Nifflas' Support Forum
Released Games => Saira => Topic started by: baramburum on February 01, 2010, 13:00:18
-
The game is nice, but everything is so hard !!!!
What is the reason to make game, what it is hard to be done ? !!!!
Please make the different difficulties (easy, normal, hard) which will affect on the time you use for tasks
-
Oh come on, it's not a difficult game!
Games used to be harder than this you know :)
-
Difficulty is subjective. Even with difficulty levels etc, it is extremely difficult for a game to be easy enough to be accessable yet hard enough to appeal to those who play for challenge.
-
If you find it too hard, and there are no other difficulty options, you can always make your own easier version.
-
If you find it too hard, and there are no other difficulty options, you can always make your own easier version.
Nah, I have a better idea. Sue Nifflas!
-
Which bit specifically are you finding hard, the platforming side or the puzzles side. If it's the former - Practice makes perfect, if the latter - On your PDA you've got a device solver thing that can help you out ....
-
I'm finding the platform bits hard. Not an unfamiliar issue with niffgames. Games with directional keys AND more than one button are an issue for me, something I have come to terms with. But, the far-too-regular momentum/collision issue where Saira seems to prefer sliding backwards to turning around are INFURIATING. Pretty sure that's happening because I'm trying to turn around a second too early while still in the air. I really like the game though. one of the best-balanced platform-puzzle combos i've come across. The little things like the level descriptions and different outfits in different weather are simply wonderful. Just wish i could get a little further to enjoy more of it. No point in getting the full game when I can't beat the demo.
-
I guess it all comes down to what people like. Some people for example complained that Saira don't lose her horizontal momentum instantly when she hits the ground, but in the early super mario games (and I remember new super mario bros DS being the same) you slide across half the screen if you don't stop the momentum while it only takes Saira two tiles to stop on full speed. I don't understand the part about sliding backwards. I know it's possible to slide backwards if you change the direction you travel by a large amount while in air, but I'm this moment searching the game for an area where this can actually be a problem, and I can't even find a place where you need to change your direction in the air at all more than just small adjustments.
I guess some people just have different opinions about how hard a game should be, and I know this game is hard, but the movements are not unfair, unpredictable, buggy, or inconsistent in any way. The problem with all PC games that works similar to a gamepad (two action buttons and four direction buttons) is key jamming. I set up the customizable function keys so it would be possible to overcome this if the keyboard is bad, but that's really all I can do about that.
-
the slidy physics are what make me so crap at mario 1, too... Having said that, I stuck some fake hair on my scrote, manned up a little and got through the demo! Will most likely go on to purchase the full game as well.
Nah, it's not turning in the air. My problem comes from attempting to turn around on the ground instantly after landing or just before falling. I THINK i hit the button too early, start falling backwards instead, hit the ground and slide instead of turning around. Or, fall off a ledge pressing back a little too early and instead of turning around and grabbing onto the wall slide off it and scrape my back all the way down.
-
There will always be people who complain, so it's impossible to make a game perfect. I'm not saying that some complaints aren't genuine, of course. Saira isn't perfect when it comes to physics, but I've never been killed or had something bad happen to me because of them. The only problems with the physics system in Saira are minor annoyances that are rare enough for me to ignore.
-
I say it's all subjective, because in my opinion she moves exactly like I want and intended. I can't see any problems. Sure, if the quality of a product is measured by the number of people who likes them, then all the mainstream games are awesome and the rest are flawed. I can just never see it like that though, and it's the same thing with the controls; if you don't like them, perhaps they're quite simply not the type of thing for you, rather than the controls themselves being flawed.
The thing is that today, even if you make a very nice design choice that every person isn't going to connect to instantly, it will be critisized for being flawed. There'll definitely be similar comments about Night Sky by a number of reasons I will not explain - but it will actually happen for things which are essentially good design choices that makes the game a lot more fun for those who figures them out and uses them as an advantage rather than just expecting NG to work like any other platformer.
-
I mentally chuckled at this, recalling the difficulty of the #mas games. The only really hard bits in Saira, in my opinion, are the sections where you need to do something really fast, like getting to a place where you need to use the flying power.
-
(note about post title: No performance issues with game itself which runs beautifully. It refers to my own ability to 'perform', a double entendre referring both to my gaming skill and an innuendo indirectly slighting my sexual performance)
Yeah, I never even got to a boss in any of the MA's. Couldn't even get to the end of TTP. At least i passed geoffry the fly (sobs). Games DID used to be harder. They couldn't use fancy graphics, developed storylines or even writable memory in many cases, so they had to rely on pure gameplay. Of course, I had an excuse for being bad at them back then, being six years old. It's just that i've only got marginally better.
Played Night Game too, (on mac keyboard, which was great, at melbourne exhibition for the last Independent Games Awards) and thought the physics for that were completely self-explanatory. By which I mean every little way the thing behaved felt right, or if not, felt necessary or at least completely explicable. Getting used to the physics in Saira quickly, though not happily. I've been spoiled by the ability to turn around and grab onto ledges which allows forgiveness for small mistakes of timing.
-
an innuendo indirectly slighting my sexual performance
wat :huh:
-
I think the controls while maybe not conventional, work pretty well in Saira. It would certainly break a lot of things (and in maybe only my opinion ruin the game in some ways) if they were changed to be more like Knytt or KS, which as Nifflas points out were totally unrealistic, but granted, so was were the games. It was a happy ending there, and seeing as Saira is more realistic in style, one would expect the control to be more realistic (and they are) so I find that really nice to see. Maybe I'm one of the few who actually like the way Saira moves and controls, but I really enjoy it, it actually reminds me of Mirror's Edge 2D, where you need momentum to get to various parts of the levels. I like it personally, and I find it a nice pace from Nifflas' other games, which while control well, and are totally in sync to their respective atmosphere, aren't nearly as natural as Saira.
-
I totally agree with everything you say there, Blox.
Knytt/KS had one control-style, which was perfect for them as it was integral to the design of those games.
Saira has a very different control-style, which is perfect for Saira as it's integral to the world you explore in that.
They're different game-systems, and I think many of the "criticisms" of Saira are simply misplaced expectations. :^^: Saira is not a Knytt-style game in the same way KS was. X-P
-
The platforming is not hard to me, i love a challenge with platforming, and the controls are brilliant for me. It's the puzzles that I cant handle, so I stopped playing. Specifically, the Function puzzles. I feel the same way I felt when I played Braid. Like crushing something.
-
It's the speedrun parts that defeated me. (But I don't blame Nifflas for it. I'm just not good enough; you can't be good at *everything*...)
-
I thought most parts were pretty easy. An XH version would be fun...
-
I thought most parts were pretty easy. An XH version would be fun...
Seconded.
-
I don't thing that in Saira is everything so hard. In some parts, you need to use your logic, the planet in left down conner is not easy, but most of places in Saira are easy.
-
I just dislike how I can't turn around in mid air... it can be done in real life with just a shift of weight (backpack).
-
I just dislike how I can't turn around in mid air... it can be done in real life with just a shift of weight (backpack).
True, but you can't change the direction of your jump in midair, so implementing it would just be pointless anyways.
-
It wouldn't be pointless because then you could grab onto a wall behind you. If you're facing the wrong way you can't grab onto the wall!
-
Sorry, I've tested it when I developed the game and it looks incredibly stupid and wrong with the character, no matter if I base the direction on the X speed or the last pressed arrow key. This is how the movements does and should work and nobody can convince me otherwise. You just have to jump in such a way that you don't end up facing the wrong direction, it's as simple as that.
-
It wouldn't be pointless because then you could grab onto a wall behind you. If you're facing the wrong way you can't grab onto the wall!
But if you are facing the wrong way you can't jump towards the wall at all. :huh:
-
You do have limited air control, so it is possible. Particularily stuff that jumping off a cliff and grabbing on to it would be possible if you could turn in mid air, which could probably be useful (although I specifically designed the game to never require the player to do it). As I mentioned earlier though, it looked too stupid in Saira for me to add it.
-
No point in getting the full game when I can't beat the demo.
Sorry for waking a slightly old thread but this seems to be a very relevant comment!!
I've been playing the demo and whilst I love the style and concept - the execution created a game which punishes me rather than rewards me and which discourages exploration - and buying the full game!
When I finally manage a difficult set of jumps or timed section I feel it was 'more by luck than skill' - wheras I should be feeling that I'd learned something and could replicate that easily (the feeling of progress).
There's a fine line between making something challenging and making it frustrating and that line varies depending on who's playing it which is why almost every game on earth has difficulty settings.
By not having those - and by making challenges frustratingly hard - you drive away custom. When the challenge is largely based on a timer - a difficulty setting would be effortless too!!
I've lost count of the comments I've seen which were something along the lines of
"Lovely game - then I got to the gas planet and just closed and uninstalled it because it was taking the piss".
and it's a shame because there's so much to love.here,
A genuinely bad game gets no comments at all, when people complain a game is too hard it's because they WANT to play it but it's not letting them - you should listen to that...
-
There's a fine line between making something challenging and making it frustrating and that line varies depending on who's playing it which is why almost every game on earth has difficulty settings.
...
By not having those - and by making challenges frustratingly hard - you drive away custom. When the challenge is largely based on a timer - a difficulty setting would be effortless too!!
I agree when it comes to that fine line, and that the fine line, in some respects, is a personal evaluation.
But i don't think this game is punishing. Some parts require the gamer to retry a few times (which is a good feat - nothing feels rewarding if there's no struggle, which i think is the major problem with many modern games), but every part is fairly beatable. The easiest way to get through a special part seems to be more reliant of rethinking, putting up a new strategy on how to move ahead, rather than refining jumping/running/climbing skills.
Personally, i love this game for daring to be a bit more challengin than many seem to expect and at the same time doesn't give you the hopeless feeling (Like Die Hard or Contra for NES).
Difficulty levels have downsides, too. When i played KS for the first time, i chose easy because i thought i would never make it otherways. It wasn't until later i realized it was much more fun to play through on the harder difficulty setting which actually suited me better (it simply feels mor rewarding to discover a new scenario/scene/level/environment/bit of story or whatever after overcoming an obstacle which actually stopped you on the first try ). That's a mistake i've done ever since i was a kid playing doom and such early 3d shooters.
-
Still, it's incredibly hard to design something for everyone. Some people thought it was too hard, while others said the difficulty made the game extremely rewarding and that they really enjoyed it. Besides, when it comes to difficulty Saira can't come anywhere close to e.g. Mega Man 9 which I specifically enjoyed for it's insane difficulty. They didn't offer an easy mode yet the game seems to do well.
If I had more time, the game would have an easier mode to appeal to more people. I wish I had time to add it, but I don't regret how I designed the game considering my limited time. One person's frustration is another person's "finally a game that's not way too easy", and I've heard both the former and latter. I chose to appeal to the second group this time, because that's the type of player I am, and a lot of players I know are too. I can't stand many "big" games today where the entire first portion of the game is a long boring tutorial that holds the player's hand and repeats everything many times to make sure I don't get stuck, and then it takes a few hours before I die the first time. Even I'm forced to make my tutorials longer than I wish and remind them about features in the middle of the games, because people aren't good at figuring things out today. Mirror's Edge is an example of a game people expected to have this awesome flow like it ran on some auto pilot, then a lot of people gave it negative reviews because the obstacles were in the way and they would stop the momentum all the time. I think it was just perfect, it's just those reviewers who aren't good enough playing it. Machinarium is an example of a game where many puzzles was said to be too hard. I can't understand that, I beat the game without a walkthrough thinking that it was great! It's also extremely common that games today have great puzzles but have this sidekick character that almost gives away the entire solution, like in Okami. In Saira, the device solver is at least optional ;)
Then, one downside of me trying different things in different games is that it does usually not not appeal to people who didn't like my previous game. Many WaDF players didn't like Knytt, because Knytt had no challenge or clever puzzles. However, Knytt found its own new group of players. Knytt players usually liked Knytt Stories because they weren't that different. Knytt Stories players didn't like Saira because it was so hard (but really, is it harder than Within a Deep Forest? That game is said by many to be incredibly frustrating, but it's still really popular) and usually gave it negative reveiws, but there were new players who liked Saira and the positive opinions and reviews started to show up. Same with FiNCK, it put a lot of people off due to it not being very atmospheric, but it's being downloaded a lot (the soundtrack is selling too although I admit I should have done the custom world support differently). I've just accepted that this is what happens when I release a new game, and that it'd be very boring to create games if this was not allowed to happen.
-
Besides, when it comes to difficulty Saira can't come anywhere close to e.g. Mega Man 9 which I specifically enjoyed for it's insane difficulty. They didn't offer an easy mode yet the game seems to do well.
Mega man 9 - what a wonder! I haven't beat it yet, but it is a really fresh breath in this age of games moving closer and closer to hollywood scripts, and as you mentioned, eternal hand-holding.
Other great examples of games that are incredibly hard but very well rewarding are Myst and Riven. I still haven't beaten those two, but i've beaten all their sequels which tells something about how the general game design ideology have changed over time. I think this is harmful in many cases. In the end, you get hordes of players that are accustomed to games who, in my opinion, lacks quality simply because they doesn't engage, nor reward.
If there's anything i prioritize in a game, it is the following four conditions:
-Game is engaging (you don't sit and passively observe, like it was some movie)
-Game is rewarding (you feel you've really accomplished something, combined with that you feel like earn something (new scenes, moods, atmosphere, music, story progression and/or items)
-Game has a high replay value (through for example variable ends, secrets, unlockable modes, characters etc, item collection/trading, achievement earning etc)
-A degree of uniqueness (be it gameplay, outstanding graphical design, rare online solutions, rare concept or goal)
If there's any of these i think Saira might lack, it would be the replayability. While it feels nice to revisit the beautiful environments, there seems to be no secrets to be found. But this only counts for now. Eventually, there might come new fanmade episodes, perhaps (oh, i wish!) even official expansions from what i've read.
DWaF was absolutely trickier than Saira, yes. I, however, found much more resemblance from Knytt/Knytt stories, despite some fundamental differences (in both DWaf and Saira, if you've finished a cave/planet, you won't be going there much more while you run through and backtrack constantly in many KS levels as soon as a new object is acquired). Also, players who are a fan of the atmosphere of Knytt should get an overdose in Saira (in a most pleasant way). :D
-
Hmm, ...
Yes, it is a little hard, but ... a few minutes with cheating in settings I can have all of items and i can teleport myself.
But the game will lose sense and big pleasure of very (!) nice gameplay.
-
I don't actually object to games which are hard - on the condition that repeated play/practice makes them easier.
This really doesn't seem to be the case with Saira tho (at least the demo) - the frustrating sections remain frustrating however many times you do them - there's seems to be an element of luck required alongside considerable repetition and skill.
To then place 2 such sections together without a save inbetween (which happens at least once in the demo) is really sticking the knife in!
All of which plays counter to the core of the game which seems much more cerebral (probably explaining why half the people complain about time limts and the other half about puzzles!!) :)
-
Perhaps you're not very good with platformers then? I've heard plenty of people thinking it's easy after some practice (I even scored lower on a review in a local newspaper complaining about how easy the game was. Sure, uncommon, but clearly shows some people have different experiences than yours). There's no luck involved, the timed puzzle in Claymore gives you 1 minute and 23 seconds over if you execute it perfectly, as oppoased to some racing games where you only get a few seconds and are doomed if you cut a corner wrong. All you need to do is to not go into the race directly, but try out various paths and plan out a good route (even though pretty much any route works). There's plenty of room for mistakes in other words, and note that Antikythera said in another thread he beated it on his second run with 30 seconds left. Yet people commonly complain about the Hoffman timed race. I'm trying to understand it, but I can't.
Same with puzzle sections. Yann designed some of the harder Goldschmidt puzzles, and although they were challenging I beated them in a few tries. I know many have complained about the difficulty of those puzzles, but that's the sort of stuff I like when I play gams and rarely get to experience. The ball chain puzzle in Machinarium was one such puzzle I really liked.
-
Personally, I think Saira is challenging, but not the kind of challenging that makes you smash your monitor. The kind of challenging that makes you feel awesome when you finally solve that puzzle, or make that jump, or whatever. Anyone here ever played VVVVVV? That game is HARD HARD HARD, but you feel really awesome when you finally beat it. Saira is like this too.
And now that I'm talking about VVVVVV: the people saying Saira is too hard: go play VVVVVV. Tell me what's harder.
=|=
-
Yeah, those complaints are unjustified. Saira is not a very hard game. It is simply a game for gamers.
-
Other great examples of games that are incredibly hard but very well rewarding are Myst and Riven. I still haven't beaten those two, but i've beaten all their sequels which tells something about how the general game design ideology have changed over time. I think this is harmful in many cases. In the end, you get hordes of players that are accustomed to games who, in my opinion, lacks quality simply because they doesn't engage, nor reward.
My favourites :D
I have finished both (and all the sequels), and i must say that although agree about riven, myst isn't that difficult. In fact, Myst and saira hare some similarities. Both of them include puzzles that really need you to think outside the square
-
Other great examples of games that are incredibly hard but very well rewarding are Myst and Riven. I still haven't beaten those two, but i've beaten all their sequels which tells something about how the general game design ideology have changed over time. I think this is harmful in many cases. In the end, you get hordes of players that are accustomed to games who, in my opinion, lacks quality simply because they doesn't engage, nor reward.
My favourites :D
I have finished both (and all the sequels), and i must say that although agree about riven, myst isn't that difficult. In fact, Myst and saira hare some similarities. Both of them include puzzles that really need you to think outside the square
I remember playing Myst IV ages ago. It was...uh, I can't describe it. It was confusing as hell. I could NEVER, EVER get past that puzzle in the elevator.
I abused the camera feature to no end, though.
=|=
-
I haven't actually tried any Myst games. I should really check them out!
-
Haha it is surprising to see my name in a Nifflas post!
About Myst, it's a really great series. The first three are amazing, and though the series goes downhill from there, there are still some great Ages. Namely Spire is especially impressive.
As others have said, Riven is the most difficult while Exile is definitely the easiest (but my favorite).
-
Yeah, those complaints are unjustified. Saira is not a very hard game. It is simply a game for gamers.
This is exactly the sort of nonsense which muddles the issue - to assume that "gamers" have some inate skill or patience or that they all have a minimum skill level is to demonstrate your ignorance and little else.
I picked up the OP's comment because it seemed to me, having played the demo and mostly enjoyed it, that punishing time limits in a game where exploration and puzzle solving seem more the order of the day, is to risk alienating most of the people, most of the time.
I didn't just speak for myself - a quick search of gaming forums produced a lot of people saying "it was great until I hit the gas planet/time limits and I just lost interest" - as the someone already said, "why buy a game you cannot complete the demo of"?
It's not hard to make a game which everyone CAN play - it's hard to make a game which everyone WANTS to play. It's actually easy to make a game a few people will beat and then declare 'easy' - and putting in a 'hardcore' difficulty allows those people to crow about their "mad skillz" whilst everyone else ENJOYS the game - y'see...
-
People who are used to playing platform games should really not find Saira very hard. A gamer is someone who plays games on a regular basis, so yes, they do have developed some more skills than one who only seldom plays a game. It's not innate, but rather something one acquires with practice. For instance, if you have beaten WaDF I don't think you'd find Saira hard. If you have no practice playing games, sure it's harder, but that's why I said it is a game for gamers.
-
Actually, I've beaten WaDF on hard, yet I find Saira a hard game to play. Not so much because of the platform aspect, but a bit due to me having to familiarize with the controls, and losing overview in a few challenges.
There's one challenge where you have to go to certain areas within a time limit. I keep screwing up there because I head into the wrong direction and make dumb climb mistakes to loose valuable time. I'm sure that if I practice long enough, I will make it, but I have too little time to invest in trying again.
NOTE: I do blame myself for failing, not Nifflas.
-
People who are used to playing platform games should really not find Saira very hard. A gamer is someone who plays games on a regular basis, so yes, they do have developed some more skills than one who only seldom plays a game. It's not innate, but rather something one acquires with practice. For instance, if you have beaten WaDF I don't think you'd find Saira hard. If you have no practice playing games, sure it's harder, but that's why I said it is a game for gamers.
How is life behind that lovely set of blinkers you're sporting there??
What you think matters not 1 iota - what Niflas things isn't much more important either - the point I've tried to make (and which you seem unable to grasp) is that the OP, myself and seemingly quite a few other people have decided the game is too hard/not worth persevering with (even just the demo!) - and that's a failure in anyone's book surely?
If we thought the game was shit we'd have said nothing and moved along, but clearly we like a lot of what the game is trying to do BUT it's less fun/enjoyable/rewarding to do it because we feel we're being punished/the game is unfair.
If I'd developed the game I'd love this sort of feedback - I'd take in onboard because I cannot know how others approach/play my games and I'd want as many people to play them as possible (whether for financial reward or just personal satisfaction).
Taking a "this game is hard and is designed for people who like hard games" attitude is - imho - bollocks - it would be like making a car which misfires and where the wheels fall-off from time to time just to 'challenge' the driver...
-
The difficulty of a game a failure it does not make. That is, the game could be insanely hard, and someone is going to enjoy it, and think it was worth playing. Same with an easy game, someone is going to enjoy it even if all you have to do is walk right the whole time.
What I'm saying here, is that there is more to a game than challenges (or lack-there-of). Frankly I find it really rude of several of the posts in this topic saying basically the the game is worthless just because they can't play it the way they would have liked it. I payed $50 for many games and still have yet to beat them after 5-8 years. But do I write them off as a failure for my inability to play the game well? No.
I don't think your statement comparing a harder game to a car that loses it's wheels quite the same either. First, remember that 1: This is a game. Second remember that the game cannot harm you the way a car could. The difficulty of the game does not compare to a life/death situation in a car. So while I understand your frustration in all of this, I think you are pointing it in the wrong direction. You bought the game. You are the one complaining about a game just because you found it too hard. Think about it a bit.
-
What you think matters not 1 iota - what Niflas things isn't much more important either - the point I've tried to make (and which you seem unable to grasp) is that the OP, myself and seemingly quite a few other people have decided the game is too hard/not worth persevering with (even just the demo!) - and that's a failure in anyone's book surely?
If we thought the game was shit we'd have said nothing and moved along, but clearly we like a lot of what the game is trying to do BUT it's less fun/enjoyable/rewarding to do it because we feel we're being punished/the game is unfair.
And my answer to you was exactly that your standards about the fairness of the game are probably not the same as one who is used to playing videogames - a gamer.
If I'd developed the game I'd love this sort of feedback - I'd take in onboard because I cannot know how others approach/play my games and I'd want as many people to play them as possible (whether for financial reward or just personal satisfaction).
That's what's wrong with commercial videogames and the reason I like indie games. Nowdays, the industry makes mostly games for the masses, instead of focusing on what they want to make, as creative people. I think you were not around at the time, but many people from this forum know that THAT is exactly what went wrong with Knytt Experiment - Nifflas trying to please everyone and thus not making the game HE wanted to make.
Taking a "this game is hard and is designed for people who like hard games" attitude is - imho - bollocks - it would be like making a car which misfires and where the wheels fall-off from time to time just to 'challenge' the driver...
As BloxMaster said, that analogy does not hold up, as a challenge is inherent to the game and a car is mostly a tool to get you from one place to another.
Also, does that "imho" mean "in my humble opinion"? Because when you said "How is life behind that lovely set of blinkers you're sporting there??", it did not sound humble at all.
-
If I'd developed the game I'd love this sort of feedback - I'd take in onboard because I cannot know how others approach/play my games and I'd want as many people to play them as possible (whether for financial reward or just personal satisfaction).
I know how others approach and play my games. I have beta testing, and even let other people play the games while I watch what they're doing. This is really important for how I design the games, so feedback is an important part of my game development. You seem to talk like I don't understand how people approach and play Saira. I have experience from creating many games here, I've got feedback for every game, and I've seen people play them all. In fact, I know in detail what areas casual gamers get stuck in, what the most common mistakes the player makes, and where non-gamers simply get frustrated and give up. I deliberately try to target people who like hard games with Saira, there's no unintentional difficulty here. I like hard games, and I have a high respect for other developers who dare to create a real challenge in the 21th century despite that people will complain. Games like La-Mulana, Spelunky, or Mega Man 9 wouldn't be what they are if they were made easier, and nothing is a failure about them just because most people can't beat them.
Don't get me wrong, I do appreciate feedback. However, one of the main mistakes people who write feedback to me often make is that they don't realize they're one single person. I get more feedback than you can imagine, both from people who absolutely hate my design choices, and people who really like them. I can never please everyone and if I try to sum it all up it just becomes a paradox. Appreciating feedback is not the same thing as agreeing with it all. If I did that, my head would explode over figuring out how to solve a paradox, instead of just being able to create the game I like.
I'm satisfied with the general feedback about Saira. Again, some think it's too hard which is logical since it's a hard game, other appreciate the difficulty because they like hard games. You say I should listen to the feedback I get, but you don't understand that I've heard a lot of positive opinions about the difficulty, and that I need to take that into account too. Even in this thread, there are more people who appreciate the difficulty, than people who dislike it. No matter how right you think you are, you're just one opinion out of hundreds to me.
<?
while($conclusion==false) {
echo "Yeah, but the game is not just hard, it's too hard!\n";
echo "That's because the game is made to appeal to people who like hard games!\n";
}
?>
-
People of the 21st century are so spoiled...
Hard is good. Raise the difficulty farther. :shifty:
-
Personally I didn't find it hard at all; I'd say it was perfect for my ability (no arrogance intended because I've got no right to be), but considering everyone has different abilities then there's obviously no pleasing everyone.
As for those who find it too hard, the opinions of those who persevere are more justified than the opinions of those who dismiss it for being too challenging.
Better a game be too hard than too easy...
-
[...] there are more people who appreciate the difficulty, than people who dislike it. No matter how right you think you are, you're just one opinion out of hundreds to me.
This entire thread carries a presumption that difficulty is an either-or (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Either-or_fallacy) property, and I do not agree.
Optional features that increase accessibility can not possibly destroy the enjoyment for these (allegedly) "hardcore" players.
An easy mode excludes none, but actively invites all of us "casual" players. While I understand there might be development- and time issues to this, surely us "1 in a 100" would be appreciated customers?
See, here's my situation: I paid for this game only to be locked out of the vast majority of its content. I'm sure you're all great people, but this macho bullshit and lack of empathy is not helpful. At all. I didn't buy Macho Mega Man 9. So please: let me increase or completely remove the time limits. And lessen my frustration by not forcing me sit through that 3-second countdown. Every. Fucking. Time. You know - just give me the god damn win-button (http://www.pixelpoppers.com/2009/11/in-praise-of-easy-lowering-barrier-to.html)! :)
(also Nifflas; the pinball mechanics are textbook game design! Superbly elegant. Do something with that, it would KILL on Android/iPhone.)
-
Everything takes time. An easy mode need to change the topography of all levels, and requires alternative variations of all the puzzles. On top of that, the second common complaint is that the game is too short. Now, Saira's development time would have been much longer if I wanted to "fix" both these things, and we were only two guys doing most of the work, the game was already pushing my capabilities. If I listened, Saira would either still be a game under development, or even worse, a game that would never be finished. Worth to mention is that the most common mistake among "small" game developers is to attempt to create too large games with too many features, and for every game released there's dozens of games that developers failed with due to taking on a too big task. Having spent so many of my first years on never-to-be-seen games like this, I know that I must ignore most of the ideas that pops up in my own head to be able to get anything done at all.
Still, people want my games with more difficulty settings, with more length, or more features. For games with customizable level editors, I get requests for customizable characters, enemies, or as it was suggested in the "the community is dead" board, that it would be great with a Knytt Stories editor with more customization so that entire new games could be built out of it.
From your perspective, it probably looks like that you know an improvement that would make the game better. You want me to implement it. Try to see it from my angle; I get tons of suggestions, opinions, and complains. I get them on this forum, by msn, by email, and in person, about every game I release and have released. I know I can only pick to a tenth of the suggestions and still be able to finish my games. I know some people will feel unappreciated because I didn't pick theirs, and I can't fix that without sacrificing something else either. How can I explain that I appreciate you casual gamers too, and still won't implement this in Saira?
I made sure that the demo both contained complicated puzzles and timed platform sections to make sure the player wouldn't be mistaken about its difficulty. The best suggestion I can give is to try the demos. In the future, I might create a game with a difficulty that's right for you!
Admins, feel free to lock; everything have been said and at this point the arguments are just on repeat.