This is the first game I thought of. This game makes the TMNT game look easy, although by any other measure, that was a very difficult game as well.
Hardest Game You've Ever Played?
- Thread starter LutherSloan
- Start date
This is the first game I thought of. This game makes the TMNT game look easy, although by any other measure, that was a very difficult game as well.
Yep played that as well, and I had the same issue has with the TMNT game: I loved it, but I could never get far. I must have been super patient with games as a kid, because I would give up so easily now if a game was that difficult.
I think the notion of video game difficulty has morphed considerably over the years. Used to be, a game was "hard" if they limited how many attempts could make: no saves, no continues, few lives, etc. Now, most games seem to let you try the same difficult segment over and over again without shunting you back to the beginning. Like the GTA games, where you can attempt a mission repeatedly without ever having to repeat one you'd already finished. And unlimited lives!!
True, but games are also a lot longer than they used to be.
I never thought of it as that hard. In fact I quite clearly remember finishing the game, then that night dreaming there was more game.
You must have gotten extremely lucky with the swimming section.
There's also the part where there's a small gap (a tile wide) in the floor with a low ceiling right at the top of the screen that the AVGN points out. If you try to jump it, you will almost certainly be sent back to the start of the area - with respawning enemies.
Then he just walks across the gap.
Quake 3: CPMA. 1v1 or Team Death match. Pick your poison.
There are no bad players in this game. The skill level of CPM players ranges from Uber Godly to "I will raped you 150 to nothing in 15 minutes."
There are no bad players in this game. The skill level of CPM players ranges from Uber Godly to "I will raped you 150 to nothing in 15 minutes."
LMAO... just watched the AVGN video review... it's all very very true. I remember the gap in the floor that you try to jump over ten times before finally realizing that you can just walk across it.
The key to being successful in the second level is making sure that you only lose one turtle during the underwater part... then you can go rescue him in the next level. If you can do that successfully, you're in a great position for the rest of the game, even though there are still some tough parts. Stupid Technodrome.
The key to being successful in the second level is making sure that you only lose one turtle during the underwater part... then you can go rescue him in the next level. If you can do that successfully, you're in a great position for the rest of the game, even though there are still some tough parts. Stupid Technodrome.
Whenever I think of "hard" one game springs to mind. Atari's Tempest. All you needed was nerves of steel, the reflexes of a cyborg, fine motor control equal to a brain surgeon, an unending pool of adrenaline and eyeballs that wouldn't dry out if you failed to blink. If you had all of those it was easy. 
Of course there's also that fact that I seldom got past the first level whenever I played with someone else. We were too busy beating each other up.
Yeah, I don't comment about new games being difficult as much as the older ones. With all the save points, and sometimes unlimited tries to get through something, it's really not all that bad. Only thing I will complain about is if the controls are crap, then it's not so much the difficulty of the game but how horrible the gameplay is, which really at this point in gaming is really no excuse for.
This thread is probably a little awkward for me since I suck so bad, that a lot games that are normal for everybody else are hard for me, but in terms of hard games that I didn't finish, the first one that popped up into my mind was Mario Brothers on the old NES. That game just required just more eye-hand coordination and reflexes than my body is capable of producing.
A few others get honorable mention though. I remember the original Tomb Raider on the PS1 had some very tedious controls that I just couldn't get the hang of. I remember a boss in Metroid Prime on the Game Cube that made me give up on that game long before I finished it. I also remember the multiplayer component of Frontlines Fuel of War. Seems like you would spawn and boom you were dead. No fun whatsoever.
A few others get honorable mention though. I remember the original Tomb Raider on the PS1 had some very tedious controls that I just couldn't get the hang of. I remember a boss in Metroid Prime on the Game Cube that made me give up on that game long before I finished it. I also remember the multiplayer component of Frontlines Fuel of War. Seems like you would spawn and boom you were dead. No fun whatsoever.
And thank God it has. In looking thru this thread, I realize I haven't played any of these games mentioned here and I guess it's because I pretty much hated gaming back in the NES days. It wasn't until these changes you've described were made that I really became an avid gamer.
TMNT on the NES
Battletoads on the NES
Super Ghouls n' Ghosts on the SNES
Phantasy Star II on the Genesis (without the guide book)
Sega designed Phantasy Star II to be such a difficult game that they included a walkthrough guide with each and every copy. The game was so frigging impossible that i eventually resorted to using the guide. Even then it was still tough as balls.
Battletoads on the NES
Super Ghouls n' Ghosts on the SNES
Phantasy Star II on the Genesis (without the guide book)
Sega designed Phantasy Star II to be such a difficult game that they included a walkthrough guide with each and every copy. The game was so frigging impossible that i eventually resorted to using the guide. Even then it was still tough as balls.
Agreed. I do not see the point in spending tens or even hundreds of millions of dollars developing a game when only 10% of the audience will ever finish it. The other 90% should return it for a full refund.
Games are sold on the basis of how many hours entertainment they will provide. If a player gets stuck three hours in to a thirty hour game through bad game design and poorly implemented difficulty settings then why should he or she pay full price ?
I think the biggest problem these days is that a lot of games are being released too early when they are clearly unfinished.
*cough*Knights of the Old Republic II*cough*
Phantasy Star 1,2,4 > almost any Final Fantasy game released during the same period. Three was a bit "meh", but the multiple paths and endings were interesting. Sega needs to make a REAL Phantasy Star 5, not another mediocre MORPG.
I'm very nostalgic for FF1 and 3 (US) though. Other than 7 and 9 the rest of them are all over the place enjoyment-wise. Mostly overblown, cinematic snore-fests featuring characters that display the same archetypes Square has been using for 20 years. "Oh look, another Spiky haired late teen with a gigantic sword/gun and a chip on his shoulder."
Ah, yes, the SNES-era Final Fantasy games. A time when it was totally acceptable for you to stumble into a dungeon and get wiped out in a single hit, and it's your own damn fault for not grinding enough beforehand.
Agreed. Sometimes console versions of games will be better than the PC counterpart, which requires multiple patches to bring it up to par.
That was one of the most anticipated sequels for me - and while I enjoyed the game, they left out so much that it was just a huge disappointment. I think there was a huge subplot involving HK-47, and the ending just left a huge WTF feeling (depending if you did the light side ending, that is.) The Ebon Hawk goes from being battered and beaten to being in prestine condition to look for Revan in unknown space. Now with the Knights of the Old Republic MMO being developed, I doubt we'll ever know of the fate of the Exile and Revan and the "true Sith."
