video games have gone soft difficulty wise. could the next wii zelda have the remote chance of me dying please?

As of September 7th, my life goes on a standstill as NHL 11 is released.

yes and no. it depends on whether or not your playing an actual game or a more modern 'gaming experience'. The Legend of Zelda series (while awesome as all get out) is all about the experience.

you want to play a game that will kill you, get one of the Mega Man re-releases.

i suppose you could say a lot of online games are very difficult considering the competition. i agree zelda is more about the experience, but it could be a bit more exciting if you had a chance of dying. how hard would it be to implement a hard mode? all you would need are mobs that have more hp/do more dmg.

my original statements were more about single player modes. for most it is pretty difficult to die on normal setting.

League of Evil

soooo much walljumping, plus the 3 star ratings for how fast you go will make you want to get into ninja mode when playing this.

has anyone else seen stuff about the nintendo 3DS? they sure are fucking great at creating gaming novelties. something like that brings my inner nerd to the foreground and forces me to tread lightly as to not induce a impulse buy.

I'm hearing that.

As of November my life goes on a standstill as Gran Turismo 5 is released.

actually implementing a hard mode is quite a bit more challenging and a lot more work than just more mobs that have more hp / cause more damage. the big challenge in balancing a game is finding the point where the average player recognizes the challenge to be overcome YET, still feels like they have a chance of overcoming it through their own skill. on one hand 'more' can achieve it, but at the same time it can easily break it.

consider this simple example. in Zelda you start with 3 hearts, so you can basically take 5 hits before you die without healing. for this example lets say an average mob is 3 monsters that take 2 hits a piece to die. in this case the most efficient way through combat involves landing 6 hits while avoiding 14. now if we just make it harder by jacking up the monster stats, let's bring up the average mob damage to a full heart and 3 hits to die. now you need to land 9 hits, and avoid 18, and if they do double damage you can only be hit twice before you risk death.

so... hit 6 avoid 14 and absorb up to 5 (so avoid as little as 9), or hit 9 avoid 18 and absorb up to 2 (which still absolutely forces you to avoid 16). hardly the same level of challenge or balance anymore for what is essentially the same mob. it could be done, but would you get the feeling that you beat the mob because of skill or because of a lucky fluke?

a well designed game NEVER relies on a player's luck to win. another example... one of the challenges in Starcraft2 is to nuke X amount of enemy units within 90 seconds using a specific number of nukes. i got gold on that challenge by complete chance, there were 20 seconds left on the timer and i had like 3 nukes left so i just dropped them wherever. i have NO IDEA what those first 2 randomly splattered but it was enough to get the trophy. sense of accomplishment? not exactly. i just got lucky that a horde likely happened to patrol right into the path of a nuke.


as for single player modes and the 'normal' setting, well... if it has a difficulty set to normal then it's an option than can be changed and your complaint is actually entirely your own fault. switch that option already :p:

it is all fairly irrelevant personally anyways. i have probably beat 3 games in the past 5 years(single player).

it's all good, i studied video games on a professional level and can't help going into too much detail on certain aspects of them.