Why the Newer Games Are Easier Than the Older Ones

[Locke]

Please note that this is not intended to be a debate over which games are easier. If you disagree with that premise, please save it for a different thread.

Assuming that the newer games are generally "easier" than older ones, why has this happened? Is it a good thing?

I came to a conclusion for both of these questions by examining my own skillset. I am not good at fast-paced action. In many of the earlier games, the "action" in "action/adventure", while not quite emphasized, played a large role - especially in battles and in puzzles requiring precise timing. I would argue that challenge is an important aspect of a game, but there's also the reality that many people just aren't inclined to certain skills, and training them can be frustrating.

What I think has happened is that the gaming industry has expanded by weeding out those elements requiring specific skillsets in favor of tasks that are more generally enjoyable, hoping to make games more accessible. With "action" limiting them to those players with specific skillsets, they began focusing on building worlds for "adventure", which is a much broader activity and can be enjoyed by a much larger audience.

The challenge is still there, but it's not focused on a specific skillset so it's not as taxing. Think of it like sitting on the blunt end of a nail versus the sharp end - Even though one end has more of an impact, there's just as much nail either way.

Improving controls to be more intuitive may also play a role.

I haven't addressed whether this is a good thing much, but I think I'll follow my advice and open this up for some discussion first.

 

[Ventus]

slightly off topic It's funny, my dad and I were just talking about how action heroes don't meld in adventure movies -- a big buffed dude doesn't fit in an adventure movie; the actor must be a "normal" person. Ha.

I do agree that the newer games are easier because, in essence, the developers are focusing less on a specific type of player (not that they were really TRYING to focus on a specific type of player back then...they inadvertently made the games that way, I assume) and more on the general audience. It's mostly so that they can make money, partially so the qualms about the games being too hard will cease and desist.

The games essentially are being geared towards a more 'adventure' based audience rather than the 'action' audience of yore. Again, it's mostly for money but also so the difficulty complaints will stop.

I wouldn't come close to arguing that this change in genre is a GOOD thing, from a gamer's point of view. I love challenge, I love sheer difficulty and the newer games do not give me that in the VAGUEST sense of the word, let alone the CLEAREST. But, for economy, this is definitely good for Nintendo themselves. More people attracted to the game typically means moer people BUY the game, and more people BUYING the game means more salad for the big N. At best, I'd say this is a double edged sword, but that's just me. The change doesn't harm Nintendo in anyway, but consumer side the lack of difficulty creates a rift of sorts. So, I don't know.

 

[A Link In Time]

The extra dimension in contemporary 3D installments allows for more wiggle room in avoiding enemies, trap doors, etc. whereas in a 2D game like A Link to the Past where dungeons are composed of cramped corridors and tiny side rooms, the threat is less easily avoided.

It's interesting you mention the shift from the "action" to "adventure" in Action-Adventure, Locke. Last year's critically acclaimed The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim featured an overwhelming level of meandering across the overworld but this also greatly prolonged the game and created the illusion of another secret or battle just around the corner.

That said the videogame industry in general has profoundly evolved and adapted over these past eight years since the inception of the Nintendo DS and its "Touch Generation" campaign turning non-gamers into gamers. Nintendo's overarching philosophy under Iwata is to lure novice players through lighter, more casual experiences prior to transitioning to the likes of Zelda or Metroid.

I'm a fan of the approach Nintendo has pursued with the Zelda franchise in particular. Take SS for example. While the main quest can be completed with Link's default arsenal and further assistance obtained through Skyloft's Sheikah Stone, upgrading provides an extra layer of depth and creativity in progression. On the other hand, it takes a veteran's eye to weed out every goddess cube, gratitude crystal, weapon upgrade, etc. with hero mode as an extra incentive for the more experienced.