure were hard. I remember that at some point the game was more popular offline than online according to surveys partially because of this.

I didn't sayi just comes to you over time. I don;t know how you got that. Point it out to me and I will correct it if necessary.

I said that most gamers are by default smart. Since console games cater to speed, quick reflexes and unforgiving gameplay, PC gamers would be at a disadvantage on consoles because most PC games are more about problem solving and management. Also, they have a different UI to adapt to, while many gamers are already familiar with a keyboard. So I feel that console gamers have an edge were they playing games on both platforms.

Oh and yes I played roguelikes on the PC. Not much strategy though, so I am very much open to opinions on those.

NEStorianPriest

You haven't responded to what I asked. How can you prove anything of this? How can you prove one is over the other? How can you negate something in one sentence and then claim what you negated in the next, how can people be smart by default and not come over time? If console gamers are so good with complex stuff why consoles lack simulators, strategy games, tactical games and full of action games and ACTION adventure? Many gamers are already familiar with a keyboard? LOL for typing maybe not for playing.

I really don't see what is so hard in practicing something as long as you have the will.

[QUOTE="NEStorianPriest"]

I didn't intellegence jsut comes to you over time. I don;t know how you got that. Point it out to me and I will correct it if necessary.

I said that most gamers are by default smart. Since console games cater to speed, quick reflexes and unforgiving gameplay, PC gamers would be at a disadvantage on consoles because most PC games are more about problem sovling and management. Also, they have a different UI to adapt to, while many gamers are already familiar with a keyboard. So I feel that console gamers have an edge were they playing games on both platforms.

Lucianu

But, fact remains, you are uninformed regarding PC games because you haven't experienced any examples posted here. To have a valid basis of comparison, one must experience both. You haven't. And as a matter of fact, you are generalizing in a very unpleasent way. Most, if not all, PC gamers play a multitude of genres, not just RTS games.

Are you only comparing consoles gamers with RTS gamers?

Look at the screenshot thread, for a example of what people play (though still generalizing) and look at the countless forms of action games available. Counter Strike is a mear one example out of dozens.

And you still, have ignored every example.

Um, if you don;t like how I post than ignore me. I'm not ignoring games. People have listed games. We're still having a discussion. Also, it's certainly okay for me to have an opinion about PC gaming. Plenty of PC gamers have opinions about console gamers that console gamers don't like. It's system wars. Please don't expect me to abide by your idea of what is the proper way to do things. I an only assume that is your problem because you keep attacking the way I'm doing things. I'm going to do what I do, and you do what you do. If you find it unpleasant, maybe don't participate.

Since I started this thread I plan to stick around and talk to people. Nothing is keeping you here, so don't feel obligated to stay if you don't like how it's going.

[QUOTE="NEStorianPriest"]

[QUOTE="glez13"]

The problem with your theory is that it is basically based of nothing. How can you discredit the possibility that reflexes and speed isn't just something that requires practice and the will to go on? The same with complex games, like I said you just need to basically study a manual or tutorial and the will to continue. How can you reach the conclusion that a smart person (which you basically said, being smart comes by default with time) can't have reflexes but a person with reflexes can easily be smart? :?

From your posts I have to wonder, have you actually played one of those hardcore Simulators or Strategy games or a Roguelike RPG? Because it seems that you are completely lost from what you post.

Arach666

I didn't intellegence jsut comes to you over time. I don;t know how you got that. Point it out to me and I will correct it if necessary.

I said that most gamers are by default smart. Since console games cater to speed, quick reflexes and unforgiving gameplay, PC gamers would be at a disadvantage on consoles because most PC games are more about problem sovling and management. Also, they have a different UI to adapt to, while many gamers are already familiar with a keyboard. So I feel that console gamers have an edge were they playing games on both platforms.

Because I see you talk about speed and quick reflexes of console gamers and then you see a match of Quake 3(or Quake live)and it is way more insane that a console game could ever achive,especially with a controller.

Having familiarity with a mouse/key is one thing,mastering it though....it´s something completely diferent,much harder than to master a controller with so much less buttons.

No I haven't played Quake 3 Arena, but I remember playing Doom Nightmare on PC and it was very hard. String of incoherent obscenities hard.I don't generally equate FPS to be the hardest of the hard, though, as there are so many options in most games to keep you going-checkpoints, saves, health, etc.

The kind of console games I;m talking about, like 8 bit era and some of the other's I mentioned, although not limited to them, give you a gameover screen frequently, and you actually have to start a whole level, or the whole game over. That to me is difficult. Mentally, you have to endure trial and error and have the desire to leanr how to do things just right in order to finish the game. Grueling, yet rewarding.

[QUOTE="NEStorianPriest"]

I didn't sayi just comes to you over time. I don;t know how you got that. Point it out to me and I will correct it if necessary.

I said that most gamers are by default smart. Since console games cater to speed, quick reflexes and unforgiving gameplay, PC gamers would be at a disadvantage on consoles because most PC games are more about problem solving and management. Also, they have a different UI to adapt to, while many gamers are already familiar with a keyboard. So I feel that console gamers have an edge were they playing games on both platforms.

Oh and yes I played roguelikes on the PC. Not much strategy though, so I am very much open to opinions on those.

glez13

You haven't responded to what I asked. How can you prove anything of this? How can you prove one is over the other? How can you negate something in one sentence and then claim what you negated in the next, how can people be smart by default and not come over time? If console gamers are so good with complex stuff why consoles lack simulators, strategy games, tactical games and full of action games and ACTION adventure? Many gamers are already familiar with a keyboard? LOL for typing maybe not for playing.

I really don't see what is so hard in practicing something as long as you have the will.

Without a doubt, I never said this. I don't even know what that means.

[QUOTE="glez13"]

[QUOTE="NEStorianPriest"]

I didn't sayi just comes to you over time. I don;t know how you got that. Point it out to me and I will correct it if necessary.

I said that most gamers are by default smart. Since console games cater to speed, quick reflexes and unforgiving gameplay, PC gamers would be at a disadvantage on consoles because most PC games are more about problem solving and management. Also, they have a different UI to adapt to, while many gamers are already familiar with a keyboard. So I feel that console gamers have an edge were they playing games on both platforms.

Oh and yes I played roguelikes on the PC. Not much strategy though, so I am very much open to opinions on those.

NEStorianPriest

You haven't responded to what I asked. How can you prove anything of this? How can you prove one is over the other? How can you negate something in one sentence and then claim what you negated in the next, how can people be smart by default and not come over time? If console gamers are so good with complex stuff why consoles lack simulators, strategy games, tactical games and full of action games and ACTION adventure? Many gamers are already familiar with a keyboard? LOL for typing maybe not for playing.

I really don't see what is so hard in practicing something as long as you have the will.

Without a doubt, I never said this. I don't even know what that means.

I bolded it up there on the quote, but it doesn't matter. What matters is the rest. Two posts and you just run around in circles because of non important stuff without answering what I'm asking. The worst part is that in other posts you tell people you are here to discuss stuff and learn and not trolling. I'm starting to think you are trolling.

- Total War series on hard difficulty

- Gothic 3

- Planscape Torment

- Stalker

- ARMA2

[QUOTE="NEStorianPriest"]

[QUOTE="glez13"]

You haven't responded to what I asked. How can you prove anything of this? How can you prove one is over the other? How can you negate something in one sentence and then claim what you negated in the next, how can people be smart by default and not come over time? If console gamers are so good with complex stuff why consoles lack simulators, strategy games, tactical games and full of action games and ACTION adventure? Many gamers are already familiar with a keyboard? LOL for typing maybe not for playing.

I really don't see what is so hard in practicing something as long as you have the will.

glez13

Without a doubt, I never said this. I don't even know what that means.

I bolded it up there on the quote, but it doesn't matter. What matters is the rest. Two posts and you just run around in circles because of non important stuff without answering what I'm asking. The worst part is that in other posts you tell people you are here to discuss stuff and learn and not trolling. I'm starting to think you are trolling.

I bolded it up there on the quote, but it doesn't matter. What matters is the rest. Two posts and you just run around in circles because of non important stuff without answering what I'm asking. The worst part is that in other posts you tell people you are here to discuss stuff and learn and not trolling. I'm starting to think you are trolling.

glez13

I think he believes that he's logic is not flawed, and everyone here is wrong. It's sad, if he's not a troll.

If he is a troll, damn, he got me.

The kind of console games I;m talking about, like 8 bit era and some of the other's I mentioned, although not limited to them, give you a gameover screen frequently, and you actually have to start a whole level, or the whole game over. That to me is difficult. Mentally, you have to endure trial and error and have the desire to leanr how to do things just right in order to finish the game. Grueling, yet rewarding.

NEStorianPriest

That´s exactly what I meant before. Those 8 bit era games were designed to be like that because so many of them were extremely small in length,so they had to compensate that with cheap deaths,super hard to reach jumps,etc.

That kind of design was based on the arcade model,to make people lose quickly to put in more coins,and while it´s understandable from a business design at the arcades,for the home consoles it´s just lame,like trying to create a fake longevity to the game(so many of them you could finish in less that 30 minutes,if it wasn´t for those cheap mechanics).

That,to me my friend,is cheap gameplay,not hard. If a game is hard and fair,I can understand it,but that era was just cheap game after cheap game. In fact,the reason why so many games from that era became so well know was because of that,not necessarily because they were good games.

The PC games I´ve mentioned before(and some others by others) aren´t all about cheap gameplay,but a serious, genuinely hard and complex gameplay,but most of the times...fair.

nuff said.

[QUOTE="NEStorianPriest"]

The kind of console games I;m talking about, like 8 bit era and some of the other's I mentioned, although not limited to them, give you a gameover screen frequently, and you actually have to start a whole level, or the whole game over. That to me is difficult. Mentally, you have to endure trial and error and have the desire to leanr how to do things just right in order to finish the game. Grueling, yet rewarding.

Arach666

That´s exactly what I meant before. Those 8 bit era games were designed to be like that because so many of them were extremely small in length,so they had to compensate that with cheap deaths,super hard to reach jumps,etc.

That kind of design was based on the arcade model,to make people lose quickly to put in more coins,and while it´s understandable from a business design at the arcades,for the home consoles it´s just lame,like trying to create a fake longevity to the game(so many of them you could finish in less that 30 minutes,if it wasn´t for those cheap mechanics).

That,to me my friend,is cheap gameplay,not hard. If a game is hard and fair,I can understand it,but that era was just cheap game after cheap game. In fact,the reason why so many games from that era became so well know was because of that,not necessarily because they were good games.

The PC games I´ve mentioned before(and some others by others) aren´t all about cheap gameplay,but a serious, genuinely hard and complex gameplay,but most of the times...fair.

Good point. A real hard game is a game that is challenging even in the default difficulty without relying on cheap mechanics. Those old console games were simply ports of arcade games that followed the trick you just described.