Gaming Games, hard easy etc.

[spy46]

Ok, so looking back at the games i have played over the years, one thing seams to keep coming to my mind.

Exactly why is easy setting, so easy, and why is hard, so hard?

In games like Halo 1&2 i noticed that what made the game hard or easy, was the weapons and shields would change.(stats)

Like using a sword in a sneak attack should mean a kill right?

well the thing is that the weapons would get a power down or the AI would get a power up, throwing a grenade that should kill all 5 guys, only annoyes them, might kill one.

Now to me, i would think that if a game was to truly be balanced in the right ways for setting, that the weapons and or stats of the AI should remain the same, but the AI level of how smart it is should actually be what is changed to make the game hard or easy.

Any one got any thing to say on this?

[Desbreko]

[color=#4B0082]It can depend on the type of game, really. In a FPS like Halo, or a platform shooter like 2D Metroid, making enemies stronger can work well in increasing the difficulty. In something like a fighting game, however, better AI rather than cheap advantages is definitely preferable.

A problem, though, is that due to good AI programming being more complex (read: more expensive) to produce than simply tweaking some stats, a lot of games resort to giving the enemies advantages in order to increase difficulty.[/color]

[Boo]

[size=1]I know that in Call of Duty 2, they increase the AI when you play a more difficult level. This is to maintain realism (it wouldn't be really realistic if you'd perforate someone in half, who'd then continue running), but still being able to make it harder on the player. Works for me. Besides, I've never liked those enemies in games that are way stronger than you. :([/size]

[spy46]

Well i have played a few games that are all different in the settings and stats that they use, such as. RTS, FPS, RPG and .... what ever other game types.

As for the cost of making an AI smarter, it would also depend on how smart they are in the first place, look at halo 1, a NPC could be looking right at a glowing sword coming right at him, hes not going to shoot at it, he is just going to look at it and watch as it cuts his head off.:animeangr

But in halo 2, they see the sword, call it out and throw grenades and empty clips towards what ever might be holding that sword.

To make the AI smarter, let them see where that plasma grenade came from and know that some one over there threw it at them.:animeswea :p

In some RTS games i have played, i would have a ..... rocket guy that should be able to take out that tank in 2 shots, according to his stats he kills tanks right?
No, that tank fires a few time and he be dead :animeangr (yes in RL he would be)

I have taken a small intro course of video game programing, nothing too big, it was only for about a month, but i know that its not hard to program a small timing trigger for some events to happen more often than others, such as the AI building a super weapon as soon as it can VS uping the stats of units that should be walked over by what ever you would have used.

[LostProphet]

[quote name='spy46']

In some RTS games i have played, i would have a ..... rocket guy that should be able to take out that tank in 2 shots, according to his stats he kills tanks right?
No, that tank fires a few time and he be dead :animeangr (yes in RL he would be)[/QUOTE]


Speaking of RTS Games.....if you're looking for good AI, look at World In Conflict. I beta tested it, and have run through the Demo. Probably the best RTS I've played....and I'm a C&C Fan

[spy46]

Hey i loved every CnC game that was made (all but generals)

But again, my point is that in a FPS like halo, a weapon should be a weapon, if i fire that rocket launcher at a cluster of what ever, they should die, not almost be killed.

[BlueYoshi]

[color=darkred]Sometimes game difficulties annoy me. My biggest example on the matter lies in the Metal Gear Solid games. I enjoy playing on the hardest possible difficulty just for the sake of trying to get past guards and employing all of the stealthy attributes that the games boast, but then I arrive at a boss fight, and they are damn near impossible. They might be good for gamers who get their kicks from bosses, but call me boring; all I want to do is get through the game without getting spotted and not wasting time fighting boss battles I'll never win.[/color]

[Rachmaninoff]

[quote name='BlueYoshi'][color=darkred]Sometimes game difficulties annoy me. My biggest example on the matter lies in the Metal Gear Solid games. I enjoy playing on the hardest possible difficulty just for the sake of trying to get past guards and employing all of the stealthy attributes that the games boast, but then I arrive at a boss fight, and they are damn near impossible. They might be good for gamers who get their kicks from bosses, but call me boring; all I want to do is get through the game without getting spotted and not wasting time fighting boss battles I'll never win.[/color][/QUOTE]I so agree. lol Not that having harder levels isn't fun, but sometimes it's like they were brain dead when they got to the boss. It takes the fun out of beating things only to get stuck on the stupid boss. Though some games getting to the boss is harder than beating the boss, in which case, those really need to be beefed up to make it more challenging. No offense to Twilight Princess... But even the final boss battle was easy to do. XP It was fun, but difficulty wise? Very disappointing.

Oh and though smarter AI's is a nice idea, even just having the different levels that are based on stronger monsters/bosses, etc would be a vast improvement. For the games that don't have any different levels of difficulty that is.

[spy46]

That may be true, but again you also have to cnsider the game its self.

I played and beat TP and granted it was fun, but it became repeditive (sp?) and the only bosses i really got annoyed with was the desert temple and Zant or how ever you spell it.

Its not that they were really hard, just what they did and when that made them annoying.

in a game like Fable, a boss was not hard at all, sure he might get a few hits in on you, but its like you know your going to kill him.

Or in a game like CnC generals (or other ones) you know exactly where when and how they are going to come at you, first 1 tank with .... 2 attack buggies or what ever, followed by later, one artilery unit and 3-4 troops.

Oh yep and an air strike will come for this building, so 20 AA weapons 2 feet over and its safe.

If any of you have played a RTS game like the CnC ones, im sure you know what im talking about

[Vigilance]

I don't really like games that has the last boss cheat alot, like I really experience this for real. First I was playing a copy of Tekken 5, when it came out, then when I got to the last boss I thought I could beat him, but for some reason he came at me like he was an expert. I play died or lost to him like 15-30 times and finally beat him because the last boss in Tekken 5 cheats and he was ticking me off and getting me real mad. When I start a new game I put it on beginner or easy, so that the last boss doesn't cheat and I would pass the game more easily, but guess what everyone. It look like when you put on the more easier level, the last boss in this game still goes out cheating.

[The Spectacular Professor]

You want cheating computers? [B]One Piece: Grand Adventure[/B] has the cheapest AI in the history of ever. One of the more common complaints is Buggy's Bara Bara harpoon, but that can be fixed with a good crowding and punchfest. No, I'm referring to the final boss on Usopp's adventure mode: God Eneru.

"KNOWYOURPLACEKNOWYOURPLACEKNOWYOURPLACE!!!!"

You basically can't approach him while he's firing that giant lightning bolt from his hand. I don't really know how I finally killed the jerk, but suffice to say I hoped it hurt. I hate ANY kind of spam, but that's the worst. Hey, Bandai-Namco, Here's an idea: next time, give us a boss that doesn't murder us withing 5 seconds using the exact same move 10 times, how about one that's actually hard, instead of cheap?

[Korey]

You guys want unfair AI? Try any SNK final Boss. It's something that us gamers like to call "SNK boss syndrome" A few examples that come to mind are KoF 2000 through 2002 and the recent NeoWave. The other enemies in the game? Easy as pie to beat, even on the harder difficulties. The Bosses? GODLY guru's who will counter your every strategem and kill you without batting an eyelash. Other games that come to mind when I think about SNK boss syndrome are BioLizard from Sonic Adventure 2 (that camera was haneous, it kicked my *** every time), the boss from DOA 4 (behind the back throw for more than 50% damage my ***) and Ruby Weapon from FF7 (which is the only boss I ever had to resort to strategy guides for)

As far as jacking up the difficulty for games, I know in Fighters it responds by making the computer more competent (blocks more, has better counters, actually uses special meter, is able to string together a decent combo...etc) and FPS normally boast more deadly opponents, less health and body armor pickups, less ammo and less health capacity or greater health loss.

One game that seems to take exception to that rule, however is Tekken 4. I've beaten the game on "Ultra Hard" and I still think that Tekken 3 and Tekken 5 were much more difficult than Tekken 4 was. The AI kept falling for the same old tricks and kept throwing the same old stuff at me on any level. One exception to that would have to be that they wanted to throw more often in the harder levels....weird.

[The Spectacular Professor]

[quote name='Korey']You guys want unfair AI? Try any SNK final Boss. It's something that us gamers like to call "SNK boss syndrome" A few examples that come to mind are KoF 2000 through 2002 and the recent NeoWave. The other enemies in the game? Easy as pie to beat, even on the harder difficulties. The Bosses? GODLY guru's who will counter your every strategem and kill you without batting an eyelash. Other games that come to mind when I think about SNK boss syndrome are BioLizard from Sonic Adventure 2 (that camera was haneous, it kicked my *** every time), the boss from DOA 4 (behind the back throw for more than 50% damage my ***) and Ruby Weapon from FF7 (which is the only boss I ever had to resort to strategy guides for)[/QUOTE]

Wait, do you mean Biolizard or Finalhazard? Either one is a pain, but Finalhazard has that thing with the random unpredictable moving laser that zapped me every time. Took me forever to realize you can switch characters by crossing the arena.

[Odin M Yggdrasi]

I mostly play MMORPGs now, where the AI is kind of cheap but still suprisingly flexible, and you also have to deal with other human players potentially attacking you too.

Before the MMORPGs though, I was really into RTS-type Games.

My favorites over the years have been:
[b]Age of Empires: Rise of Rome.[/b]

Not bad in my experience, while the AI would predictably make a compact but efficient city and populate their entire region with patrolling soldiers (typically of the infantry type, but sometimes cavalry or siege) they really didn't have the coordination to attack effictively. Scouting becomes a problem due to their patrols, but if you marched a legion at almost any AI in game you would conquer as long as your supply and reinforcement lines held up- which the AI would sometimes do is sabotage the supply lines using a flanking maneuver.

[b]Age of Empires II: The Art of Conquest[/b]

I liked this one too, but it had a lot of similarity to Rise of Rome. The AI would typically produce a compact but powerful city, depleting the resources inside the city walls before going outside them, and filling it's domain with patrols.

They did however fix the attack coordination problems, and in many cases I would find myself in a fix as their scouts crippled my economy right as I should be raising troops to resist the incoming army of huns marching in my direction.

Something I found though is if you destroyed a specific building or unit a certain number of times, the AI would essentially 'give up' trying to replace it, even though the AIs usually were allowed to cheat to get additional resources to prolong the end-game.

My favorite tactics were to use cavalry sweeps first to undermine the economy, and then march in with Heavy infantry backed by siege, and level the enemy towns.

Age of Empires II did have the option to make and use custom AI scripts, I had done this in several scenarios I made to produce a specific effect, but the code behind the AI was clumsy and unreliable.

[b]Rise of Nations[/b]

Now here's a game that I still can't always beat the computer, though I am getting better at it.

The AI tends to be slower than a human, but most games that is the case. You do see excellent coordination of both offense and defense, at times they will even use Cruise Missiles or Nuclear Missiles on you. So far my favorite strategy has been to race to the highest age possible, and then use a combination of air bombings and cruise missiles to damage the economy- in the order of Oil, Wealth, Metal, Wood, Food. Typically by hitting the oil first the troops they will be able to make to defend themselves will be land-only and most often of the light infantry variety, which is easy to deal with in most cases.

I also played Empire Earth at one point, it really wasn't that much of a challenge having a weak strategy AI.

[b]Starcraft[/b]
YOU MUST CONSTRUCT ADDITIONAL PYLONS!

I hated that message while I was under siege by a computer-guided Zerg rush, to this day I still lose more often than I win because I do not do well with military rush strategies. The AIs used seem to be fitting to the roles each race plays, and the way that those races are tuned to fight-
the Zerg building fast for a rush, and then spreading across the entire map if not checked, frequently coming at you very quickly with numbers of cheap units and annihilation of a slow to develop player with alarming speed, yet in end-game the way they spread lends itself to formidable defense without a lot of wasted effort or resources.
the Terrans building fast enough to resist the intial rush but then losing strength again in the end-game to slightly slower and less convienient production, also generally weaker units.
And my favorite, the Protoss, whose high powered units and elaborate towns, while they take time to construct and can be difficult to defend if not built right, otherwise do exceptionally well in battle if you last long enough to get your forces established.

[Korey]

[quote name='Aceburner']Wait, do you mean Biolizard or Finalhazard? Either one is a pain, but Finalhazard has that thing with the random unpredictable moving laser that zapped me every time. Took me forever to realize you can switch characters by crossing the arena.[/QUOTE]

I meant Biolizard. That thing has the most random, unfair deaths ever concocted in a game. I've been beaten so many times by the damn camera. It just lets me know that I won't be able to beat it. Plus when you jump on the orbs to hit the power cell on Biolizard's back I've been thrown away into the pit before by doing the homing jump stuff. Talk about unfair! This boss fight was just plain unfair.

And just to show how old school I am, does anyone remember how insanely hard the boss fights were in Battletoads? I've broken many an innocent SNES controller because of the sheer frustration that those games have costed me. Even to this day when I've memorized the stupid attack patterns and how to beat the boss...it still takes me anywhere from 15 to 30 minutes just to kill off one boss! ARRRRGH! >_<

[Konata]

Ha-ha, this reminds me of the 2ch meme:

"Eh?! You serious? Easy Mode? How disgusting~ The only people allowed to play easy mode are elementary school kids~ Kyahahahahaha~"

No offense to anyone by the way >_> [strike]I play on Easy Mode for danmaku and still fail at them...[/strike]

As for the topic, Melty Blood is a pure example~

In easy mode, the NPCs barely even move. Then it's really not like a fighting game D:

Later on though, if you're in hard mode, the NPCs break into many lengthy combos and it proves to be very challenging.

But since it's a basic fighting game, they have the same amount of health.

[Korey]

I'm a tad bit confused....do you mean that this game is a beat em up? Cause in fighters most of the time everyone is playable.

While I'm on the subject of fighters. Did anyone notice how exploitable the computer is in most Capcom fighting games? I could tell when the computer was going to jump and just go straight into the anti air of my choice. Most people cringe when they see that my difficulty setting is on 8 stars, but I calmly explain to them that this just means that the computer just blocks more and that you can still exploit it quite easily.

Also, for harder games, Shinobi (PS2) still kicks my glueteus maximus to this day. The last 4 or 5 boss fights are frickin hard....but it's the stages that really send me for a loop. Some of the acrobatics they make you perform just to cross the next gap are just insane and require strictly timed button presses just to make it out alive. This means a LOT of restarts and a lot of accidental deaths.

[spy46]

I once played a game like that on the super nintendo (many years ago) and what i had found was that the harder the setting, the more times you have to his how ever many things.

A good example for the computer beeing uped in stats is HALO 2, on the first level when your fighting the borading parties, in the second hanger after killing so many troops, an elite comes out with a sword and ive had him chase me into the first hanger and run out of ammo.

another thing (same area) is if i got the sword, and i tried to use it on another elite, it would just turn and hit me once where i would have had to do it 2 times with the sword.:animeangr

Its not the the AI is smarter, its just really cheep with how big of a bost its stats got that make it hard and that annoyes the hell out of me.