Everything is so HARD !!!

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).

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

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

Quote from: Stinktier on July 30, 2010, 20:15:56

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

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.