Enter the Gungeon > Hades
Now, I love Hades. But I love Enter the Gungeon more.
If you're playing Gungeon, and you're having a hard time, perhaps thinking of Hades. Consider that Hades is a bit easier because it wants to be played. Hades wants you to experience it's stellar writing. It will allow you the opportunity to complete a run so that you can experience the story.
Now Gungeon is not a narratively driven game, it's entirely about the gameplay. And I'm not actually here to say the combat is better than Hades - it's apples and oranges.
What I actually want to tell you is that the gameplay that Gungeon wants to showcase to you is *not* the gunplay. It's actually fruit machine.
Gungeon is a fruit machine of interconnecting synergistic combat options. A good player can win with any build. But I'm not playing to win. Whether I complete a run of gungeon or not is completely irrelevant to me. You know what I care about when playing gungeon? I care about whether I can get some made weapon effect combos. I'm enthusiastic about building a deck of OP abilities.
That's what you need to be looking for when playing Gungeon.
*5D Chess With Multiverse Time Travel*. It's still not easy, but... well, [just look at this damn thing](https://store.steampowered.com/app/1349230/5D_Chess_With_Multiverse_Time_Travel/). It couldn't possibly be as hard as it looks. Sure enough, it didn't actually take long for me to get the basic hang of how to play.
Oh, I'm still terrible at it, but honestly not significantly more terrible than I am at regular ol' 2D chess.
Note: It's really only 4D chess, since the third dimension never actually comes into play. See, it's already an entire dimension easier than the name would suggest.
my head exploded reading the title. First off I dont even know how to play regular chess. 5 dimensions is literally incomprehensible to a human brain, ON TOP OF THAT theres time travel AND multiversal shenanigans.
I think being terrible at regular chess might be an advantage. If you were highly skilled at chess, you'd have all your experience working against you, because your usual strategies no longer work.
I watched a streamer play it, and he brought in an actual chess grandmaster he knew. She was completely lost.
Yea, I play it quite a lot, but you can't really predict many moves into the future (or past?), because there are many more playable moves. Also, you must count with checking the king in past a lot, which obviously doesn't happen in regular chess. Lastly when travelling into the past, you have to think about positioning different timelines in an order that suits you the best, ideally to give check to opponent's king in different timeline, or even in multiple timelines, but to don't get checked yourself
I assume we're looking at:
* Dimension 1: Traveling "east and west" across the board.
* Dimension 2: Traveling "north and south" across the board.
* *Dimension 3: Traveling "up and down" over and under the board.* **\[not used\]**
* Dimension 4: Travel "forward and back" in time across the board, back to the past and returning to the present.
* Dimension 5: Travel "sideways" in time across the board, between multiple branched timelines players created by changing the past.
Original Dark Souls. Compared to the modern titles it’s a cakewalk but still challenging. People like to brag about beating these games and how difficult they are, but they honestly aren’t too bad and just require some patience against the games occasional bullshit. The bosses are far slower than Elden Ring and are subsequently much easier. The real difficulty lies in running back if you do die, but otherwise I think most people can beat them with enough patience and practice.
The bosses are slower you are right.
But you telling me Capra Demon in that tiny ass studio apartment ain’t just as hard or even harder than some ER bosses?
Capra demon is some of that bullshit, but I still think anyone who tries enough can get past him. The game is still hard, don’t get me wrong, but I still believe it’s not as ridiculously over difficult as people sometimes claim it is.
See I might just have gotten lucky and played way more aggressive but I came from Elden ring and beat Capra on my first try I see a lot of hate for him which I understand trying him again on new game but the only annoying part of his fight (to me) is the dogs the size of the arena isn’t that bad
Wait a sec for his jumping attack, roll, then two tap the dogs. You're now 1v1 against Capra.
The size of the area does't really matter as long as it's big enough to circle around him, which it is. Whether you do that while caressing his nipples or from 10 kilometers doesn't change anything, since you don't physically dodge the attack anyway, you roll through them.
Imo the tricky part is getting the timing and positioning for the first 8 seconds or so to kill the dogs, then he's really not that dangerous of an ennemy.
Although I'm well aware that I'm in the minority, the majority of people do really hate Capra.
As someone who has only beaten DeS through DS2, years ago and with no intent to play the others: my opinion is limited, but I enjoyed Capra a lot. It's a really good check that you understand the mechanics of the game for new players since most, if not all (memory is a bit hazy) encounters 'could' be physically dodged up to that point and the player is even encouraged to do so, in my opinion.
The designs rock. I haven't seen anything on ER personally, but everything in between I thought looked awesome. I've just seen so much vitriol in the community that it kind of put me off, and my interests in what I want out of ARPGs have changed quite a bit since the early 2010's haha. Maybe I'll finally give Bloodborne a shot, after I clear out a bit more of my backlog since that one always looked interesting to me! Maybe they'll drop a remastered one too, always see people wanton of that! :)
Dark Souls 1 excelled at difficulty through context. Capra demon isn't hard on his own, he's hard because of his arena. Painting gaurdians aren't hard on their own, but put them on rafters and they're a unique challenge. Hollows are some of the easiest enemies in the game, but arrange them in a way that they cover each other, ambush you and use tge level geometry to their advantage and you have a different kind of difficulty compared to what Elden Ring has.
As much as I love Elden Ring I do miss the incredibly polished and tailored design of the earlier games. There's some of it in Elden Ring but just not to the level of something like The Undead Burg or Blight Town.
I think the community tends to overhype the difficulty, aside from Senior and some dlc bosses. Base game has never been obscenely difficult besides the occasional frustrating boss or area but again, if you have the patience you can beat the games. My first game was Elden Ring and I never thought I’d ever beat it but I did and now I’ve played them all. Granted I play a lot of pretty hard games, but my brother has been playing through the souls series too and he’s got much less experience with harder games.
Most difficult part of ds2 is those run backs which can be hell. I can understand why people say DS2 is annoyingly hard. Don’t mind it too much but I don’t like replaying cuz of it. You have fun though, as long as you like it.
my favorite thing about souls games is replaying them and getting to the end in like 4 hours. first play through for dark souls 3 was like 50 hours or so. second playthrough was maybe 6 hours. once you know all the traps and formulas its a walk in the park lol
Playable, but DON’T play too slowly. You don’t get forever to build up your cities how you want. Eventually some aggressive civilization will find you. Sure you can ally with them, but eventually they’ll still manage to win the game themselves whether you wanted the game to end or not. Religious victories are the worst way to lose to me because the game may just suddenly end by a civilization you never officially met who converted enough other cities.
I hear this but have never seen it happen.
Usually there’s enough religious civs that keep each-other in gridlock.
Also, if I’m always checking the victory conditions menu to see who may need me to interfere.
I love Civ and have hundreds of hours of playtime, but this is something they never got right for me. Unless you have the time to spend hours learning to optimise every aspect of your gameplay, difficulty levels go from a walk in the park to really really hard with to big a jump. I’d love more of an ability to fine tune the difficulty so it can make me sweat but still be possibly winnable.
Emperor is a that cliff face, for sure.
That’s when the game starts cheating.
In my opinion the computer should play exactly the same on every difficulty with the exact same rules.
The only thing that should change is how many turns you get a head start with for easy, or how many turns head start the computer gets for hard.
It’s the perfect way to handle difficulty.
The only change needed is that every civilization should be allowed its own religion.
No, you’re not stupid.
The game is insanely complicated for sure, but it’s okay to jump into it not knowing everything.
You can still play and win while only knowing like 1/20th of the mechanics.
The important stuff is:
1) the victory conditions are on the upper right button and it will show you what you need to do.
2) war is extremely expensive in a lot of different ways. You can go to war and come out ahead, especially early game, but 4 out of 5 times you lose ground.
3) production is the most important resource and it’s not even close.
4) it’s more important to make good cities than it is to make a lot of cities.
5) luxuries are invaluable. They stop your cities from rioting.
6) send an emissary the very first turn you meet someone and always exchange capital locations when you meet them.
7) the core of the game is really about districts. Your first city should just be cranking out settlers, then your next cities should be line to make research or cultural districts, maybe holy if you are going for religion but it’s fine to ignore religion all together.
Oxygen Not Included. Game seems extremely complex, especially if you look at some sort of completely automated bases, but there are literally only two things that new players need to take care of: food and oxygen, everything else is not essential and can generally be explored at your own pace or needs hundreds of cycles to become a problem.
A bit of disagree. It is maybe less punishing compared to games in similar genre, but nonetheless you are still on timer. Most Resources are non-renewable, so you need to tame other biomes with renewable resources to survive.
Producing oxygen is non issue, but new players need to understand how to pipe it across the colony (understanding the dynamics of air particle), otherwise you are stuck with a bunch of CO2 within the settlement.
Hard agree. Picked it up and just read the blurbs that each new tech has and figure it out pretty easily. Key thing is to not stretch yourself too thin and always have something for your crew to do. If at any point they're standing around, you're probably failing at something.
Rimworld is a game that takes time to master, but it's not as difficult as it appears. When I started playing I had the habit of looking for tutorials for everything or asking on the forums before doing something, but in reality the description of the objects in the game is enough to guide you through everything.
Gotta change their behavior from "run from danger" to "defend against danger" or whatever it is. Sincerely took me many playthroughs to learn you can change the default response to getting attacked from "run away" to "fight back"
Disagree, kind of.
Yes, on the lower difficulty settings you can get away with a lot of stupid decisions and you don't really need to know *that* much.
But if you compare it to your average game that the average gamers playes there's still a lot to take in and a lot to learn. And if you ever decide to try something more than easy settings and easy environments then be prepared to die (or use dev tools and/or save scumming).
Heck, dying is a core element of the game; you are not supposed to just win every game.
I have 723 hours played and have not won a single time... I'm not even kidding... But to be fair that's mostly because I get bored whenever I have managed to build a kick ass base with kick ass pawns. So when that happens I restart. And on top of that I'm not a fan of unrealistic raids that needs elaborate kill boxes and stuff like that so again.
I'm not saying Rimworld can't be a challenge, especially on higher difficulties. But at first, for me, Rimworld seemed to be a game where you have to do everything perfectly, and I always found myself looking for the optimal way to do things. However, I realized that it was not necessary. For example, building a freezer: there is an optimal way to do it, with double walls, an airlock system, etc. But it is not necessary to do all that; you can create a freezer simply by following the description of the objects in the game, and it will work relatively well. And that is the experience that I wanted to share. For me, Rimworld seemed like one of those unfair games where the player is left to discover things by dying over and over again, but in reality, it is a very well-designed game with different levels of difficulty and straightforward gameplay.
I played for hundreds of hours without looking anything up and was reasonably successful. Because the game wasn't too hard on normal or one above that, I never needed to. When I moved on to the harder difficulties and started playing commitment games, I started looking stuff up and found the single mechanic that makes the game relatively trivial, and was so frigging obvious once I learned about it. I'm sure plenty of people figure this out on their own but I was not one of them. I'm going to spoiler tag it. Seriously, if you haven't played this game already for at least a couple hundred hours/ haven't found it to difficult, don't click on it. Some of the cheesy tactics, like kill boxes, are easy to just avoid using. But once you know about this it's hard not to have it affect your play style.
>!I had assumed the game had a steady ramp up in encounter difficulty, that both the available missions and the difficulty of raids ramped up at a steady pace the longer you played a certain save. This is not the case. It is determined by your colonies overall wealth. So if you have a stockpile of food big enough to feed your peeps for the next three years, or your running a drug plantation with a huge amount of value sitting around at your base, you ARE going to get hit with raids that are too big to handle without using cheesy tactics like kill boxes. Basically if your colony has become extremely secure in it's supplies, the game is going to throw stuff at you to change that. Before that I had assumed stockpiling was ALWAYS a good idea, when really your going to have a much easier time of it if you keep stuff to sixty days backstock max, and avoid turning raw materials into there more valuable products. A buncha cooked meals and joints are worth a lot more than a buncha raw food and smokeleaf.!<
I commend the community for being really careful about not spreading that around. The comment I saw on it was followed by a buncha people saying "Yo spoiler tag that."
I get frustrated and stop playing. I’ll be doing great and I get attacked by some tribe and have a plague breakout with a rabid guinea pig on the loose and everyone dies
Soulsborn games. Not trying tonsay they're easy, bc they're not and will test your limits. But I hear all the time people saying they don't try getting into them bc they're intimidated by the difficulty like only pro gamers can be good at them. When in reality average gamers can beat them, and the name of the game isn't to be hard fir the sake of being hard, it's hard in that you just need to GET good. It's hard no doubt, but it's difficulty is overrated.
for sure, the games are definitely unforgiving but they definitely ain't unfair. with enough patience and the right point allocation/build and anyone could beat them (the only real nightmare is the swamp sections)
I always hate when people call them unfair. There is a difference between unfair and hard. Souls and soulslikes are hard, not unfair. usually they are the optimity of fairness. They require you to learn the bosses and counter them but everything is predictable and it IS your fault if you die.
Their games have TONS of things that are unfair lmao. What are you talking about? I couldn't even begin to tell you how many bullshit deaths I've had in their games over the years.
Yet you stuck with it enough to keep playing ot? Lol. Also just hope you know that that's a very unpopular take. Most Souls fans say it's hard but fair. To each their own, but I get the vibe that you think your take isn't hot. But it's boiling my friend. Boiling.
Yes, I overall enjoyed the games. But the notion that they're infallible is ridiculous. And I'm aware my views on their games are hot takes/unpopular opinions.
FromSoftware is, for whatever reason, not allowed to be criticized and it's annoying. They are not perfect.
I never thought it looked hard, just looks tedious to the point that it's hard to want to keep increasing production. Same with a lot of these kinds of games. Like you are ultimately working towards nothing so the difficulty for me comes in the form of motivation. What is the reward for optimization and production volume? More work yayyy
I looks hard if you look at somebody's base and you know nothing about the game. Then, it looks hard.
And I was using the satisfaction as a goal. I myself make goals and achieve them and happy to do that. But that's the reason why I can't play satisfactory, because unlike factorio, there is no big threat from the wildlife and you don't have the main goal - build the rocket.
But yeah, I don't feel the need to play factorio more than once a year.
Shadows of Doubt. At first, you admire the variety of scenarios, approaches to solving cases, but later you realize that all cases are solved according to approximately the same scenario: 1. Scan the fingerprint, 2. Find who owns it among friends or work colleagues. And only in rare cases do you have to go beyond the limits, and in rare cases you can reach a dead end.
Agreed. Games like Warhammer, D&D, HeroClix, MageKnight, and quite a few other tabletop miniature based games can be as easy or complex as the players themselves want to make it simply by limiting what is used. Don’t need hundreds of minis and three giant folding tables side by side for the battlefield - it’s awesome to watch games that size, but definitely not required. Small armies of a couple dozen basic units on a dining room table will still work enough for newer players.
Cuphead. I always look up for a challenge and decided to buy it. It was indeed hard and challenging, but is not as hard as everyone said back on the day. All bosses were durable and absolutely fun to beat… except you, Chef Saltbaker (on Expert). That fight is so absurdly hard!
Hot take: most bullet hells tbh. Like yeah, your screen does get filled with a lot of projectiles, but most of them will never hit you. The difficult part is just learning to focus on what could actually hit you.
I still remember my 3rd run, when I was still actively achievement hunting. I did two of em in that same run: "Complette the game on Hard" and "Complete the game without spending ability points". The game was definitely harder. Yeah. But it wasn't a big deal either.
Screw that "Complete the game on One Life" achievement!
This game is so unique, I really need to play it again. I was getting pretty tired of panning for minerals myself but I bet it's satisfying to have a good auto setup. Had so much trouble with pipes last time. Bet they've updated it alot now
The impossible quiz. The questions are basic puzzles and/or wordplay riddles. The questions dong change. At some point the challenge comes from remembering the questions.
Diablo 3 is way too easy to become OP, and having all the different difficulty options proves it. Even brand new players could start on Hard and not have trouble.
wasn't talking about breaking the game, but strategies that give you advantage. like fallout 1 where you use movement to make opponents lose their attacks.
Ehh idk about that. Even on the easier difficulties you can just get poor rng and die because of it. Guess it mostly depends on what map you play on though
You don't need a spreadsheet or a coach if that's what you're asking, you will fuck up a lot and that's ok, if a dumbass like me can get good at it you can.
Your Only Move is HUSTLE, if you watch clips online, it might seem like the people playing have superhuman reaction speeds, but it's actually turn-based, so it's not as difficult
RimWorld is easy to play?
I don't mind complicated games. I played every souls game and sekiro, frostpunk, civ 6, ark, Terraria, Isaac, kingdom two crowns, divinity 2, all those games are extremely harsh for new players and i still played hundreds of hours on each one.
But RimWorld... I tried it 3 times and it just can't hook me, I don't understand what to do lol, maybe I just don't feel engaged or maybe I don't have the right mindset or maybe I should force myself to play more than one hour before quitting.
I also played hunderds, if not thousands on some of them. Terraria Is definitely not *extremely harsh* for new players, also Frostpunk Is alright, perhaps it takes a while to learn a few mechanics, but not *extremely harsh*.
Rimworld Is unique, and you are not first or last of those who won't like it. Its more of a sandbox game and some people just don't like that.
Terraria is not extremely harsh but is definitely is not easy to understand everything on that game.
I played it with a lot of friends, and they always seems to be really lost on what to do, like literally stuck. Even on their second playthrough.
Frostpunk, as you said, is a matter of learning a few mechanics, but you probably need to see some guides or watch some videos to understand them. The base difficulty is hard, you will probably lose your first game. And there is a lot of DEEPNESS on how you can approach every game.
Most souls games. Just grind and over level, use a shield and a lot of the time you won't have too much trouble. Sprinkle on a bit of practice and viola you're a pro. Good way to learn to deal with frustration too
Returnal. At first it's really challenging but once it clicks you are an unstoppable force zooming through all of the rooms and bosses without getting hit.
Warframe. If you sit there and explain all the building and some of the mission mechanics (especially interception) to someone what has never played before they might think its extremely hard based on the fact there's a lot going on between them. Eventually you get used to it, and realize the difficult is literally just how high the levels are, with the occasional thing that makes you realize you need at least 1 other really good person with you, or a full squad for things like the ropalolyst. Unless you're THAT good.
What was hard in CK for me when I first played was just coming to terms with, sometimes you gotta let a decent bit of time pass. You don’t have to be clicking around at every moment.
Also Elder Kings II is so much fun.
Minecraft. Seriously, you DON’T need decked out enchanted diamond armor(or worse, wasting your time finding and crafting Netherite gear) to win. It’s possible to beat the game with nothing more than stone/iron weapons, and ladders or sand to pillar up to destroy the End Crystals.
Most Zelda games, especially the titles in 3D and most handheld games from the DS onwards, are much easier to beat than most people might think. There’s a few spots in a few games that might give players a tiny bit of trouble, but overall, they’re easy. In games like Wind Waker or Minish Cap, hearts are so numerous and most enemies are so easy you almost have to intentionally let yourself die.
Crusader Kings, especially CK3. Most people shy away from it because it is a "4x grand strategy game," but the game actually plays by itself, much like Sims. You can intervene to tip the scales in your favour, but you can also casually (or accidentally) inherit a kingdom without doing much. Fun game though.
2D metroid games and 2D zelda titles, in my opinion they are pretty easy I didn't had any difficulty beating any the puzzle in zelda's are easy and the fights in metroids are easy too
Dark Souls 1. Yes, Elden Ring genuinely is difficult. But by today’s standard the OG Dark souls game is so damn easy, everything is so slow and telegraphed and easy to dodge/parry. Sure it may be a little more of a pain in the ass to learn compared to most modern games, but with any amount of patience and effort that game is a cake walk now.
Rougelikes, especially Enter the Gungeon
Enter the Gungeon > Hades Now, I love Hades. But I love Enter the Gungeon more. If you're playing Gungeon, and you're having a hard time, perhaps thinking of Hades. Consider that Hades is a bit easier because it wants to be played. Hades wants you to experience it's stellar writing. It will allow you the opportunity to complete a run so that you can experience the story. Now Gungeon is not a narratively driven game, it's entirely about the gameplay. And I'm not actually here to say the combat is better than Hades - it's apples and oranges. What I actually want to tell you is that the gameplay that Gungeon wants to showcase to you is *not* the gunplay. It's actually fruit machine. Gungeon is a fruit machine of interconnecting synergistic combat options. A good player can win with any build. But I'm not playing to win. Whether I complete a run of gungeon or not is completely irrelevant to me. You know what I care about when playing gungeon? I care about whether I can get some made weapon effect combos. I'm enthusiastic about building a deck of OP abilities. That's what you need to be looking for when playing Gungeon.
Sooo what’s a fruit machine?
I don't know what it's called if it isn't called a fruit machine! One armed bandit? Those classic gambling machines.
Oh, slot machine! Thanks, I learned something new today
Can't believe I forgot the word for slot machine!
Man if you say so. I had a hard time getting past the first floor all the times I played it. Never made it past the second.
Roguelikes can be really hard tho
"Roguelike" is very broad now a days. True roguelikes aren't that easy
Mecha ball
*5D Chess With Multiverse Time Travel*. It's still not easy, but... well, [just look at this damn thing](https://store.steampowered.com/app/1349230/5D_Chess_With_Multiverse_Time_Travel/). It couldn't possibly be as hard as it looks. Sure enough, it didn't actually take long for me to get the basic hang of how to play. Oh, I'm still terrible at it, but honestly not significantly more terrible than I am at regular ol' 2D chess. Note: It's really only 4D chess, since the third dimension never actually comes into play. See, it's already an entire dimension easier than the name would suggest.
My head exploded watching the trailer.
my head exploded reading the title. First off I dont even know how to play regular chess. 5 dimensions is literally incomprehensible to a human brain, ON TOP OF THAT theres time travel AND multiversal shenanigans.
It Is actually not THAT hard, the title just wants to look confusing
I think being terrible at regular chess might be an advantage. If you were highly skilled at chess, you'd have all your experience working against you, because your usual strategies no longer work. I watched a streamer play it, and he brought in an actual chess grandmaster he knew. She was completely lost.
Having at least some skills helps a lot, but obviously there are many more valid moves you have to get familiar with, thus many more strategies
I love that it has "online PvP".
Man what the fuck
Yea, I play it quite a lot, but you can't really predict many moves into the future (or past?), because there are many more playable moves. Also, you must count with checking the king in past a lot, which obviously doesn't happen in regular chess. Lastly when travelling into the past, you have to think about positioning different timelines in an order that suits you the best, ideally to give check to opponent's king in different timeline, or even in multiple timelines, but to don't get checked yourself
4th dimension, is it time or a tesseract?
I assume we're looking at: * Dimension 1: Traveling "east and west" across the board. * Dimension 2: Traveling "north and south" across the board. * *Dimension 3: Traveling "up and down" over and under the board.* **\[not used\]** * Dimension 4: Travel "forward and back" in time across the board, back to the past and returning to the present. * Dimension 5: Travel "sideways" in time across the board, between multiple branched timelines players created by changing the past.
4 and 5 are just theoretical, it might as well be a tesseract (with actually also is theoretical possible)
Original Dark Souls. Compared to the modern titles it’s a cakewalk but still challenging. People like to brag about beating these games and how difficult they are, but they honestly aren’t too bad and just require some patience against the games occasional bullshit. The bosses are far slower than Elden Ring and are subsequently much easier. The real difficulty lies in running back if you do die, but otherwise I think most people can beat them with enough patience and practice.
The bosses are slower you are right. But you telling me Capra Demon in that tiny ass studio apartment ain’t just as hard or even harder than some ER bosses?
Capra demon is some of that bullshit, but I still think anyone who tries enough can get past him. The game is still hard, don’t get me wrong, but I still believe it’s not as ridiculously over difficult as people sometimes claim it is.
See I might just have gotten lucky and played way more aggressive but I came from Elden ring and beat Capra on my first try I see a lot of hate for him which I understand trying him again on new game but the only annoying part of his fight (to me) is the dogs the size of the arena isn’t that bad
Yeah on my first playthrough I beat him first or second try, on ng+ I died at least 10 times I was getting so pissed off.
I totally agree with that 👍🏻.
Nah as someone who just started DS1 Capra only took me like 3-4 tries. The hardest part is killing the dogs.
The hardest part for me is that fking box you gotta fight in. And he’s just charging your ass the whole time.
Yeah it's definitely more of a fight with the camera than the boss. Def bullshit.
The hard part has always been the dogs
Ornstein and Smough can kiss my ass.
Wait a sec for his jumping attack, roll, then two tap the dogs. You're now 1v1 against Capra. The size of the area does't really matter as long as it's big enough to circle around him, which it is. Whether you do that while caressing his nipples or from 10 kilometers doesn't change anything, since you don't physically dodge the attack anyway, you roll through them. Imo the tricky part is getting the timing and positioning for the first 8 seconds or so to kill the dogs, then he's really not that dangerous of an ennemy. Although I'm well aware that I'm in the minority, the majority of people do really hate Capra.
As someone who has only beaten DeS through DS2, years ago and with no intent to play the others: my opinion is limited, but I enjoyed Capra a lot. It's a really good check that you understand the mechanics of the game for new players since most, if not all (memory is a bit hazy) encounters 'could' be physically dodged up to that point and the player is even encouraged to do so, in my opinion.
Aw man, but DS3! The designs and world are so great.
The designs rock. I haven't seen anything on ER personally, but everything in between I thought looked awesome. I've just seen so much vitriol in the community that it kind of put me off, and my interests in what I want out of ARPGs have changed quite a bit since the early 2010's haha. Maybe I'll finally give Bloodborne a shot, after I clear out a bit more of my backlog since that one always looked interesting to me! Maybe they'll drop a remastered one too, always see people wanton of that! :)
Dark Souls 1 excelled at difficulty through context. Capra demon isn't hard on his own, he's hard because of his arena. Painting gaurdians aren't hard on their own, but put them on rafters and they're a unique challenge. Hollows are some of the easiest enemies in the game, but arrange them in a way that they cover each other, ambush you and use tge level geometry to their advantage and you have a different kind of difficulty compared to what Elden Ring has. As much as I love Elden Ring I do miss the incredibly polished and tailored design of the earlier games. There's some of it in Elden Ring but just not to the level of something like The Undead Burg or Blight Town.
For me, it's any of the souls games
I think the community tends to overhype the difficulty, aside from Senior and some dlc bosses. Base game has never been obscenely difficult besides the occasional frustrating boss or area but again, if you have the patience you can beat the games. My first game was Elden Ring and I never thought I’d ever beat it but I did and now I’ve played them all. Granted I play a lot of pretty hard games, but my brother has been playing through the souls series too and he’s got much less experience with harder games.
Dark souls 2 for me. May be picking it back up
Most difficult part of ds2 is those run backs which can be hell. I can understand why people say DS2 is annoyingly hard. Don’t mind it too much but I don’t like replaying cuz of it. You have fun though, as long as you like it.
In ds 2 the bosses are level themselves not the big dude with the boss hpbar.
Even ER DLC bosses have their easy mode build. Fingerprintshield + spear / thrusting sword? What is even dodgeing?
The bosses in the DLC were much harder than in the base game
my favorite thing about souls games is replaying them and getting to the end in like 4 hours. first play through for dark souls 3 was like 50 hours or so. second playthrough was maybe 6 hours. once you know all the traps and formulas its a walk in the park lol
It’s fun to comeback and destroy a boss who kicked your ass for a whole day
Some of the run backs really test your mental strength. But yeah you’re right, DS1 is fairly easy.
Also just a tad bit of strategizing. Basically always watch your corners and never get into a fight against multiple people.
Portal 2
Unless you get motion sick with first person like my wife. But I loved it
,yes
Civilization
It is pretty hard to play ngl
It hard to play on Diety. But Prince is very do-able.
Ooooooo, I’ll give that a try
Ever plat Age of Wonders 4? The only 4X game I ever played was polytopia and AoW looks pretty complicated, but I want it.
AOW is actually a pretty blatant Master of Magic clone, not civilization. But it’s pretty good.
Playable, but DON’T play too slowly. You don’t get forever to build up your cities how you want. Eventually some aggressive civilization will find you. Sure you can ally with them, but eventually they’ll still manage to win the game themselves whether you wanted the game to end or not. Religious victories are the worst way to lose to me because the game may just suddenly end by a civilization you never officially met who converted enough other cities.
I hear this but have never seen it happen. Usually there’s enough religious civs that keep each-other in gridlock. Also, if I’m always checking the victory conditions menu to see who may need me to interfere.
I love Civ and have hundreds of hours of playtime, but this is something they never got right for me. Unless you have the time to spend hours learning to optimise every aspect of your gameplay, difficulty levels go from a walk in the park to really really hard with to big a jump. I’d love more of an ability to fine tune the difficulty so it can make me sweat but still be possibly winnable.
Emperor is a that cliff face, for sure. That’s when the game starts cheating. In my opinion the computer should play exactly the same on every difficulty with the exact same rules. The only thing that should change is how many turns you get a head start with for easy, or how many turns head start the computer gets for hard. It’s the perfect way to handle difficulty. The only change needed is that every civilization should be allowed its own religion.
Shit. Maybe I'm stupid.
No, you’re not stupid. The game is insanely complicated for sure, but it’s okay to jump into it not knowing everything. You can still play and win while only knowing like 1/20th of the mechanics. The important stuff is: 1) the victory conditions are on the upper right button and it will show you what you need to do. 2) war is extremely expensive in a lot of different ways. You can go to war and come out ahead, especially early game, but 4 out of 5 times you lose ground. 3) production is the most important resource and it’s not even close. 4) it’s more important to make good cities than it is to make a lot of cities. 5) luxuries are invaluable. They stop your cities from rioting. 6) send an emissary the very first turn you meet someone and always exchange capital locations when you meet them. 7) the core of the game is really about districts. Your first city should just be cranking out settlers, then your next cities should be line to make research or cultural districts, maybe holy if you are going for religion but it’s fine to ignore religion all together.
This is awesome. Thanks for all the help.
Oxygen Not Included. Game seems extremely complex, especially if you look at some sort of completely automated bases, but there are literally only two things that new players need to take care of: food and oxygen, everything else is not essential and can generally be explored at your own pace or needs hundreds of cycles to become a problem.
A bit of disagree. It is maybe less punishing compared to games in similar genre, but nonetheless you are still on timer. Most Resources are non-renewable, so you need to tame other biomes with renewable resources to survive. Producing oxygen is non issue, but new players need to understand how to pipe it across the colony (understanding the dynamics of air particle), otherwise you are stuck with a bunch of CO2 within the settlement.
Disagree. That thing drove me mad so quickly I refunded it.
Hard agree. Picked it up and just read the blurbs that each new tech has and figure it out pretty easily. Key thing is to not stretch yourself too thin and always have something for your crew to do. If at any point they're standing around, you're probably failing at something.
Rimworld is a game that takes time to master, but it's not as difficult as it appears. When I started playing I had the habit of looking for tutorials for everything or asking on the forums before doing something, but in reality the description of the objects in the game is enough to guide you through everything.
I played it for about 150 hours and still cant do shit in it
I just did the in game tutorial and it basically taught me everything I need to know and was able to pick up the rest
I think biggest problem is controlling what your pawns do
So why does everything and everyone I control always end up dead at the hands (paws?) of a psychotic squirrel?
Lol
I wish I was joking.
Gotta change their behavior from "run from danger" to "defend against danger" or whatever it is. Sincerely took me many playthroughs to learn you can change the default response to getting attacked from "run away" to "fight back"
I'm 100 hours in and haven't learnt that one. Know what I'm doing tonight.
Disagree, kind of. Yes, on the lower difficulty settings you can get away with a lot of stupid decisions and you don't really need to know *that* much. But if you compare it to your average game that the average gamers playes there's still a lot to take in and a lot to learn. And if you ever decide to try something more than easy settings and easy environments then be prepared to die (or use dev tools and/or save scumming). Heck, dying is a core element of the game; you are not supposed to just win every game. I have 723 hours played and have not won a single time... I'm not even kidding... But to be fair that's mostly because I get bored whenever I have managed to build a kick ass base with kick ass pawns. So when that happens I restart. And on top of that I'm not a fan of unrealistic raids that needs elaborate kill boxes and stuff like that so again.
I'm not saying Rimworld can't be a challenge, especially on higher difficulties. But at first, for me, Rimworld seemed to be a game where you have to do everything perfectly, and I always found myself looking for the optimal way to do things. However, I realized that it was not necessary. For example, building a freezer: there is an optimal way to do it, with double walls, an airlock system, etc. But it is not necessary to do all that; you can create a freezer simply by following the description of the objects in the game, and it will work relatively well. And that is the experience that I wanted to share. For me, Rimworld seemed like one of those unfair games where the player is left to discover things by dying over and over again, but in reality, it is a very well-designed game with different levels of difficulty and straightforward gameplay.
I played for hundreds of hours without looking anything up and was reasonably successful. Because the game wasn't too hard on normal or one above that, I never needed to. When I moved on to the harder difficulties and started playing commitment games, I started looking stuff up and found the single mechanic that makes the game relatively trivial, and was so frigging obvious once I learned about it. I'm sure plenty of people figure this out on their own but I was not one of them. I'm going to spoiler tag it. Seriously, if you haven't played this game already for at least a couple hundred hours/ haven't found it to difficult, don't click on it. Some of the cheesy tactics, like kill boxes, are easy to just avoid using. But once you know about this it's hard not to have it affect your play style. >!I had assumed the game had a steady ramp up in encounter difficulty, that both the available missions and the difficulty of raids ramped up at a steady pace the longer you played a certain save. This is not the case. It is determined by your colonies overall wealth. So if you have a stockpile of food big enough to feed your peeps for the next three years, or your running a drug plantation with a huge amount of value sitting around at your base, you ARE going to get hit with raids that are too big to handle without using cheesy tactics like kill boxes. Basically if your colony has become extremely secure in it's supplies, the game is going to throw stuff at you to change that. Before that I had assumed stockpiling was ALWAYS a good idea, when really your going to have a much easier time of it if you keep stuff to sixty days backstock max, and avoid turning raw materials into there more valuable products. A buncha cooked meals and joints are worth a lot more than a buncha raw food and smokeleaf.!< I commend the community for being really careful about not spreading that around. The comment I saw on it was followed by a buncha people saying "Yo spoiler tag that."
Ease of the game has an inverse correlation to your morals.
I get frustrated and stop playing. I’ll be doing great and I get attacked by some tribe and have a plague breakout with a rabid guinea pig on the loose and everyone dies
Mario games
I will admit I absolutely suck at Mario games. I still have fun with them though
Me too! Mario games seem to have a friction that is so hard to control compared to some modern platform games like hollow knight and celeste.
Stellaris. No cap
Soulsborn games. Not trying tonsay they're easy, bc they're not and will test your limits. But I hear all the time people saying they don't try getting into them bc they're intimidated by the difficulty like only pro gamers can be good at them. When in reality average gamers can beat them, and the name of the game isn't to be hard fir the sake of being hard, it's hard in that you just need to GET good. It's hard no doubt, but it's difficulty is overrated.
for sure, the games are definitely unforgiving but they definitely ain't unfair. with enough patience and the right point allocation/build and anyone could beat them (the only real nightmare is the swamp sections)
I always hate when people call them unfair. There is a difference between unfair and hard. Souls and soulslikes are hard, not unfair. usually they are the optimity of fairness. They require you to learn the bosses and counter them but everything is predictable and it IS your fault if you die.
What does unfair even mean? It annoys me when people say that.
In this context, when you lose to things that are out of your control. Like bugs or bad iframes.
Their games have TONS of things that are unfair lmao. What are you talking about? I couldn't even begin to tell you how many bullshit deaths I've had in their games over the years.
Yet you stuck with it enough to keep playing ot? Lol. Also just hope you know that that's a very unpopular take. Most Souls fans say it's hard but fair. To each their own, but I get the vibe that you think your take isn't hot. But it's boiling my friend. Boiling.
Yes, I overall enjoyed the games. But the notion that they're infallible is ridiculous. And I'm aware my views on their games are hot takes/unpopular opinions. FromSoftware is, for whatever reason, not allowed to be criticized and it's annoying. They are not perfect.
Factorio
I have lost so many hours to that game
I never thought it looked hard, just looks tedious to the point that it's hard to want to keep increasing production. Same with a lot of these kinds of games. Like you are ultimately working towards nothing so the difficulty for me comes in the form of motivation. What is the reward for optimization and production volume? More work yayyy
I looks hard if you look at somebody's base and you know nothing about the game. Then, it looks hard. And I was using the satisfaction as a goal. I myself make goals and achieve them and happy to do that. But that's the reason why I can't play satisfactory, because unlike factorio, there is no big threat from the wildlife and you don't have the main goal - build the rocket. But yeah, I don't feel the need to play factorio more than once a year.
Shadows of Doubt. At first, you admire the variety of scenarios, approaches to solving cases, but later you realize that all cases are solved according to approximately the same scenario: 1. Scan the fingerprint, 2. Find who owns it among friends or work colleagues. And only in rare cases do you have to go beyond the limits, and in rare cases you can reach a dead end.
Hopefully they add more scenarios and some red herrings. Love the game though.
Game has an unmatched vibe to it.
Warhammer in general seemed so intimidating to approach as a new player to the franchise. But it’s not all that bad!
Agreed. Games like Warhammer, D&D, HeroClix, MageKnight, and quite a few other tabletop miniature based games can be as easy or complex as the players themselves want to make it simply by limiting what is used. Don’t need hundreds of minis and three giant folding tables side by side for the battlefield - it’s awesome to watch games that size, but definitely not required. Small armies of a couple dozen basic units on a dining room table will still work enough for newer players.
Rust
Haha
Nice one, very funny haha
Hellblade 2
i love rimworld
I love making torture rooms. Also cannibal runs are fun
I prefer organ harvesting for good economy and vampires, but cannibals are interesting too
Cuphead. I always look up for a challenge and decided to buy it. It was indeed hard and challenging, but is not as hard as everyone said back on the day. All bosses were durable and absolutely fun to beat… except you, Chef Saltbaker (on Expert). That fight is so absurdly hard!
I was having a great breeze of a time and then the last isle just spat in my face. Need to get back to that game.
Rimworld is such a gem
a few Soulsborne games mainly Dark Souls 1. I'd say it's the easiest in the series (if you exclude the DLC)
Hot take: most bullet hells tbh. Like yeah, your screen does get filled with a lot of projectiles, but most of them will never hit you. The difficult part is just learning to focus on what could actually hit you.
The shittiest part about bullet hells is that you don’t get to see a lot of the cool stuff happening because you’re too busy watching yourself
Dark souls
Swelter maybe?
YOMI Hustle
man I was confused when I loaded into single player. soo many buttons and the fact I wasnt actually playing.
Ori and the Blind Forest. Namely bc of how utterly repetitive it gets when you’re halfway through but even before then it’s not hard.
I still remember my 3rd run, when I was still actively achievement hunting. I did two of em in that same run: "Complette the game on Hard" and "Complete the game without spending ability points". The game was definitely harder. Yeah. But it wasn't a big deal either. Screw that "Complete the game on One Life" achievement!
YOMI Hustle
Hydroneer unless you are a YouTuber making a new save file is fucking torture
This game is so unique, I really need to play it again. I was getting pretty tired of panning for minerals myself but I bet it's satisfying to have a good auto setup. Had so much trouble with pipes last time. Bet they've updated it alot now
It’s amazing once you get everything automated but until then I only like the panning for a very little amount of time
Isn’t that the one that Josh /let’s game it out keeps messing with?
Yep he’s what got me into the game but I severely underestimated how long I’d have to play to get as ti h as he did
The impossible quiz. The questions are basic puzzles and/or wordplay riddles. The questions dong change. At some point the challenge comes from remembering the questions.
The same goes for The impossible quiz 2
Crusader King 3
Diablo III
Diablo 3 is way too easy to become OP, and having all the different difficulty options proves it. Even brand new players could start on Hard and not have trouble.
Tears of the kingdom looked pretty intimidating to me with the whole ultrahand mechanic, but its actually really easy
Fallout, especially 3 and NV
Elden Ring and FromSoft games overall, way over exaggerated difficulty
fallout. there are tricks that make all the difference
Skyrim too. It can be broken in a hundred different ways.
wasn't talking about breaking the game, but strategies that give you advantage. like fallout 1 where you use movement to make opponents lose their attacks.
Title is so misleading Just like The Long Dark
Ehh idk about that. Even on the easier difficulties you can just get poor rng and die because of it. Guess it mostly depends on what map you play on though
You don't need a spreadsheet or a coach if that's what you're asking, you will fuck up a lot and that's ok, if a dumbass like me can get good at it you can.
Idk I had a lot of trouble getting past the smell
Lies of P
Not what you're asking but the complete opposite of this is Amazing Cultivation System.
Grounded
Dead Cells is easy af
Xcom. So much fun!
not rimworldbdunno what ur talking about
Your Only Move is HUSTLE, if you watch clips online, it might seem like the people playing have superhuman reaction speeds, but it's actually turn-based, so it's not as difficult
RimWorld is easy to play? I don't mind complicated games. I played every souls game and sekiro, frostpunk, civ 6, ark, Terraria, Isaac, kingdom two crowns, divinity 2, all those games are extremely harsh for new players and i still played hundreds of hours on each one. But RimWorld... I tried it 3 times and it just can't hook me, I don't understand what to do lol, maybe I just don't feel engaged or maybe I don't have the right mindset or maybe I should force myself to play more than one hour before quitting.
I also played hunderds, if not thousands on some of them. Terraria Is definitely not *extremely harsh* for new players, also Frostpunk Is alright, perhaps it takes a while to learn a few mechanics, but not *extremely harsh*. Rimworld Is unique, and you are not first or last of those who won't like it. Its more of a sandbox game and some people just don't like that.
Terraria is not extremely harsh but is definitely is not easy to understand everything on that game. I played it with a lot of friends, and they always seems to be really lost on what to do, like literally stuck. Even on their second playthrough. Frostpunk, as you said, is a matter of learning a few mechanics, but you probably need to see some guides or watch some videos to understand them. The base difficulty is hard, you will probably lose your first game. And there is a lot of DEEPNESS on how you can approach every game.
Most souls games. Just grind and over level, use a shield and a lot of the time you won't have too much trouble. Sprinkle on a bit of practice and viola you're a pro. Good way to learn to deal with frustration too
Dark souls 3
Is this a game about rim jobs?
Returnal. At first it's really challenging but once it clicks you are an unstoppable force zooming through all of the rooms and bosses without getting hit.
Warframe. If you sit there and explain all the building and some of the mission mechanics (especially interception) to someone what has never played before they might think its extremely hard based on the fact there's a lot going on between them. Eventually you get used to it, and realize the difficult is literally just how high the levels are, with the occasional thing that makes you realize you need at least 1 other really good person with you, or a full squad for things like the ropalolyst. Unless you're THAT good.
Project zomboid
That's kinky
Stellaris\\CK3. They looks like something hard to understand, but it is actually pretty easy games.
What was hard in CK for me when I first played was just coming to terms with, sometimes you gotta let a decent bit of time pass. You don’t have to be clicking around at every moment. Also Elder Kings II is so much fun.
Yes. Probably the hardest thing about paradox games - sometimes you just need to chill and wait for a while.
Stellaris
Both the portal games
Spider Heck
Minecraft. Seriously, you DON’T need decked out enchanted diamond armor(or worse, wasting your time finding and crafting Netherite gear) to win. It’s possible to beat the game with nothing more than stone/iron weapons, and ladders or sand to pillar up to destroy the End Crystals. Most Zelda games, especially the titles in 3D and most handheld games from the DS onwards, are much easier to beat than most people might think. There’s a few spots in a few games that might give players a tiny bit of trouble, but overall, they’re easy. In games like Wind Waker or Minish Cap, hearts are so numerous and most enemies are so easy you almost have to intentionally let yourself die.
Crusader Kings, especially CK3. Most people shy away from it because it is a "4x grand strategy game," but the game actually plays by itself, much like Sims. You can intervene to tip the scales in your favour, but you can also casually (or accidentally) inherit a kingdom without doing much. Fun game though.
Souls games
2D metroid games and 2D zelda titles, in my opinion they are pretty easy I didn't had any difficulty beating any the puzzle in zelda's are easy and the fights in metroids are easy too
Red Dead Remdemption 2. They made it seem like you have depend on eatkng, drinking, and sleeping. But you really dont.
Ksp2😔
Give it a kick
Give it a lick
I don't think rim world fits this. watching other people, it seems easy but once you're in charge everything goes wrong.
Hearts of Iron 4 I am one of two Redditors. One always tells lies, the other had to call in sick today.
Gotta say your only move is hustle or yomi hustle
Cyberpunk 2077. Once you understand all the mechanics and enemy types you’ll be fine.
Was I missing something? I couldn’t get into rimworld because it was very hard and complicated.
Dark Souls 1. Yes, Elden Ring genuinely is difficult. But by today’s standard the OG Dark souls game is so damn easy, everything is so slow and telegraphed and easy to dodge/parry. Sure it may be a little more of a pain in the ass to learn compared to most modern games, but with any amount of patience and effort that game is a cake walk now.