Multiple Difficulties in Hacks [locked]

2008-10-23 01:20:45 pm

I saw a small discussion on this in the Pantheon thread but didn't want to continue it there. It's been suggested that future hacks should make two versions of hacks, easy and hard so as to please the most people. I don't like this idea one bit, personally.

In my opinion, the only way to make a hack harder is to either a., increase enemy and boss health and damage and add a few tricky jumps or grapple sections (legitimate difficulty) or b., create what I call "artificial difficulty." Artificial difficulty is adding spikes, random mockballing, crazy shinesparks, One wall walljumps in tight spots, more spikes, heat runs, suitless underwater for prolonged periods of time, those sorts of things. I'm opposed to all of those when concerning the way I want to make Volta. From the beginning, I've wanted Volta to be accessible to anyone, even someone that had never played SM before. My idea behind it is that what if Super Metroid took place on another planet? Therefore I want to keep the same/slightly harder difficulty that SM had.

Now, I know I could release the hack like that for the easy crowd and make a harder one for the rest but the deal is that it goes against my values in hacking to make those required. Sure, I can do all the tricks with the best of them, but just because I can doesn't mean I want to place them in a hack of mine.

Trick sections break the flow of the game. If you're traveling along and suddenly you have to stop for 5 minutes in one room because you have to solve a tricky mockball, it defeats the purpose of having smooth game flow, not to mention that any time you want to go the other way, you have to redo the puzzle. It's not fun gameplay. That's one reason I loved Redesign, Dependence, Golden Dawn, Pantheon, the Japanese hacks and will definitely love Aegis and Eris. These hacks don't require all the glitch maneuvers and yet still manage to be tough in their own ways. Redesign had you dealing with physics all the time, Dependence and Golden Dawn were hard in exploration, Pantheon wasn't really hard but it was still very enjoyable, the Japanese hacks were very unique in a lot of ways, Aegis looks to be a Super Metroid player's dream and Eris is scraping the heaven with its high level of detail in its design. These are the kind of hacks that I enjoy the most.

This is not to say that I hate hacks that require these things. I still like them but not as much as the others. I just don't want to see it become a requirement that every hack must include these tricks in some shape or form in order to please people. I was looking at the comment in the Pantheon thread where people were criticizing it for being too easy How is that a bad thing? Those sort of comments make me worry about the future of SM hacking. I'm worried that soon we'll get to a point where SM hacks will only become accessible to TASers and glitch masterminds.

Well, this rant/food for thought went on a bit longer than I anticipated it to go. But I just felt like i had to get it out there. I'd love to hear everyone's ideas on the subject and maybe we can bget a good discussion going here.

Thread title:

I saw a small discussion on this in the Pantheon thread but didn't want to continue it there.  It's been suggested that future hacks should make two versions of hacks, easy and hard so as to please the most people.  I don't like this idea one bit, personally.

In my opinion, the only way to make a hack harder is to either a., increase enemy and boss health and damage and add a few tricky jumps or grapple sections (legitimate difficulty) or b., create what I call "artificial difficulty."  Artificial difficulty is adding spikes, random mockballing, crazy shinesparks, One wall walljumps in tight spots, more spikes, heat runs, suitless underwater for prolonged periods of time, those sorts of things.  I'm opposed to all of those when concerning the way I want to make Volta.  From the beginning, I've wanted Volta to be accessible to anyone, even someone that had never played SM before.  My idea behind it is that what if Super Metroid took place on another planet?  Therefore I want to keep the same/slightly harder difficulty that SM had.

Now, I know I could release the hack like that for the easy crowd and make a harder one for the rest but the deal is that it goes against my values in hacking to make those required.  Sure, I can do all the tricks with the best of them, but just because I can doesn't mean I want to place them in a hack of mine.

Trick sections break the flow of the game.  If you're traveling along and suddenly you have to stop for 5 minutes in one room because you have to solve a tricky mockball, it defeats the purpose of having smooth game flow, not to mention that any time you want to go the other way, you have to redo the puzzle.  It's not fun gameplay.  That's one reason I loved Redesign, Dependence, Golden Dawn, Pantheon, the Japanese hacks and will definitely love Aegis and Eris.  These hacks don't require all the glitch maneuvers and yet still manage to be tough in their own ways.  Redesign had you dealing with physics all the time, Dependence and Golden Dawn were hard in exploration, Pantheon wasn't really hard but it was still very enjoyable, the Japanese hacks were very unique in a lot of ways, Aegis looks to be a Super Metroid player's dream and Eris is scraping the heaven with its high level of detail in its design.  These are the kind of hacks that I enjoy the most.

This is not to say that I hate hacks that require these things.  I still like them but not as much as the others.  I just don't want to see it become a requirement that every hack must include these tricks in some shape or form in order to please people.  I was looking at the comment in the Pantheon thread where people were criticizing it for being too easy  How is that a bad thing?  Those sort of comments make me worry about the future of SM hacking.  I'm worried that soon we'll get to a point where SM hacks will only become accessible to TASers and glitch masterminds.

Well, this rant/food for thought went on a bit longer than I anticipated it to go.  But I just felt like i had to get it out there.  I'd love to hear everyone's ideas on the subject and maybe we can bget a good discussion going here.

Crys

Edit history:

Crys: 2008-10-23 01:41:42 pm

2008-10-23 01:39:14 pm

Green-Kirby, ROAR!

I agree with most things. I will have more versions then one for Ice Metal. In the "b" (As in less energy, missiles and, some other stuff. No spikes!) way. After all I want DMantra to try it out! laugh new

Jokes aside, I do have two versions because I think it is needed. Like the hard mode in zero mission; It was just fun to play once you did beat the game a few times.

But thats not all; in Ice Metal I do have a few extra hard things that are not needed to be done to beat the game.
Think like the crazy shiny spark in MZM in lower norfair; That was just assholeish.
Stuff people won't see the first time.

So yeah I support this idea as long as it's done well.

Opium

2008-10-23 02:05:01 pm

Quote from FirePhoenix0:

Trick sections break the flow of the game. If you're traveling along and suddenly you have to stop for 5 minutes in one room because you have to solve a tricky mockball, it defeats the purpose of having smooth game flow, not to mention that any time you want to go the other way, you have to redo the puzzle. It's not fun gameplay. That's one reason I loved Redesign, Dependence, Golden Dawn, Pantheon, the Japanese hacks and will definitely love Aegis and Eris. These hacks don't require all the glitch maneuvers and yet still manage to be tough in their own ways. Redesign had you dealing with physics all the time, Dependence and Golden Dawn were hard in exploration, Pantheon wasn't really hard but it was still very enjoyable, the Japanese hacks were very unique in a lot of ways, Aegis looks to be a Super Metroid player's dream and Eris is scraping the heaven with its high level of detail in its design. These are the kind of hacks that I enjoy the most.

This is not to say that I hate hacks that require these things. I still like them but not as much as the others. I just don't want to see it become a requirement that every hack must include these tricks in some shape or form in order to please people. I was looking at the comment in the Pantheon thread where people were criticizing it for being too easy How is that a bad thing? Those sort of comments make me worry about the future of SM hacking. I'm worried that soon we'll get to a point where SM hacks will only become accessible to TASers and glitch masterminds.

Well, this rant/food for thought went on a bit longer than I anticipated it to go. But I just felt like i had to get it out there. I'd love to hear everyone's ideas on the subject and maybe we can bget a good discussion going here.

Firstly these things are all about people's preferences, so there's no right or wrong answers since we're not really talking about facts, merely people's opinions. It's my opinion that the root of what has people disagreeing about hack difficulty levels is game flow and patience levels. Some people, like myself, are perfectly capable of pulling off the moves in original CH and other 'hard' hacks, but I dislike having to reload save-states repeatedly in a game. I know I said I'm capable of the advanced moves, but that doesn't mean that I pull them off easily the first time. An extreme example of this is the room above PB's in CH that required mid-air unmorph -> grapple -> mid-air morph -> IBJ -> HBJ. That room took me like 30 tries the first time, and at least 6 times in subsequent playthroughs. I lack the patience to prevent these rooms from compromising my game experience. The game ceases to flow, and throughout the entire game I have this nagging worry about when/where I should create the next save and which slot to put it in lest I create a fuck-me save state. This is why I prefer the moderate difficulty hacks. Of course I want difficulty to be greater than vanilla SM, but I need a basically uninterrupted flow of the game in order to really enjoy myself fully.
Again, anyone who criticizes a hack for being too hard or too easy is merely stating what their preferences are, they can't in all fairness say the hack is bad simply because it isn't the way that they want it to be.
If the hacker is motivated by a pleasing the player, then multiple versions are a good idea because more people will be pleased. If the hacker is not motivated by pleasing the player, then whatever players have to say about it is irrelevant anyways.

[quote="FirePhoenix0"]

Trick sections break the flow of the game.  If you're traveling along and suddenly you have to stop for 5 minutes in one room because you have to solve a tricky mockball, it defeats the purpose of having smooth game flow, not to mention that any time you want to go the other way, you have to redo the puzzle.  It's not fun gameplay.  That's one reason I loved Redesign, Dependence, Golden Dawn, Pantheon, the Japanese hacks and will definitely love Aegis and Eris.  These hacks don't require all the glitch maneuvers and yet still manage to be tough in their own ways.  Redesign had you dealing with physics all the time, Dependence and Golden Dawn were hard in exploration, Pantheon wasn't really hard but it was still very enjoyable, the Japanese hacks were very unique in a lot of ways, Aegis looks to be a Super Metroid player's dream and Eris is scraping the heaven with its high level of detail in its design.  These are the kind of hacks that I enjoy the most.

This is not to say that I hate hacks that require these things.  I still like them but not as much as the others.  I just don't want to see it become a requirement that every hack must include these tricks in some shape or form in order to please people.  I was looking at the comment in the Pantheon thread where people were criticizing it for being too easy  How is that a bad thing?  Those sort of comments make me worry about the future of SM hacking.  I'm worried that soon we'll get to a point where SM hacks will only become accessible to TASers and glitch masterminds.

Well, this rant/food for thought went on a bit longer than I anticipated it to go.  But I just felt like i had to get it out there.  I'd love to hear everyone's ideas on the subject and maybe we can bget a good discussion going here.
[/quote]

Firstly these things are all about people's preferences, so there's no right  or wrong answers since we're not really talking about facts, merely people's opinions.  It's my opinion that the root of what has people disagreeing about hack difficulty levels is game flow and patience levels.  Some people, like myself, are perfectly capable of pulling off the moves in original CH and other 'hard' hacks, but I dislike having to reload save-states repeatedly in a game.  I know I said I'm capable of the advanced moves, but that doesn't mean that I pull them off easily the first time.  An extreme example of this is the room above PB's in CH that required mid-air unmorph -> grapple -> mid-air morph -> IBJ -> HBJ.  That room took me like 30 tries the first time, and at least 6 times in subsequent playthroughs.  I lack the patience to prevent these rooms from compromising my game experience.  The game ceases to flow, and throughout the entire game I have this nagging worry about when/where I should create the next save and which slot to put it in lest I create a fuck-me save state.   This is why I prefer the moderate difficulty hacks.  Of course I want difficulty to be greater than vanilla SM,  but I need a basically uninterrupted flow of the game in order to really enjoy myself fully.  
Again, anyone who criticizes a hack for being too hard or too easy is merely stating what their preferences are, they can't in all fairness say the hack is bad simply because it isn't the way that [i]they[/i] want it to be.  
If the hacker is motivated by a pleasing the player, then multiple versions are a good idea because more people will be pleased.  If the hacker is not motivated by pleasing the player, then whatever players have to say about it is irrelevant anyways.

Acheron

2008-10-23 02:58:33 pm

Acclaimed Threshold

Constant Sorrows

FP, it's all about personal taste. Some people want a challenging game, and to them it doesn't disrupt game flow to struggle through each room. To them, it's more disruptive to breeze through rooms with little challenge. Why wouldn't you want to make a hack to please both crowds? Don't say "it's against my standards as a hacker" 'cause that's a cop-out answer. Explain why your personal taste overrides the tastes of the hard-mode crowd.

Keep in mind, anyone who downloads the hard mode knows what they're getting into. They do it intentionally, and that's the challenge they want to tackle. If you really don't want players to have that experience the first time they play Volta, you could always release it first, then work on a hard-mode version (I might end up doing this myself for Aegis).

DMantra

(user is banned)

2008-10-23 03:35:34 pm

Breathe in the Future, Breathe out the Past

I know there's been some tricky hacks added to the list this past year but I believe this phase will grind down to a halt after precision. I just don't see any other tricky challenges left, at this point I feel it would be more of the same.

I wonder when people will stop referring to CH when talking about something hard for the sake of their case, the reality is what Acheron said - "Keep in mind, anyone who downloads the hard mode knows what they're getting into. They do it intentionally, and that's the challenge they want to tackle.". There's two versions, you wouldn't see a macho trick taser here say "Ugh the easy version of Cliffhanger was too easy!". The original/hard version wasn't geared at the general audience, the easy version was. /rant

Crys

2008-10-23 03:40:57 pm

Green-Kirby, ROAR!

Well guys there are also the normal people like me who thinks Super Metroid Redesign is to hard. Wink

* Crys hopes there will come more hacks in his level soon.

normad

2008-10-23 03:52:03 pm

I, for one, enjoy occasional spikes (which force you to make precise jumps), mockball sequences and moderate midair morphs. What I dislike is when failure to perform those tricks means imminent death. Now that's harsh, especially if a closest save point is half map away. Player is basicly forced to use save states or waste hours of playtime redoing same rooms over and over again. But maybe I'm just not good enough to play such hacks without save states. And enemies with massive amount of health are annoying, not hard.
If there are different versions of a hack, I always pick the hardest one (yes, I'm asking for it).

FirePhoenix

2008-10-23 03:55:10 pm

The thing for me is that I really don't like the idea of having to crate the artificial challenge. To make Volta more appealing to the harder crowd, I'd need to go to a normal room and say, well, let's put a mockball challenge here, or I guess I could throw down some random spikes. I dunno, to me, these tricky challenges just don't seem like good room design and I'd rather avoid them, even if it means that the hard crowd won't be as happy. Perhaps in the future I'll reconsider, but that's my stance for the time being...

uNsane

Edit history:

uNsane: 2008-10-23 04:47:43 pm

2008-10-23 04:05:20 pm

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

The way I see it, a hack should and have been intended to be a specific difficulty from its conception. I agree that adding artificial difficulty is a bad idea; it's very hard to make it fit right with an original, easier version. The same goes for originally hard hacks; making it easier, in most cases, will detract from its value.

Quote from Crys:

Well guys there are also the normal people like me who thinks Super Metroid Redesign is to hard.

I thought Redesign was more difficult than Cliffhanger. '>_>

Crys

2008-10-23 04:09:12 pm

Green-Kirby, ROAR!

Quote from uNsane:

Quote from Crys:

Well guys there are also the normal people like me who thinks Super Metroid Redesign is to hard. Wink

* Crys hopes there will come more hacks in his level soon.

I thought Redesign was more difficult than Cliffhanger. '>_>

I never said it was easier then Cliffhanger. (But I do think so) But both are way to hard for me to play normaly. (And that kills the experince for me)

Opium

2008-10-23 04:18:58 pm

Quote from DMantra:

I wonder when people will stop referring to CH when talking about something hard for the sake of their case

People have been referring to CH alot (and not just when discussing difficulty) because it was freakin' great. IMO, it set such a standard that people can't help but refer to it or compare it to other hacks in a hacks discussion.

Quote from uNsane:

The way I see it, a hack should and have been intended to be a specific difficulty from its conception. I agree that adding artificial difficulty is a bad idea; it's very hard to make it fit right with an original, easier version. The same goes for originally hard hacks; making it easier, in most cases, will detract from its value.

Yes, the original version of a hack is what the hack is supposed to be. It is what the hacker had envisioned for the game. So I guess when it comes to making an alternative version the trick is to do it right. If its done well then the the alternative version has no problem standing on its own as its own game.

[quote="DMantra"]
I wonder when people will stop referring to CH when talking about something hard for the sake of their case
[/quote]

People have been referring to CH alot (and not just when discussing difficulty) because it was freakin' great.   IMO, it set such a standard that people can't help but refer to it or compare it to other hacks in a hacks discussion.

[quote="uNsane"]
The way I see it, a hack should and have been intended to be a specific difficulty from its conception. I agree that adding artificial difficulty is a bad idea; it's very hard to make it fit right with an original, easier version. The same goes for originally hard hacks; making it easier, in most cases, will detract from its value.
[/quote]

Yes, the original version of a hack is what the hack is supposed to be.  It is what the hacker had envisioned for the game.  So I guess when it comes to making an alternative version the trick is to do it right.   If its done well then the the alternative version has no problem standing on its own as its own game.

Cardweaver

2008-10-23 06:34:34 pm

Well, I'll play any hack regardless of difficulty, and if it defeats me, then I will accept defeat.

More people should adopt this attitude. grin new

Black Telomeres

2008-10-23 06:55:01 pm

I think creating a hard mode of a hack you intend to not be hard isn't really necessary despite the recent insistance on "two versions," as even highly skilled players will be able to play the normal mode and complete it, even if they wished it was harder. Much of the "two versions" appreciation is because it worked well for Cliffhanger, whose original version wasn't too player-friendly, and the easy version allowed more access from people who just wanted to appreciate the design without a huge level of challenge. It's when someone's hack is ridiculously hard and he/she knows not everyone will have the time, skill or patience to play through the hard version that an easy version is a good idea. I don't think there's any point to creating a hard mode if your heart's not in it, as it will show in your design of that version and the people who enjoy hard hacks will probably be able to tell.

DonnyDonovan

2008-10-23 07:55:10 pm

There are also different ways to add difficulty. If adding spikes or physical obstacles would take away from the feel of a hack that's meant to be exploratory, there's always the option of removing energy tanks, expansions and other things to put survival at more of a premium and force the player to be somewhat careful when navigating the planet, but not turn the game into a tedious state/load fest if that's not what the hack is supposed to be about.

Sometimes late in a hack, when you have 10 tanks and the gravity suit, you don't even worry about taking damage from anything but the most robust of enemies. Forcing a player to be a little careful can create a different type of challenge.

As an example, in Metroid Magma, there were only six tanks and no varia. You could only lose 98 energy total to both forms of mother brain. Doable for sure, but, it sure made be better at learning her patterns and movements, movements I never even bothered to pay much attention to when you're just whaling away at her with 14 tanks.

There are also different ways to add difficulty.  If adding spikes or physical obstacles would take away from the feel of a hack that's meant to be exploratory, there's always the option of removing energy tanks, expansions and other things to put survival at more of a premium and force the player to be somewhat careful when navigating the planet, but not turn the game into a tedious state/load fest if that's not what the hack is supposed to be about.

Sometimes late in a hack, when you have 10 tanks and the gravity suit, you don't even worry about taking damage from anything but the most robust of enemies.  Forcing a player to be a little careful can create a different type of challenge.

As an example, in Metroid Magma, there were only six tanks and no varia.  You could only lose 98 energy total to both forms of mother brain.  Doable for sure, but, it sure made be better at learning her patterns and movements, movements I never even bothered to pay much attention to when you're just whaling away at her with 14 tanks.

Tahngarthor

2008-10-23 08:55:39 pm

Bangaa Bishop

Personally, in a hack i'm just looking for more good ol' metroid sidescrolling platforming action. I'm not looking for crazy stunts with pixel perfect precision that only 0.1% of all players can accomplish without tools. I just want to have some fun in new levels and stuff. It doesn't have to be super hard, it just has to offer variety. :)

Bioniclegenius

2008-10-23 08:59:24 pm

Fear Me! (Or else...)

Myself, I just would like a hack around the difficulty of the original SM, except maybe actually requiring wall-jumping, which I've gotten really good at, in areas like before the bombs so it's actually required. Yes, I know that's a really long sentence, so please don't bug me. It's not an actual run-on!

Zhs2

2008-10-23 09:09:10 pm

Yo.

Quote from Bioniclegenius:

Myself, I just would like a hack around the difficulty of the original SM, except one that maybe actually requires wall-jumping (which I've gotten really good at) in areas like before the bombs so it's actually required.

You're right. This sentence wasn't a run-on; it was the exact opposite: a comma splice. I fix'd it in the quote tags.

I actually find myself going for the easier hacks. I like the easier ones for a reason: they don't make me give up, and they don't take as long to beat as the harder ones. I might play harder hacks from time to time when I'm really bored, but that's about it.

Quietus

2008-10-24 05:24:02 am

Super Secret Area - Dead Ahead!

I think that hard hacks are perfectly acceptable, provided that the degree of hard is reasonable.

Take boss fights, for example. You run into Ridley's room, pound away with all of your weapons like the original Super Metroid, only to find that you're out of ammo and don't have plasma yet. You're low on health, and you die because you rushed, and tried to fight him normally. You load your save-state and try again, a little more carefully, and comfortably defeat him.

But... Having the floor covered in spikes, Ridley with three times his normal health, and only having missiles and the pea shooter, is just ridiculous.

I think it's all about balance.

squishy_ichigo

Edit history:

squishy_ichigo: 2008-10-24 08:42:05 am

2008-10-24 08:39:44 am

. . .

I'm glad to see this topic, I didn't want to clog the forums with all this kind of talk in the other topics so...

MULTIPLE DIFFICULTIES:
I personally don't like the 2 different versions idea. BT said it good enough there.
Some hacks just aren't supposed to be hard/easy. It might open it up to a bigger crowd, but ALL hackers should know what crowd there aiming at when they start out. Making two difficulties to me just seems like a cheap way out.

Cliffhanger did it well, but that doesn't mean it should be used alot, or even again. It takes alot of work to change the overall feel of your hack to make it harder/easier, and still keep the original feel of the game. If you do it wrong, then one version doesn't keep the magic.

DIFFICULTY IN GENERAL:
I personally, when playing a hack get turned off if I have to do a chain of tricks to go thru ONE ROOM. If I'm in the mood its not so bad, but usually its a pain. I still havn't beat Cliffhanger yet for this exact reason. I WANT to beat it, and will eventually; but difficulty, be it to easy or to hard, will always turn some people away.

But regardless of my views on difficulty, I still stand by my views on not having multiple difficulties.
Damn paradoxes...
---------------
SIDENOTE:
Difficulty has been a hot topic lately in alot of topics, but this is the first topic dedicated to it. I hope we get to read some interesting POVs.

I'm glad to see this topic, I didn't want to clog the forums with all this kind of talk in the other topics so...

MULTIPLE DIFFICULTIES:
I personally don't like the 2 different versions idea.  BT said it good enough there.
Some hacks just aren't supposed to be hard/easy.  It might open it up to a bigger crowd, but ALL hackers should know what crowd there aiming at when they start out.  Making two difficulties to me just seems like a cheap way out.

Cliffhanger did it well, but that doesn't mean it should be used alot, or even again.  It takes alot of work to change the overall feel of your hack to make it harder/easier, and still keep the original feel of the game.  If you do it wrong, then one version doesn't keep the magic.

DIFFICULTY IN GENERAL:
I personally, when playing a hack get turned off if I have to do a chain of tricks to go thru ONE ROOM.  If I'm in the mood its not so bad, but usually its a pain.  I still havn't beat Cliffhanger yet for this exact reason.  I WANT to beat it, and will eventually; but difficulty, be it to easy or to hard, will always turn some people away.

But regardless of my views on difficulty, I still stand by my views on not having multiple difficulties.  
Damn paradoxes...
---------------
SIDENOTE:
Difficulty has been a hot topic lately in alot of topics, but this is the first topic dedicated to it.  I hope we get to read some interesting POVs.

Bolognab

2008-10-24 09:05:11 am

Okay. Would you stop using the word 'cheap'? It's really starting to annoy me; did someone just suddenly decide what's cheap and what's not? Who are you to say that something is 'cheaply' used? The word really has no definite value when discussing such matters as difficulty since it seems everybody has suddenly developed their own meaning for it. (I'm not endorsing anything that's been defined as cheap, I'm just saying)

Now, why not use multiple difficulties? The best argument I've heard in this thread to not use them is that it's cheap. Yeah, okay. Rolling Eyes

And then, "Cliffhanger did it great, but don't do it!"

BT basically just said that if you will use multiple difficulties, put your heart into the alternative difficulty(this is where I fail). I guess I agree. FP said...I'm not too sure. I believe he's saying that hard things break the flow of the hack, but I don't see where he actually addresses the cons of multiple difficulty.

And now the great big pro of multiple difficulties: a massive audience! No good arguments have been said to oppose this.

Okay. Would you stop using the word 'cheap'? It's really starting to annoy me; did someone just suddenly decide what's cheap and what's not? Who are you to say that something is 'cheaply' used? The word really has no definite value when discussing such matters as difficulty since it seems everybody has suddenly developed their own meaning for it. (I'm not endorsing anything that's been defined as cheap, I'm just saying)

Now, why not use multiple difficulties? The best argument I've heard in this thread to not use them is that it's cheap. Yeah, okay. :roll: And then, "Cliffhanger did it great, but don't do it!"

BT basically just said that if you will use multiple difficulties, put your heart into the alternative difficulty(this is where I fail). I guess I agree. FP said...I'm not too sure. I believe he's saying that hard things break the flow of the hack, but I don't see where he actually addresses the cons of multiple difficulty.

And now the great big pro of multiple difficulties: a massive audience! No good arguments have been said to oppose this.

Crys

2008-10-24 09:49:57 am

Green-Kirby, ROAR!

Self I prefer to have it set up like zero mission. Once you beat normal you get hard mode. And hard mode is just less HP and missiles.

I think it works great in zero mission thats why I will use it! =)

SleepingSeaweed

2008-10-24 11:42:31 am

Is the hack meant to be good as a game, did the creator put something in it that he/she always wanted to see in SM or is it meant to entertain a small group of die-hard SM fans?

I think the SM hacking community has a ridiculous focus on difficulty. Not in the sense that every hack that comes out is difficult, but in that it's the first thing people talk about - how easy/difficult the hack is. Usually in games, difficulty is a side effect. Enemies become harder, conditions makes it more difficult as time goes by, in order to match up with the players increasing skill level and better equipment, or whatever you collect to go through the game. If don't want to look for equipment (or something) and/or are too impatient to learn about how to do well in the game, you might have a hard time. In the end, difficulty often comes from things that are new to you. When you become good at the game, you can manage to beat it in less favorable conditions or in a lower amount of time.

About different difficulty versions of hacks, I always pick the original - which is usually the harder version. I imagine that's what the maker had in mind when doing the hack. The tricks you need to do aren't actually hard, because I can do them. But if I wanted to do tricky moves just for the sake of doing tricky moves, I could just fire up vanilla and practice there. It ends up being little more than annoyance since in every room I'm delayed by obstacles that demand too much attention. I'm not entirely fair in saying this, because many hacks have introduced tricks and moves that there was never any reason to do in vanilla. It's by no means a bad cause, I just don't think it's very creative.

Anyway, difficulty doesn't change much more than how frequently I use save states. If enemies kill me in one hit or rooms in the beginning of the game are covered in spikes, I save in every room. But in vanilla I rarely ever use save states even if I'm doing some sort of challenge run, or it would be more accurate to say that's the time I never do it. I want to be able to play hacks without being forced to use save states too.

Is the hack meant to be good as a game, did the creator put something in it that he/she always wanted to see in SM or is it meant to entertain a small group of die-hard SM fans?

I think the SM hacking community has a ridiculous focus on difficulty. Not in the sense that every hack that comes out is difficult, but in that it's the first thing people talk about - how easy/difficult the hack is. Usually in games, difficulty is a side effect. Enemies become harder, conditions makes it more difficult as time goes by, in order to match up with the players increasing skill level and better equipment, or whatever you collect to go through the game. If don't want to look for equipment (or something) and/or are too impatient to learn about how to do well in the game, you might have a hard time. In the end, difficulty often comes from things that are new to you. When you become good at the game, you can manage to beat it in less favorable conditions or in a lower amount of time.

About different difficulty versions of hacks, I always pick the original - which is usually the harder version. I imagine that's what the maker had in mind when doing the hack. The tricks you need to do aren't actually hard, because I can do them. But if I wanted to do tricky moves just for the sake of doing tricky moves, I could just fire up vanilla and practice there. It ends up being little more than annoyance since in every room I'm delayed by obstacles that demand too much attention. I'm not entirely fair in saying this, because many hacks have introduced tricks and moves that there was never any reason to do in vanilla. It's by no means a bad cause, I just don't think it's very creative.

Anyway, difficulty doesn't change much more than how frequently I use save states. If enemies kill me in one hit or rooms in the beginning of the game are covered in spikes, I save in every room. But in vanilla I rarely ever use save states even if I'm doing some sort of challenge run, or it would be more accurate to say that's the time I never do it. I want to be able to play hacks without being forced to use save states too.

Opium

2008-10-24 12:24:16 pm

this discussion is getting too complicated. this is the way I see it:

hackers: make your hack however you want it. If you want to target a certain audience, go for it. If you're making a more difficult hack but want to also appeal to a more diverse audience, consider creating a good alternative version. You just have to ask yourself what your motivation for making this hack is and decide how you want it to be based on that.

players: play the hack, if you like it then fine. If you don't like it then that's fine too, its not like you paid money for it. Just hope that the next one that comes out is more to your liking. The hackers are not like Nintendo - meaning they aren't trying to sell as many copies as possible. Hell, they can make a hack that would only appeal to 2 or 3 people if they choose.

Zhs2

2008-10-24 12:52:57 pm

Yo.

You know, now I'm regretting I haven't already said what Opium did. Now I'm prolly gonna say it again, albeit more generally.

If you decide to create something, go ahead and go for it. It doesn't matter who gives a crap when you release what you do to the world; the fact that you are truly satisfied with what you have done is what matters. Of course, what is satisfactory does differ from person to person because we are all unique. Say maybe this one guy will want to appeal to the people and make the perfect hack, while another guy doesn't want to take the time and effort to release something that will satisfy everyone; the hacks they release are going to be satisfactory to them. It all depends on character whether or not each hacker does what they do (or not.) This is where the saying, "If you want the job done right, you have to do it," comes from; since only you can determine what you like in a hack, if someone else releases a hack full of stuff you don't like, either don't play it or go one better and make one for yourself.

TL;DR, It isn't the hacker's fault you don't like their hack. It's yours.

EDIT: Now that I think about it, this paragraph here pretty much sums up why this thread exists.

You know, now I'm regretting I haven't already said what Opium did. Now I'm prolly gonna say it again, albeit more generally.

If you decide to create something, go ahead and go for it. It doesn't matter who gives a crap when you release what you do to the world; the fact that you are truly satisfied with what you have done is what matters. Of course, what is satisfactory does differ from person to person because we are all unique. Say maybe this one guy will want to appeal to the people and make the perfect hack, while another guy doesn't want to take the time and effort to release something that will satisfy everyone; the hacks they release are going to be satisfactory to them. It all depends on character whether or not each hacker does what they do (or not.) This is where the saying, "If you want the job done right, you have to do it," comes from; since only you can determine what you like in a hack, if someone else releases a hack full of stuff you don't like, either don't play it or go one better and make one for yourself.

TL;DR, It isn't the hacker's fault you don't like their hack. It's yours.

EDIT: Now that I think about it, this paragraph here pretty much sums up why this thread exists.

FirePhoenix

2008-10-24 04:09:06 pm

I've decided that if I do do a hard version, it will be a ZM styled one where I will halve all the powerups. Missiles will go to 2 and 1 tanks, all SMs will be 1 and all PBs will be 1. E Tanks will go to 50 per tankm, and the same to reserves. Enemies will also go double health/damage. That should be enough to satisfy you difficulty seekers.