![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
p_h_leeVaguely in response to +Dana Fried's recent post on the topic.
One of the fascinating things about the cultural construction of video game difficulty is that, historically, it's not true. I mean, yes, games were harder in the NES era, and there were good reasons for that (mainly, increasing the time commitment necessary) but Super Mario Bros, even in the Nth play-through where everything is beetles, isn't nearly as hard as Super Meat Boy. Metroid isn't nearly as hard as Ori. Etc.
So, what's up with this? Partially, I think that this is very standard sort of reactionary [1] cultural behavior, where you start by trying to push back against trend you dislike and end up pushing far, far beyond the nostalgic past that forms the emotional center of your reaction. You can see this in almost any form: an attempt to reinstate the past by codifying it actually ends up quite extreme.
But I think that there's something else going on as well. Namely, for most of these designers, they are nostalgic for games that they played as kids. Metroid isn't that hard for an adult, but for a child, it's nearly impossible. Mario, likewise, despite being fairly forgiving, is a huge difficulty for a child's mind and a child's reflexes. Thus, a lot of ~Nintendo Hard~ games aren't about recreating games as hard as the games we played as kids, but about creating games that are as hard on adults as those games were on us as kids. Which is to say: much, much harder.
Just a thought, not sure that there's any conclusion.
[1] No judgement is intended here. I love the hell out of a lot of modern, superhard games. I just recognize that they exist as a cultural reaction to the trends of making video games easier.
(apparently accidentally posted this to a tiny circle, intended to be public, sorry if you see it twice.)
One of the fascinating things about the cultural construction of video game difficulty is that, historically, it's not true. I mean, yes, games were harder in the NES era, and there were good reasons for that (mainly, increasing the time commitment necessary) but Super Mario Bros, even in the Nth play-through where everything is beetles, isn't nearly as hard as Super Meat Boy. Metroid isn't nearly as hard as Ori. Etc.
So, what's up with this? Partially, I think that this is very standard sort of reactionary [1] cultural behavior, where you start by trying to push back against trend you dislike and end up pushing far, far beyond the nostalgic past that forms the emotional center of your reaction. You can see this in almost any form: an attempt to reinstate the past by codifying it actually ends up quite extreme.
But I think that there's something else going on as well. Namely, for most of these designers, they are nostalgic for games that they played as kids. Metroid isn't that hard for an adult, but for a child, it's nearly impossible. Mario, likewise, despite being fairly forgiving, is a huge difficulty for a child's mind and a child's reflexes. Thus, a lot of ~Nintendo Hard~ games aren't about recreating games as hard as the games we played as kids, but about creating games that are as hard on adults as those games were on us as kids. Which is to say: much, much harder.
Just a thought, not sure that there's any conclusion.
[1] No judgement is intended here. I love the hell out of a lot of modern, superhard games. I just recognize that they exist as a cultural reaction to the trends of making video games easier.
(apparently accidentally posted this to a tiny circle, intended to be public, sorry if you see it twice.)
