I've played quite a few games in my life, untrackable at this point. The time I must have spent is probably more shocking than impressive, but mostly, well worth it. That brings me to my current topic. How much do you have to play a game to know when you're not interested in it? When is it fine to put that game down and step away for good?
As I have mentioned, I've played so many games over the years that I'm bound to have played a few ( or not so few) bad games. When I say bad, I mean critically poorly received. Low review scores, poor marketing, questionable production value, been there played that. I'm definately open to playing something even if I know it may not be 'good' simply because 'good' and 'bad' are subjective and more often than not I find myself enjoying games that were not enjoyed by others. It probably also has to do with expectancy theory dictating that since I'm expecting next to nothing and it delivers slightly more than that, I'm take by surprise and enjoy the experience.
Recently, yesterday to be exact, I've decided to put down Resonnace of Faith. I won't go into the details of the game since there is an ambudance of reviews and videos to do that for me. All you really need to know is that it's a JRPG that has a non traditional combat and exploration system. At first, the combat took some getting used to since it's not the same bag of tricks that we're all used to. However, it was a very unique system and it offered enough challenge to get me through the first 4 chapters of this 16 chapter story. There was definately a great flow of combat, exploration and rewards. It had definately been designed with the right things in mind, focusing on its strenghts and keeping the action (and story) moving along nicely.
Until chapter 5. There was definately this false sense of understanding the combat. There was a few tutorial battles at first and it showed you the basics to get you up and running. By the time you get to the 5th chapter, their assuming that you are either going to start power leveling (staying in one area to level up your character with an investment of time) or that you are an expert in the combat system. Both which I didn't do. Now, the argument is that it's a JRPG and that the goal of it is to be drawn out and difficult. That may be a valid comment, but in this day and age, it is overhwhelmingly punishing to gamers who are actually enjoying themselves. At the point where I decided that I had had enough, I had already invested about 8 hours into the game and was really starting to get interested in progressing. It seemed that the number of enemies doubled and their levels were increased too, making it really difficult to progress without dieing multiple times to get just the right situation to win the battle.
Here is the question. Is it ok to stop playing a game after 8 hours has been put into it? (having read online, the game is approximately 20 hours long) Some people, myself included, are completionists who will play anything to the end ( I don't really care for achievements at this point and much rather the act of just finishing a game now). Others feel that the challenge drives them forward to getting past obstacles.
When challenge is greater than skill, either your skills must improve or your challenge will prevail. From a design point of view, there should always be a way of balancing those two things in a dynamic way. Many games implement an option to change the difficulty on the fly or offering DLC to unlock stronger items earlier. I would even suggest an "Ask Madden" option ( in Madden football games, the Ask Madden option, has the AI pick the best play for the current situation.) That would allow you to get a tip in a tight spot to get that last push you may have been missing.
Challenge vs. Skill is what makes games interesting, but adapting the challenge to the skill is how gamers will stay interested.
