And that's the point I was making. What you're talking about is player based decisions choosing to make the game easier or harder, depending on how much of a challenge they fancy.

There are 'cool-points' to be had by putting words like 'dynamic' into game descriptions, even if the words are badly misused.

Many games allow for non-linear storyline/progression.

If my understanding is correct, the topic is regarding games that may not have multiple branches when moving forwards, but at least have the ability to go 'backwards' through the 'levels' the game has had to further the strength of the character and/or the capabilities of the player until they decide for themselves to more the game forward.

If that's the case, virtually any game that lets you play the same level over and over before continuing or allows to play previous levels before continuing to the next could fit this category.

Say for example, you are playing Super Mario World for SNES. You beat a level, opening up the next level. Instead of continuing, you replay the same level practicing the controls, acquiring a feather/flower, etc prior to continuing on to the newly unlocked level.

I believe there are a lot of games like this really, that have existed in the past, but I don't have any idea what you might call the concept itself. However, "in-game dynamic difficulty" does lead one to think of something else.

I would personally call it something like "Non-Forced Gameplay Continuation" or something along those lines. It has nothing to do with actually lessening the difficulty of the game, but rather improving the capabilities of the player/character until they decide themselves to continue.



Most any RPG really has the abilitiy to hold off on progression of the game until you are ready, by allowing you to simply grind monsters until you level/get new items/etc.

Quote:Original post by Bravepower
...
So you're asking if there are any other games which allow you to go back and forth between levels? Only rogue-like RPGs come to mind, since the whole premise of those games is to go deeper and deeper in a sequential vertical dungeon. Most single-player games (RPGs excepted) are based on skill to the point where the player is expected to be able to overcome the challenges in the next level. In other words, completing one level is qualification enough to play the next.

But some space games, for example "privateer", have this 'decision-based' difficulty. Maybe this is why they are so absorbing.

In my opinion, almost every game (without rigid, linear plot) can be made in such way that this would be possible to go back and forth between levels. I think this philosophy adds some freedom to the game.

Quote:Original post by jackolantern1
I would like to see more casual-friendly games that allow players to simply pause the game and choose a different difficulty while in the game... Some players want to just beat the game and see the ending, while others are playing specifically for the challenge. The former would likely love to be able to change it on the fly, so that they can have some challenge, but if it gets too much they can lower it. The latter would likely always choose the hardest difficulty for the achievement in it.

I also think the player should be given the choice.

My question is this: if I do let the player decide the difficulty, would I need to reward accordingly?

In a score based game, with a global leadrboard, would it be fair to credit the players with the same score whether they played it on hard/easy mode? if I do differentiate, wouldn't it encourage cheating (switching from one mode to another to get a higher score)?

[Edited by - Digital Chaos on October 19, 2009 1:26:19 AM]

Quote:Original post by jackolantern1
I would like to see more casual-friendly games that allow players to simply pause the game and choose a different difficulty while in the game...

This was done in the (very non-casual-friendly!) game Odin Sphere. If you switch to easy mode, you get fewer rewards for your efforts. I think it's a sensible approach, especially considering you are able to revisit levels at your leisure later on.

Quote:Original post by Digital Chaos
My question is this: if I do let the player decide the difficulty, would I need to reward accordingly?

In a score based game, with a global leadrboard, would it be fair to credit the players with the same score whether they played it on hard/easy mode? if I do differentiate, wouldn't it encourage cheating (switching from one mode to another to get a higher score)?

It's up to you if you think players should get lower scores in easier modes. Typically that's how it's done, though.

If you allow for switching difficulties during play, scoring should continue at the lowest difficulty they chose in that stage. That way, players are encouraged to stay with the harder difficulties if they are going for high scores.

I think for leaderboards it's usually most appropriate to have different boards for different difficulties. If you provide lower scores in easier modes, they will never appear on a shared leaderboard anyway. However, in a game where difficulty can be chosen like this, you couldn't really make the distinction between the modes so perhaps one is enough.

Hi Bravepower,

What if my game doesn't have stages/levels, but a constant flow? I think that allowing the player to switch between modes(ex. by pressing a button),while differentiating the score, might indeed encourage cheating.

So, should I:

a. Not enable that option
b. include it with a differentiated score and let the player have fun and cheat
c. include but credit with the same score


How would either one affect the players?

Thanks for the feedback :-)

@ Digital Chaos

What I've found is that lowering the rewards for playing on an easier difficulty will counter the impulse to go to lower difficulty.

A game like Fallout 3, for example, had a simple difficulty option in-game that you could change at any time. Lowering the difficulty on boss battles and what not was an option, but you wouldn't get as much experience points (Which is what you want) for it.

So, that would be a fair trade off to allow the feature.

Another thing I would mention is the game Borderlands, which had a tier (Dungeon/tier, who cares) based difficulty system where each new area had higher level enemies that challenged the player at seemingly every new area. This is by far the best system. At least, for a challenge seeker like me.

Borderlands' system would be a counterpoint to a game like Ninja Gaiden where at the start you are able to select a difficulty and play through the entire game at that difficulty (Unable to change it without restarting the whole story). Basically, with this type of system, the player gets small upgrades here and there but the enemies are virtually the same, some with more health than others, or do more damage, but the only way past an area was to keep dying until you got it. There was no option to return to an earlier level and hone your skills, or upgrade your character, you had to try and try with what you were given.

Games like that are a major challenge, but for more of a hardcore variety as it raises the replay value because player "must" beat him, but for others it will dissuade them to play a different game.

Hope that makes sense.

Hi Lando2,
It was really educating reading your post :-)

Quote:Original post by Lando2 What I've found is that lowering the rewards for playing on an easier difficulty will counter the impulse to go to lower difficulty.

But what If my game is a racing game, where you earn your points every time you do a lap?
If Pressing the fast play button (which is harder mode), every time, just before crossing the line (and switching right back to regular mode/slower mode) would earn me with double points, it would just be cheating, right? Which I'm not saying is necessarily a bad thing..(heck.. I'm new here, maybe it is :-) ) but still, should it be an option?
Thanks for the insight!
Cheers