Official Nintendo Magazine

Log in to access exclusive Nintendo content, win prizes and post on our forums. Not a member yet? Join for free

Are old games too hard?

Chris Rooke gives his opinion

By now, many of you will have had a few weeks to play the NES games released on the 3DS as part of the Ambassador Program, or perhaps you've bought a few of the old Game Boy games from the eShop. More still will probably have downloaded an older game on the Wii's Virtual Console.

Click to view larger image

While the majority of gamers seem to be very happy that there is an option to download retro games, yet when the old NES games were made available for download on 3DS, the comments on this website or tweets in my Twitter stream quickly turned from joy to frustration as many people struggled to get to grips with the difficulty level on games such as The Legend Of Zelda or Zelda 2.

This obviously leads to an interesting question: are older games too difficult? Well, I would argue that they aren't. After all, and those games were all very popular when they were originally released so people must have enjoyed and completed them.

Most of them have managed to remain great fun and entertaining, despite the relatively simplistic controls or graphics.

No, I'd argue that the question is: are modern games too easy?

Well, the answer is yes and no. The games released today are certainly easier than the retro titles.

One reason for this is due to technological enhancements: save points and save files undoubtedly make things easier and then there is the addition of things like the Super Guide in New Super Mario Bros Wii.

Click to view larger image
I don't think that there can be any doubt that these things have made newer games a good bit easier.

Of course, game design has also been changed and has affected the difficulty level. Gone are the days in Zelda when you would have literally no idea where you were meant to go or what you were meant to do next.

The same goes for Metroid, where you also used to be also take a pretty brutal beating quite quickly from just a small number of enemies. And just remember having to play amany retro games on a screen that didn't have a backlight!

Click to view larger image
So yes, games are most certainly easier now. But is that a bad thing?

I'm sure that if games were more difficult - especially if they'd stayed at the NES-era level of difficulty - that gaming wouldn't be as popular as it is today.

The games industry is now gigantic, and that's because gaming has been becoming more popular. That wouldn't have happened if the majority of people couldn't play the games!

So the accessibility factor is certainly a huge part in the lowering of the difficulty bar. And I'm not talking about the Wii Sports or Wii Play type of accessibility. Games such as Mario Kart are now very popular because nearly anyone and their parents can join in.

I know that some readers will think that this shouldn't be the case and that there should still be difficult games for the more "hardcore" gamers. Those who think like this should check out some recent offerings on WiiWare such as Kyotokei and EscapeVektor, both of which offer are challenging.

Previous 1 2 Next page

Comments

47 comments so far...
Add a comment

  1. Mello Saturday 8th Oct 2011 at 18:27

    For me it's just a case of what was impressive at the time is different from now. While today it's confusing, unintuitive and difficult, the original Zelda would have been absolutely mind blowing at the time, given the level of sophistication of most games during that period.

    By this point, there have been many improvements made to games, both subtle and major, that makes it kind of harsh to judge many old games for the way they are, but imo I think it's fair for a modern gamer to think "I can happily play Links Awakening or Link To The Past but completely ignore the antiquated NES ones". Zelda stands up very well compared to a lot of RPGs of the time, but for me I still needed to use an annotated map when I played it on the Virtual Console, and even though it's fairly easy to follow a map (or an FAQ for one of the bits that aren't intuitive) for me that totally destroys a game and actually makes it less fun than working (since you're not being paid, and you're actually using up your free time). Playing without a map would be even more hellish to me, so good luck to anyone who enjoys that type of stuff, but for me those Zelda games are just lumps of fat clogging up the arteries of my 3DS and Wii SD cards. :P

    For me, it's the more simple games like Super Mario Bros, Castlevania, Duck Hunt, Tetris etc that define the best of NES era stuff. The more elaborate games like Metroid and Zelda are a bit too much work to be fun for me, particularly since I never played them at the time, and even the SNES incarnations of those games were too much for me at the time and I just got lost fairly quickly in both. :oops:

  2. ZeldaKing Saturday 8th Oct 2011 at 18:52

    honestly i feel like some old NES games are like a cross word with no clues
    For example on TLOZ i run around for what seems lie ever for a cave / dungeon / something and all of my efforts seem fruitless and i'll end up getting a game over.
    and some games eg lego harry potter isn't that difficult (i know it isn't supposed to be)

    Both of these games are still very good games and most games have difficulty setting these days so games being easy isn't a problem

    I'm awful at the old super mario games but i still think they're fun.

    Edit* also some games nowadays are being criticised for being too difficult
    eg.The World Ends With You Was criticised for it's battle system being too difficult

  3. GuitarHero Saturday 8th Oct 2011 at 19:03

    Nope, new games are too easy.

  4. falconpunch94 Saturday 8th Oct 2011 at 19:24

    Nope, the games of today just hold our hand too much.

  5. Yirba Saturday 8th Oct 2011 at 19:27

    Older games are generally more difficult, but they're also shorter, so in theory you should clear both older games and newer games in about the same time.

  6. Flag Captured Saturday 8th Oct 2011 at 19:30

    I disagree. I think that games are just as hard, but are just more accessible and more fluid to play.
    To get what I mean, just play the original Super Mario Bros and then play New Super Mario Bros. It's hardly a big change, but NSMB is tweaked to be more fluid to play, and I think that's the only reason they're more difficult.
    That, and you're not forced to discover everything yourself now. Game menus and informational clips of speech give you a better idea of what's going off than saying "You're a plumber. You are Here. Go." or "Here's a sword and a tunic. Explore."
    You get tutorials now, and it's just giving a better explanation of what's going on rather than actually being more difficult.
    Look at Super Meat Boy and Dark Souls, for example. Incredibly tough games.

  7. ledreppe Saturday 8th Oct 2011 at 19:37

    Older games can be more difficult than new ones, but I've found that some newer games can be more difficult than some easier older ones, it just depends on the game.

  8. Beyond Birthday Saturday 8th Oct 2011 at 19:37

    Modern games as a whole are way too easy. NSMB in particular is a joke compared to its predecessors.

  9. zelda97 Saturday 8th Oct 2011 at 19:46

    old games are not to hard it's just that we get used to playing easy games and when we do this are caperbility for other older games are bad. not just this but were not used to the controls. e.g when i played pirates of the caribean dead mans chest on the ds for the first time i couldn't get used to x being the jump while b was kick... "simples."

  10. Mushrule Saturday 8th Oct 2011 at 19:49

    I guess it depends on the game.
    I agree that a lot of older games are much harder such as LOZ and some Mario games, but I think that makes it more worthwhile and rewarding. Most of the Zelda games are challeging anyway which is a good thing as it makes them more fun and interesting, where as some games are predictable and easy.
    Games such as Super Mario Galaxy are really good and fun because they are lengthy and offer some challenging levels, so I wouldn't say all recent games are too easy, but you can tell they are much easier than they used to be, e.g if you compare SM64 to SMG or Mario Bros. (1) to New Super Mario Bros.

  11. K-tet Saturday 8th Oct 2011 at 19:51

    Does it matter? If a game is difficult, but enthralling, then it's a good game. Most games nowadays don't have a good enough difficulty curve.

    Actually, most games nowadays are rehashes of the same formula. I'd rather play the older games.

    One last point: Rare NES games were MUCH harder than The Legend of Zelda. Solar Jetman anyone?

  12. falconpunch94 Saturday 8th Oct 2011 at 19:52

    Game menus and informational clips of speech give you a better idea of what's going off than saying "You're a plumber. You are Here. Go." or "Here's a sword and a tunic. Explore."


    I get what your saying but most of the explanation was in the game manuals, for example Metroid NES has the backstory in the manual and tells you to go to the three hideouts, theres even a diagram/map to show you where they are and a few pages explaining each item and it's abilities. The Legend of Zelda one tells you screen by screen how to get to the first few dungeons are and gives you a map also. Obviously most people don't know that since it's kind of rare to find the instruction booklets :(

  13. zapper01 Saturday 8th Oct 2011 at 20:41

    No, modern games are not too easy. Most people would rather play an easy game than a hard one, it's hard to enjoy something if you have to do it again and again.

  14. Samster296 Saturday 8th Oct 2011 at 20:46

    Old games are what made the gaming industry today. I wouldn't say that they are hard. They just get harder the farther you get into the game. For example Super Mario Bros and Mario Bros 3.

  15. Purplekuribo Saturday 8th Oct 2011 at 20:57

    For many the NES games were confusing and difficult beyond the point of being fun. Of course, there were still a lot of people who did enjoy it and could cope with it just fine. A great deal of modern games have been made more accessable, not neccesarily easier. By that I mean that people can choose how difficult they want the game to be, they can choose to ignore the super guides or even the option to save if they want. Easter eggs can be found, side quests completed etc.

    There are still loads of modern games that have the potential to provide a massive challenge to the old school gamers but can be made easier for people who find it difficult or confusing so everyone finds them fun. I personally prefer modern games, some of them are too easy but then some NES games could be too. At least now I won't be throwing my controller about over tiny things.

  16. hotswipe Saturday 8th Oct 2011 at 21:29

    back in the day i used to play the games with no problems.
    i go back on them now and die soooo many times!!

    i downloaded streets of rage on the Wii, when i had it on the MegaDrive i used to complete it without using a continue, i couldnt even get past the 1st level without using the majority of my lives on the Wii :x

  17. A.B.Lexis Saturday 8th Oct 2011 at 22:29

    I don't think that old games are too difficult, rather, we've become to used to modern day gaming. It's made easier so that people won't complain. When Catherine by Atlus in Japan, a number of people complain about the difficulty of the game being "too hardcore", and thus released a patch to tone down the difficulty.
    The article:
    http://www.sankakucomplex.com/2011/02/20/atlus-well-make-catherine-easier-for-you/ The website is NSFW, enter at own risk.

    If I bought a game, and found that it was too difficult for me to play, I'd moan to my friends and tell them not to buy it, and trade in the game for something else, and I know a canny few people that do this.

    Nowadays, people just tend to plow through a game, if they're on Xbox, PS3 or on Steam, then it's played only for achievement value.
    Overall, I want games to be harder. I want a challenge that will make me stop and think of how to proceed. Games like Super Meat Boy and I Wanna Be the Guy do provide this difficulty, but that just tends to lead to many a rage. I say, bring back hard games!

  18. PuAl Sunday 9th Oct 2011 at 00:58

    I think there's a lot to be said for both the new 'Here's a checkpoint every five minutes. Also, here's your objective in six feet tall neon letters, if you get hurt just hide behind this rock and you'll be fine.' and the old 'This character is you. Work the rest out yourself, and don't die all over my carpet, moron.' approach. It all depends upon what you want to get from your games. Something like The Legend of Zelda or Metroid couldn't deliver a hugely cinematic story driven experience, so instead they opted for what is still one of gaming's greatest virtues - the ability to immerse the player in the thrill of discovery, to drop them in a new world and let them explore. In many ways, games like the Elder Scrolls series are still taking that approach today. Sure, they're not as unforgiving as Zelda was (in that you only get sent back as far as your last save when you die), but they're still pretty solid in instances where you go wandering off in the wrong direction within 5 minutes of starting the game and get utterly savaged by the native fauna. This happened more in Morrowind than Oblivion, but even Oblivion occasionally set a bear on me when I was still pretty low level.

    The less difficult modern games (unless you ramp the difficulty up to max, in which case modern games can actually be harder than older games, mainly because often the harder difficulties aren't really balanced in a manner that rewards progression well enough) have their place in that they get to tell a story in a much more visual way, and the realisation of the worlds they invite the player into is much more vivid and sophisticated. When the sprawling fantasy world genuinely feels real, then the challenge of being able to die in almost every location isn't really necessary to keep the player interested - the challenge can be spread out more, as the exploration in between encounters is more compelling.

    And, because it's nearly 2am and I'm starting to doze off a little, I'll simply end with etc.

  19. Hisoka Sunday 9th Oct 2011 at 01:17

    As has been said, there's too much handholding in today's games.

    Don't you think it's pretty bad that the only challenging games you could come up with were a bullet hell game and a basic 2D puzzle game.

    Funny you should mention brawl's competitive play too, considering that game alienated a lot of it's competitive players by including tripping and having worse controls.

  20. The_BAAD_Man Sunday 9th Oct 2011 at 01:42

    I also think that older games were more challenging to increase their longevity. The games were relatively "short" but with the difficulty cranked, the games felt like a far greater challenge and would last longer.

  21. RaidingRaichu Sunday 9th Oct 2011 at 06:39

    Yes, they are considerably easier now but is that bad? It may be allowing Casual Gamers into experiencing classics after playing the newest instalment. I for one have never completed the original Zelda despite owning it on my Wii, 3DS and NES! I enjoy by time with it, but always end up dead. But bearing in mind how far technology has come our classics are not easy to play, neither in some cases are they enjoyable as they once were but thanks to Nintendo we can always go back to the roots and see how an 8-bit game evolved into the touch screen epics which are Phantom Hourglass and Spirit Tracks and Skyward Sword which slowly stalks my social life, ready to pounce.

  22. Toastie Sunday 9th Oct 2011 at 07:06

    I think it's more that older games had to be difficult, otherwise they'd be boring. Now that games are more advanced and can have lots of gameplay features to spice things up they don't have to worry about that any more.

  23. Mahzes Sunday 9th Oct 2011 at 08:25

    As said in the article, I think in the case of Zelda, it's not so much 'difficulty' as it is a lack of intuitiveness and design polish. The fact you can be left wandering with no clue as to where you have to go is a bit frustrating. Also, the dungeon design is relatively basic, and most of the difficulty comes not from puzzles but being killed by enemies instead.

    If old games had the polish and direction that they did today, they'd be far too short. In most cases they needed to compensate for lack of length with difficulty.

  24. Turboman Sunday 9th Oct 2011 at 09:10

    I like games that are so easy that you coould complete them with your eyes closed. But then I like gamesto challenge myself, and if you really want a tough game nowadays there always some (DKCR e.c.t.)

  25. kylewithaface Sunday 9th Oct 2011 at 14:08

    i feel that if i knew what it was that i was supposed to do in old games then they would be a lot eaasier and better

  26. lrwr14 Sunday 9th Oct 2011 at 14:29

    I think the question should be
    "Are games nowadays to easy?"

    lol. I'm still having problems completing Super mario bros. Can't seem to do world 8 >_< , But I prefer a game when it's hard. Makes completing it feel like you have actually accomplished something, which is something a lot of modern games lack.

  27. mudders Sunday 9th Oct 2011 at 15:15

    Well, I did beat the original Legend of Zelda in 1 hour...

  28. Cazy008 Sunday 9th Oct 2011 at 15:39

    I can't stand games like zelda where you never know where to go or what to do next. This kind of 'challenge' is just a cheap way of extending play time. Games are meant to be fun, it's no good if you're searching for that fun for 5hours game time.

  29. zelda97 Sunday 9th Oct 2011 at 15:55

    back in the day i used to play the games with no problems.
    i go back on them now and die soooo many times!!

    i downloaded streets of rage on the Wii, when i had it on the MegaDrive i used to complete it without using a continue, i couldnt even get past the 1st level without using the majority of my lives on the Wii :x

    old games are not to hard it's just that we get used to playing easy games and when we do this are caperbility for other older games are bad. not just this but were not used to the controls. e.g when i played pirates of the caribean dead mans chest on the ds for the first time i couldn't get used to x being the jump while b was kick... "simples."

  30. tomutwit Sunday 9th Oct 2011 at 18:01

    I hate retro games end of story.

  31. Waldy565 Sunday 9th Oct 2011 at 18:09

    definetley agree. while some of us do want hardcore games, nintendo IS a family-orientated gaming company, therefore you're not gonna get the guts and glory of Sony's and Microsoft's more violent games, but that's what makes nintendo king, the RANGE of games avaliable, not too mention the stress-relief we get from this as we don't rage at violent games :P

  32. reeesy Monday 10th Oct 2011 at 09:07

    I wouldn't say that older games are too hard. But at the same time i wouldn't say that modern games are too easy. They are just different. Game design has changed significantly over the years so it's just a different approach.
    Modern games tend to be much more story driven. The long stories generally keep you on a set path through the game so it's difficult to stray off from the main story, in a sense you are guided through the game by the game itself.

    Older games were shorter and gave you a set amount of lives, where as modern games you can die over and over. Imagine how frustrating it would be playing through a 30hr+ Zelda game or Mass Effect game and running out of lives right at the end... so in that sense the modern games can seem easier.

  33. masamune Monday 10th Oct 2011 at 12:27

    I hate retro games end of story.

    lol, that was funny

    ...

    oh

    care to elaborate?

  34. justthetrick.tm Monday 10th Oct 2011 at 12:35

    Welcome to the new society of gamers that don't like a challenge, that don't want to perfect the moves and not receive a high level of satisfaction when they finally beat that last boss...

    Sure, I get frustrated with a game sometimes when I can't get past a bit. But persistence and using the old grey matter gets me through it and I feel great for doing it. Sometimes I do just like to play a game so I can enjoy the story and not be too challenged, other times I crave the challenge.

    The trouble with old games, in comparison to new games the pay off for beating a challenge isn't so apparent or met with little fanfare, so it could be deemed less rewarding. Whereas, back in the day (ahh, "the day") overcoming the challenge was reward enough. I remember finishing Zelda the first time and I was so pleased with myself for having found all the dungeons, completed the puzzles and then kicked Gannon's butt. I then set about trying the second, harder quest. My goodness that was tough but I managed it too. I was 9.

  35. zapper01 Monday 10th Oct 2011 at 15:02

    But I prefer a game when it's hard. Makes completing it feel like you have actually accomplished something, which is something a lot of modern games lack.


    Modern games don't need difficulty to feel rewarding, they can give you extra modes and unlockables, while old games can just say "well done" and that's it.

  36. Hisoka Monday 10th Oct 2011 at 16:18

    Welcome to the new society of gamers that don't like a challenge, that don't want to perfect the moves and not receive a high level of satisfaction when they finally beat that last boss...

    Sure, I get frustrated with a game sometimes when I can't get past a bit. But persistence and using the old grey matter gets me through it and I feel great for doing it. Sometimes I do just like to play a game so I can enjoy the story and not be too challenged, other times I crave the challenge.

    The trouble with old games, in comparison to new games the pay off for beating a challenge isn't so apparent or met with little fanfare, so it could be deemed less rewarding. Whereas, back in the day (ahh, "the day") overcoming the challenge was reward enough. I remember finishing Zelda the first time and I was so pleased with myself for having found all the dungeons, completed the puzzles and then kicked Gannon's butt. I then set about trying the second, harder quest. My goodness that was tough but I managed it too. I was 9.

    You pretty much said what I wanted to say.

    Also I'm going to quote myself from another thread on difficulty and accessibility to new players-

    (being hard) doesn't necessarily mean it will put off those new to the franchise. People assume difficulty is the barrier to new players. When you make the difficulty curve right and make it so people can learn how to play effectively however, you don't need to make the game stupidly easy.
    If more people figured this out, games wouldn't have to be 'streamlined' or 'dumbed down', they would just need to be planned out better. A certain amount of difficulty is needed to make the game truly rewarding, and to keep suspense.

  37. light_goose Monday 10th Oct 2011 at 16:50

    I downloaded Mario which isn't acaully too hard but I haven't finished it yet because you need to do it all in one go ang there's literally no way to avoid every water level and I always die so many times in them. Legend of Zelda is another story however. Thet odn't even tell you where to go!! The reason I play Legend of Zelda is because when I've saved a place the people in the place worship me basically but now I can't even get to the place. It's like there's no plot! Mabye I'm just too young to appriciate it's true beauty or something because to me it feels pretty boring.

  38. masamune Monday 10th Oct 2011 at 16:59

    original Zelda is all about exploration - it's very different from newer Zeldas which, like most modern games, guide you by the hand. though i'd suggest playing it with a guide nowadays

  39. zapper01 Monday 10th Oct 2011 at 18:01

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DWHHlnbZOYQ&feature=related
    Look around for a die-hard retro gamer. They probably grew up with those games, right? Now find someone who hates them. They probably didn't grow up with them. What I'm saying is that because people grew up with these games, they find it impossible to compare them to modern games and see the very obvious flaws in them. They're trying to impress you by being difficult, but that's only because in reality they're two hours long, extremely repetitive and broken. Look at megaman for example. It's incredibly short. Not only that, but it is full of flaws, Enemies respawn whenever they move offscreen, which is just really stupid and unfair. The enemies feel like they should be in another game because they're not suited to megaman's abilities at all.

  40. lrwr14 Monday 10th Oct 2011 at 18:02

    But I prefer a game when it's hard. Makes completing it feel like you have actually accomplished something, which is something a lot of modern games lack.


    Modern games don't need difficulty to feel rewarding, they can give you extra modes and unlockables, while old games can just say "well done" and that's it.

    But then that means you play games just to unlock something which makes the game longer not fun, when they could have spent the time making the game harder. I would have a "well done" over extras any day, that's why I'm playing Dark Souls-I actually feel like I've accomplished something, when after dying 10 times on one boss or trying to get past a certain area, I finally do it.

  41. zapper01 Monday 10th Oct 2011 at 20:21

    But then that means you play games just to unlock something which makes the game longer not fun, when they could have spent the time making the game harder. I would have a "well done" over extras any day, that's why I'm playing Dark Souls-I actually feel like I've accomplished something, when after dying 10 times on one boss or trying to get past a certain area, I finally do it.


    I don't get your point. I'd much rather have developers spending time making the game good than making it hard. The unlockables are fun and give you a reason to play the game. Take fighting games for example. I'm not going to try to finish arcade mode on a fighting game just for it to say "well done" but if I unloc an extra character for it I'll try harder. Difficulty is not fun.

  42. Hisoka Monday 10th Oct 2011 at 20:42

    It's true enough that difficulty =/= fun, but at the same time easiness =/= fun.
    Difficulty isn't always about how often you die, and it's not usually a bad thing unless the level design is seriously broken.
    People often whine about how old games are too difficult, poorly made (even though they were amazing at the time), and only use difficulty as a means of lengthening a game out so that it lasts long enough to make you see past the fact that it's short and badly made.
    But hang on a minute- by making games difficult and making you think about what you're doing in the game (rather than hitting a few buttons and then winning like most games these days), beating the game feels better and is more of an achievement. Difficulty being in there to compensate for the limitations of hardware wasn't always a bad thing. Sure, there were a lot of games where dying was just unfair, but when you died and it was your fault you tried again and felt better by learning from your mistakes.

    There are many games that I enjoy that could be considered easy, but I understand well that difficulty doesn't make a game fun nor make it annoying. However, you tend to get a deeper experience out of a game by using your brain and actually challenging yourself to accomplish your goals.

  43. shuggybarr Wednesday 12th Oct 2011 at 10:39

    I remember the original GTA on PC. No saves at all. Complete a city or start again.

    Loved it.

    Admittedly at 43 I don't have the time or patience these days but in my 20s that game kept me up all night.

    It's not that old games are too difficult, remember, this was back in the day with 4 channels on TV and no Internet. There was hee-haw to do but hone your skills on the games.

    That's why you will never get a game without a save point today - commercial suicide!!!!!

    That's my 2p worth

    Shug

  44. zwii01 Wednesday 12th Oct 2011 at 21:04

    I agree that a game does not necessarily have to be hard to be fun, I also think that modern games in relation to older games are harder but in terms of difficulty it depends on what you grew up with and your expectations (my first game was Ecco the Dolphin on the Sega Mega drive at age 5, so I guess I started at the deep end...sorry.)

    Personally I love hard games that challenge you but I understand that certain gamers might not enjoy such difficulty in a game, which I think leaves developers an interesting dilemma; how to make a game that can please gamers who like real challenges and gamers who want to pick up and play games easily.

    As mentioned above the platform that a game was made on, limited design polish which is why older games ended up being the way they are (lack of saves being a key point) but with new tech games could grow harder in different ways (such as collecting all items and doing side quests such as Galaxy's Purple coins).

    Therefore I think older games are difficult in a cruel way (Game Over meant game over back then!) and newer games are difficult in a creative way (the aforementioned purple coins).

  45. TheMarioMan997 Sunday 16th Oct 2011 at 02:03

    true say that gaming difficulty has drastically been affected by today's technology. near enough all of the games released in the 5th generation of videogaming depend on the online features or were just simply built to be online. for example, Call of duty is one of the worst games in history - without the online. seriously do you really think people enjoy campaign more than the online? third-dimensional videogames are a lot less of a challenge aswell. A game like super mario galaxy - in my opinion - was just a little bit too easy. sure it packed a bit of a challenge towards the end but while playing as luigi and sweeping through the levels to get to grandmaster galaxy just feels like a chore. games should pack a hard challenge and for this reason is why i think 2-D platformers are much harder. They were much more basic, played on a classic joypad, featured a boss and where a lot more strategic. you would get an enemy, stomp its head and doing so would leave you toe-to-toe with another enemy however knocking it out would make it chase you and corner you. whereas today, you can do a huge blast, destroy everything in sight and happily skip along the level and 2-D games would look like a battlefield. Not many producers are attempting to fix this problem only focussing on enjoying the game and this is what frustrates me because you want to cover all aspects of the game and on the last level or boss, i think it should be near uncompletable so once you win you really feel like you have achieved something important. Furthermore, where have high scores disappeared to? enemies you would find in a game today in a game today would hinder you and you can easily walk or jump over them. back in the day, stomping one would give you 100 points depending on which enemy you defeated. I find that the first boss battle in the game is just as easy as the last one, in metroid you would find yourself shooting at a 8 ft cyber dragon and it would eventually die. in the end you would be battling something 10 times bigger and 10 times stronger and that would be your average goomba of level 1 in the last world of metroid and the last battle i remember can take a whole gaming session.
    The point i am trying to make here is that no game compaines are noticing what is happening to the videogame industry. i am a real serious die-hard mario/nintendo fan and with the looks of mario 3D land it looks unrealistically good, but shigeru miyamoto confirmed it does not get really hard until world 8. so mark me if i am wrong but by the sounds of it the penultimate world (7) is about as easy as world 1? the tanooki suit has lost its flying ability but can still flutter, so does that mean that by being granted an assisted jumping ability the game is made easier or its just a bonus and makes mario look cute? this compares to super mario bros 3 because it was as hard as nails and did not feature any save files and the raccoon suit was necessary to the game or it could lead to a secret. Also what is with the cheats nowadays? in super mario bros wii you can find a secret that leads from world 1 to world 5. in world five you would find a secret to world 8 and then you would finish the game. so where is the achievment? it is not hard to find a secret in world 1 and i will say it is a bit tricky in world 8 but where is the love? if all the people want to do is beat the game so they can see the ending, why not go onto youtube and hold a controller in your hand type in the final battle and pretend you did it yourself? im being serious you could save yourself a lot of money. but the guts inbetween the first and last world is where the magic is made and this is wasted on silly things like making sure you get loads of bonuses but it could be raw videogaming.
    i know i am not speaking alone in this and i know there are a lot of the same types of gamers like me but i think i have found a conclusion; is the gaming industry becoming so big it can escape with silly games and charge 40 worth of effortlessness and laugh at the money they earn? i think the aim is money now. games like donkey kong country, zelda, street fighter they were all building up to become like this and have the best games on the market. but now do they really have an aim? just to have the best selling console on the market does not make it the best thing out there. i know there are a lot of gamers like me and we i know we can all agree that a game we find today is simply efortless.

  46. masamune Sunday 16th Oct 2011 at 08:45

    near enough all of the games released in the 5th generation of videogaming depend on the online features or were just simply built to be online.

    stopped reading here, then i noticed some generic CoD hate, so thought i'd continue

    for example, Call of duty is one of the worst games in history - without the online. seriously do you really think people enjoy campaign more than the online?

    explain why Call of Duty is bad please. i've never played the games extensively, so i'd like to hear opinions

    The point i am trying to make here is that no game compaines are noticing what is happening to the videogame industry.

    someone hasn't heard of CAVE

    is the gaming industry becoming so big it can escape with silly games and charge 40 worth of effortlessness and laugh at the money they earn? i think the aim is money now.

    the aim's always been money. it's just that nowadays developers know that it's easy and quickly playable stuff that people buy so they pump that out. and let's not forget that the arcade has declined severely, much lessening the influence it had over console gaming

  47. Gaebora Tuesday 18th Oct 2011 at 19:13

    I think games back in the day are harder for the wrong reasons...wasn't puzzles that got me but tons of enemies (Super Probotector for example) and other games you didn't have a clue where to go or what to do,of course you don't want too a linear title but after 3 hours walking around kind of got boring.
    Don't get me wrong Starfox,Mario Kart,SMW, etc are great games but I prefer games from the N64 onwards.
    But games are like films and music,we all have different opinions.
    But take in to account how we control the game has improved lots.I think this might have something to do with it and also when I started gaming it really was a nerdy,weird,stay at home thing to do and not as accepted and mainstream as it is now,so designers have to cater for younger players who might not have the skills to complete a 'tough' Mario or Zelda...in all I think Nintendo gets this hard balance right.
    I still think the Water Temple in OOT is one of the best and hardest levels in any game.

Register or log in to commment
Add a comment
Nintendo Co., Ltd. is the owner of certain copyright which subsists and trade marks and other intellectual property rights in certain content, characters, artwork, logos, scripts and representations used in this publication. All rights are expressly recognised and they are used by Future Publishing Limited under licence © 2006 Nintendo Co., Ltd. All rights reserved. "Nintendo", "International Nintendo Licensed Product" "Nintendo DS", "Nintendo DS Lite", "Nintendo DSi", "Nintendo 3DS", "Nintendo DSi XL", "Nintendo 3DS XL", "Wii" and "Wii U" and the associated logos are the trademarks of Nintendo Co. Ltd. All rights reserved.