I decided to write this one in light of the recent Pokemon Go’s difficulty slope beginning at level 20. Everybody has a fairly common conception of the ideal difficulty slope which, naturally, looks like y=e^x for 0<x<1 on a graph (pun totally intended). But as we all know, difficulty curves don’t always actually happen that way. As we don’t all know, there are sometimes good reasons, or at least understandable reasons, for this. Oh, and if the math joke didn’t tip you off, I’ve been watching way too much Numberphile lately, so things are going to get mathy.
All graphs were made in Desmos.
Back in the bad old days of the arcades, many games would begin easy, Continue reading “Experience Point 3/3: Difficulty Curves and Spikes”
This article is a bit shorter than usual for three reasons:
- Rather than actually making an argument (other than the obvious one: Don’t do artificial difficulty, kids! Artificial difficulty is not cool!), I’m mostly providing a definition. This is informative, not persuasive.
- This is practically an addendum to last week’s article, Difficulty Does Not Imply Quality.
- Currently, I write these on the day that they’re published, and I’m tired of them always going up at 11:59:59.999 p.m. every time. Sometime in the future, I will probably start writing these the day before, like I should be doing now.
So, what is artificial difficulty? Sometimes, a certain mechanic will be flawed in a certain way: Continue reading “Experience Point 2/3: Artificial Difficulty, What We All Know and Hate”
There is one fallacy that I tend to hear once in a while. It goes something along the lines of “It’s not that bad; it’s actually pretty difficult.” The problem that we have here is that this argument assumes that a game’s difficulty is always proportional to fun (including fear or rage-inducing, for horror or rage games, respectively), and that the relationship is causal (not casual) where difficulty always increases fun. That isn’t always true. Continue reading “Experience Point 1/3: Difficulty Does Not Imply Quality”
To begin with, this subject overall went (relatively) quite a bit better than education did, despite its somewhat misleading title. For recap, the subject was about when young people want to become game makers.
Rando Post No. 4: You Can Ce Whatever You Want to Be*
I forgot to mention how there are reasons other than parents implying otherwise that this isn’t true. For instance, I used to want to be a fighter pilot, thanks to Ace Combat 5. Continue reading “Rando Follow-Up: Ambition”
Last week, I wrote about how children shouldn’t be discouraged from getting involved in making games when the popular opinion is that they shouldn’t, and how people shouldn’t actively discourage them. However, some people would find this a rather naive argument. So, here I consider their side.
It’s alright for a kid to try it out, but not every kid who does is really cut out for making games. In fact, most of the time, they aren’t. Continue reading “Rando Post No. 6: Seriously Though; Game Making Isn’t For Everybody”