Should Playing on Harder Difficulties and/or on Classic be Incentivized

[Jagged Jagen]

Fire Emblem Warriors dishes out additional in-game funds to those who play on hard. Heroes gives out an extra orb for each harder level played.

In Forza, the higher the difficulty, the higher the payout. In Bethesda games, enemeies drop better loot on higher difficulties.

Should the main line series start to incentivize playing with Classic/on Higher Difficulties.

Personally, I think they should. It requires a lot of time and patience and incentives would be nice. Maybe a bit more gold, an extra endgame weapon, a bit of extra BXP, an extra cog in the turnwheel (if it comes back), a silver card, a few more buried items, etc. Maybe even an extra challenge level or character but that may be a bit far? Little treats should be given above all, not half the game or some crud like that. It is especially important if multiplayer is back without standardised units as those who play classic (especially without resetting) will likely be at a disadvantage.

Thoughts?

[Replica Model]

I would say, Casual/Classic is more of a play style while the harder difficulties shows your skill level, and thus you should get rewarded for being better at it and for taking up the harder challenge, right? Those who have should get more of.

[Ertrick36]

Playing on higher difficulties is its own reward.

In the worst case scenario, you'll at least feel accomplished that you beat a really tough game.

In the best case scenario, you'll have fun while you're at it.

Maybe they could incentivize you with a post-game item.  Sort of like they do in Awakening where if you beat the game on higher difficulties, you get more Renown Points, which you could use to give all your saves some neat little items.  Or it could be purely cosmetic stuff like costume items, or titles, or what-have-you.  Stuff that won't make the game easier, but will still feel special.

Otherwise, you run into the classic trap of "this stuff would be more useful to someone lacking the skill to acquire it in the first place", and it all winds up feeling redundant to better players.  I'm pretty good about obtaining all the weapons and items in any given FE game, but often times I wind up not using them because I don't need them in the first place.  The only instance I give an exception to in this is if the something I get is a difficult to acquire unit, because they might offer some substance outside of making the game easier.

 

So in other words, I'm of the opposite opinion to that of the TC.  Little scraps to make the game easier are not a good reward for a pro player, but stuff that expands the experience more is (as long as it doesn't take away from the base experience).  But above all else, I feel the best reward for a challenge is a simple good time.

[eclipse]

The fuck?  NO!

The point of a game is to enjoy it, no matter what the difficulty.  And if it means beating it on Phoenix, who are you to tell them otherwise?

[Hanes]

Misleading title, i thought it meant that if the community should push others or reccomend to play on classkc which was an obvious yes for me and then I read the post :/ 

I dont think so that you should get more rewards, in what way EXP? That would ironically turn it kind off into easy mode or Paragon mode. FE is a different game than those you listed and Heroes is a gacha game so it works for it because of that and also ita very different than mainstream FE in many ways.

[Hanes]

34 minutes ago, eclipse said:

The fuck?  NO!

The point of a game is to enjoy it, no matter what the difficulty.  And if it means beating it on Phoenix, who are you to tell them otherwise?

Read the post lol it talks about rewardong you with stuff not for other people to force you

[Eltosian Kadath]

I don't think so, the difficulty is its own reward; but I will note multiple main entries to the series do have incentives for beating harder modes and/or classic mode. In the Binding Blade two of the trial maps are locked behind a hard mode completion. In Path of Radiance again one of the trial maps is locked behind a hard mode completion. Radiant Dawn locks its hardest difficultly behind a completion of its second highest difficulty. In New Mystery of the Emblem, completing the game on hard unlocks more reclassing options by combining the two male class sets, and completing the game on Lunatic unlocks Lunatic reverse and some stat boosters in the map prep shop, and it even has an incentive to play on classic by only unlocking Classic Lunatic Reverse if you completed Lunatic on Classic. Awakening locks Lunatic + behind completing it on Lunatic. In Fates a colored symbol for each path and difficulty is unlocked for the player card as a bragging right incentive. Echoes has awards for the player card for those who complete the game on Hard and Classic, with a renown boost attached to each (as well as the bragging rights).

 

[eclipse]

1 hour ago, Critical Sniper said:

Read the post lol it talks about rewardong you with stuff not for other people to force you

The point of gaming is to have fun, not to dangle shit above your head for doing harder things.  IMO doing a game on a harder mode should be announced if you're doing some kind of walkthrough, or are trying to help someone.  Otherwise, it's no one's business.

I think the question you need to ask yourself is why someone would make a topic like this in the first place.

Edited January 25, 2019 by eclipse

[Jagged Jagen]

5 hours ago, Replica Model said:

I would say, Casual/Classic is more of a play style while the harder difficulties shows your skill level, and thus you should get rewarded for being better at it and for taking up the harder challenge, right? Those who have should get more of.

Fair point on the playstyle part. I agree higher risk should lead to higher reward.

 

4 hours ago, Ertrick36 said:

Playing on higher difficulties is its own reward.

In the worst case scenario, you'll at least feel accomplished that you beat a really tough game.

In the best case scenario, you'll have fun while you're at it.

Maybe they could incentivize you with a post-game item.  Sort of like they do in Awakening where if you beat the game on higher difficulties, you get more Renown Points, which you could use to give all your saves some neat little items.  Or it could be purely cosmetic stuff like costume items, or titles, or what-have-you.  Stuff that won't make the game easier, but will still feel special.

Otherwise, you run into the classic trap of "this stuff would be more useful to someone lacking the skill to acquire it in the first place", and it all winds up feeling redundant to better players.  I'm pretty good about obtaining all the weapons and items in any given FE game, but often times I wind up not using them because I don't need them in the first place.  The only instance I give an exception to in this is if the something I get is a difficult to acquire unit, because they might offer some substance outside of making the game easier.

 

So in other words, I'm of the opposite opinion to that of the TC.  Little scraps to make the game easier are not a good reward for a pro player, but stuff that expands the experience more is (as long as it doesn't take away from the base experience).  But above all else, I feel the best reward for a challenge is a simple good time.

Fair enough. You bring up a good point on the power creep that can result from giving extra items and exp making the game ultimately easier. I was viewing it more as levelling the playing field on online play as those (particularly ones who do not grind/reset) would be at an inherent disadvantage, but it does run the risk of breaking the single player experience. I will be the first to admit that the drops in Bethesda games can be too good at points, leading to an easier experience than anticipated. I liked how Awakening handled Reknown and would love to see a merger of that system with old-school ranked play.

 

1 hour ago, eclipse said:

The fuck?  NO!

The point of a game is to enjoy it, no matter what the difficulty.  And if it means beating it on Phoenix, who are you to tell them otherwise?

Difficulty Incetives do not equate to easy mode mockery. FE warriors can still be enjoyed on lower difficulty levels, Forza and Forza Horizon are perfectly fun experiences regardless of difficulty, I've played Bethesda games since I was a young inexperienced kid who had never touched an Action RPG and I had just as much fun then as I do now, Smash Bros. rewards playing hard versions of Classic and is still one of Nintendo's most beloved and accessible series, Kid Icarus Uprising also incentivized hard play perfectly.

IMO there is nothing wrong incentivizing tougher play, it even adds replay value. It is only when things get out of balance when it is an issue. It is not "telling people how to play" either, it is simply rewarding those who take a challenge and incentivizing future play amongst newcomers.

1 hour ago, Critical Sniper said:

Misleading title, i thought it meant that if the community should push others or reccomend to play on classkc which was an obvious yes for me and then I read the post :/ 

I dont think so that you should get more rewards, in what way EXP? That would ironically turn it kind off into easy mode or Paragon mode. FE is a different game than those you listed and Heroes is a gacha game so it works for it because of that and also ita very different than mainstream FE in many ways.

Sorry about the title confusion. You bring up a similar point about difficulty as Ertrick, and I ultimately agree that too many EXP incentives would make the game easier. I viewed it more as balancing multiplayer as those who do not reset would be at a disadvantage, a major reason why I also advocate for fixed unit multiplayer. I also agree that we should recommend (but not force) Classic as it is a part of series history.

 

1 hour ago, Eltosian Kadath said:

I don't think so, the difficulty is its own reward; but I will note multiple main entries to the series do have incentives for beating harder modes and/or classic mode. In the Binding Blade two of the trial maps are locked behind a hard mode completion. In Path of Radiance again one of the trial maps is locked behind a hard mode completion. Radiant Dawn locks its hardest difficultly behind a completion of its second highest difficulty. In New Mystery of the Emblem, completing the game on hard unlocks more reclassing options by combining the two male class sets, and completing the game on Lunatic unlocks Lunatic reverse and some stat boosters in the map prep shop, and it even has an incentive to play on classic by only unlocking Classic Lunatic Reverse if you completed Lunatic on Classic. Awakening locks Lunatic + behind completing it on Lunatic. In Fates a colored symbol for each path and difficulty is unlocked for the player card as a bragging right incentive. Echoes has awards for the player card for those who complete the game on Hard and Classic, with a renown boost attached to each (as well as the bragging rights).

 

Good points all around. I ultimately think all levels should be unlocked for all, but I like how extra bonuses and difficult modes were given as rewards.

[eclipse]

1 minute ago, DeoGame said:

Difficulty Incetives do not equate to easy mode mockery. FE warriors can still be enjoyed on lower difficulty levels, Forza and Forza Horizon are perfectly fun experiences regardless of difficulty, I've played Bethesda games since I was a young inexperienced kid who had never touched an Action RPG and I had just as much fun then as I do now, Smash Bros. rewards playing hard versions of Classic and is still one of Nintendo's most beloved and accessible series, Kid Icarus Uprising also incentivized hard play perfectly.

IMO there is nothing wrong incentivizing tougher play, it even adds replay value. It is only when things get out of balance when it is an issue. It is not "telling people how to play" either, it is simply rewarding those who take a challenge and incentivizing future play amongst newcomers.

If you say "nothing wrong", you're not looking for discussion, you're looking for agreement.  And that would be enough justification for me to shut this topic down. . .which I won't, yet.

Instead, I want an answer as to why you felt this was an appropriate topic, and I want you to be honest.  If I get the sense that you're not being fully honest, I lock this.

[Jagged Jagen]

6 minutes ago, eclipse said:

If you say "nothing wrong", you're not looking for discussion, you're looking for agreement.  And that would be enough justification for me to shut this topic down. . .which I won't, yet.

Instead, I want an answer as to why you felt this was an appropriate topic, and I want you to be honest.  If I get the sense that you're not being fully honest, I lock this.

I said in my opinion, I see nothing wrong. I am not looking for agreement, in fact, many of the dissenting replies have raised incredibly good points I did not take into account such as the potential imbalances of additional EXP and some of the ways prior installments did implement bonuses and the positives and negatives therein (i.e. I feel that locking story content behind difficulty should not be done.)

Now, as for the reasoning behind this thread, I wanted to discuss the merits and drawbacks of incentivizing harder modes, drawing comparisons to other games that do so. I feel that we should be allowed to discuss the merits of game design, replayability, incentivization and the choices made.

 

It is also not a concept Nintendo is adverse to, having released the BOTW Master mode DLC to great success, that helped make the game replayable and provide both challenge and incentive.

 

If this is not genuine enough for you than so be it, feel free to lock the thread. I have made my point, I have heard many great counter points, so be it.

[eclipse]

1 minute ago, DeoGame said:

Now, as for the reasoning behind this thread, I wanted to discuss the merits and drawbacks of incentivizing harder modes, drawing comparisons to other games that do so. I feel that we should be allowed to discuss the merits of game design, replayability, incentivization and the choices made.

It's not the subject itself that I have an issue with.  It's the motive behind bringing it up in the first place. . .and that is what I'm looking for.

[Jagged Jagen]

3 minutes ago, eclipse said:

It's not the subject itself that I have an issue with.  It's the motive behind bringing it up in the first place. . .and that is what I'm looking for.

I recently posted a thread about Three Houses with a poll discussing the implementation of various mechanics, both new and old after changes made to many in Echoes (i.e. Support convos, permadeath, voice acting). 

That got me thinking about permadeath and difficulty and how they could be implemented, including incentives. I posted here to debate the merits of such incentives, as I believe it lead itself better to discuss here than in the Three Houses thread. 

[eclipse]

1 minute ago, DeoGame said:

I recently posted a thread about Three Houses with a poll discussing the implementation of various mechanics, both new and old after changes made to many in Echoes (i.e. Support convos, permadeath, voice acting). 

That got me thinking about permadeath and difficulty and how they could be implemented, including incentives. I posted here to debate the merits of such incentives, as I believe it lead itself better to discuss here than in the Three Houses thread. 

I'll accept this for now.  I have my own theories regarding this, and I'll let your future posts determine whether I'm right or wrong. . .and if I'm proven right, I will not be happy.

[Hanes]

IMO this topic did nothing wrong, it ain't long as hell or really that bad, sometimes people want to ask others if they think their ideas are cool or interesting and that's enough motivation to do so.

[Jagged Jagen]

22 minutes ago, Critical Sniper said:

IMO this topic did nothing wrong, it ain't long as hell or really that bad, sometimes people want to ask others if they think their ideas are cool or interesting and that's enough motivation to do so.

Thanks. :)

[Hawkwing]

I don't really see much of a way they could encourage players to pick classic mode over casual unless they mock them for choosing the easier difficulty, but I never liked that attitude from game developers, and Fire Emblem isn't exactly the best series to pick the harder difficulties if it's your first time playing. Encouraging it as a "training wheels" mode would be just as discouraging. For better or worse, it's up to the player whether to use casual mode to compensate for bad strategies, or as a tool to learn the mechanics without being permanently punished for their mistakes, and there's not much the developers can do about that.

As for the difficulty level, I do think that the rewards should be the same throughout all of them, barring a few balancing changes (such as giving increased stats to units that join later on the higher difficulties), so no added gold, experience, or weapons in the run itself.

However, rewards for completing the higher difficulties should be a good motivator, and there are multiple routes the developers could take to handle this that are not mutually exclusive. I don't think they should do the "player gets more story if they beat the game on lunatic" just because it could be found easily online, but stuff like unlocking cosmetic changes and more bonus features would be neat. Gaining more options to affect the gameplay for a New Game + would add a ton of replayability, either by making the game even more challenging, letting the player experience using more powerful weapons and characters outside of the endgame, adding unique twists that enhance the experience, and much more.

[Flere210]

Honestly, this seems like the "there is only one true way to enjoy this game and if you don't play that way you are playing it wrong" argument. 

And giving extra stuff go againist the point of difficulty levels. Harder difficulties are harder because there is a lesser range of viable strategies aviable. If you get stuff like more bexp, more money or better weapons, then you get more options. An whit more optikns you are more likely to find the gamebreaker ones. For example, whit extra founds you can forge a weapon and buy a master seal quicker, wich may give an huge powerspike to an unit that trivialize midgame.

In general i am not a fan of rewarding players whit extra advantages for playing well, because usually those advantage piles up and snowball in the mid-late game. It is one of the reason why the difficulty of so many games is frontloaded. Sure you can balance the game so that it still is hard even if you exploit everything, but in that case, the game would be even more frustrating for the newcomers that don't know how to exploit stuff.

 

As for multiplayer. Allowing post game grinding would allow anyone to get a competitive team. As a rule of thumb, multiplayer teams are inerently built differently than campaign teams, let alone efficient campaign teams, and i din't think that allowing people to jump in online battling whit their story mode team is a good idea. The metagames are just too differents, and will always be.

[Ertrick36]

4 hours ago, DeoGame said:

Fair enough. You bring up a good point on the power creep that can result from giving extra items and exp making the game ultimately easier. I was viewing it more as levelling the playing field on online play as those (particularly ones who do not grind/reset) would be at an inherent disadvantage, but it does run the risk of breaking the single player experience. I will be the first to admit that the drops in Bethesda games can be too good at points, leading to an easier experience than anticipated.

Well if you're looking to level the playing field for online, there would, theoretically, be other systems in place to prevent inherent disadvantages.  If I'm not mistaken, Awakening's MP let's you see what units a Spotposs team has and what their stats and skills are, and Fates allows you to use a handicap if you are at a disadvantage against the enemy.  I'm unsure of any other MP experiences in FE, but in many cases the simple answer would be to separate multiplayer from singleplayer progression entirely - something that practically every game that isn't an MMO and has PvP does.

3 hours ago, Hawkwing said:

I don't really see much of a way they could encourage players to pick classic mode over casual unless they mock them for choosing the easier difficulty

That's the kind of attitude that kills indie snarky indie developers' dreams and that waning development companies employ in a last ditch effort to appeal to players through ballsy rhetoric.

Or it's the kind of crap you'd see back in the 80's and 90's when games were all designed to infuriate you as much as possible and bar you from actually winning.  Either way, you aren't alone in thinking that games that mock you for selecting lower difficulties suck.

4 hours ago, Critical Sniper said:

IMO this topic did nothing wrong, it ain't long as hell or really that bad, sometimes people want to ask others if they think their ideas are cool or interesting and that's enough motivation to do so.

I could understand from the perspective of a moderator how a topic like this could be suspect.

Some folks only want to either stir trouble or rally people under a certain way of thinking, and these methods are typically disguised as threads for genuine discussion.  I see it all the time on bigger, less moderated sites like GameFAQs or YouTube; people will make a thread with a question (often a leading question, but not always), and then it'll turn out the thread creator is just ranting and rambling about this or that and expressing opinions in such a way that they're inciteful.  And they'll be combating other users every step of the way, or other users will be combating each other because it's a hot button topic.

It's a bit harder to find that motive on this website because things are more stringently handled - you won't usually find threads that are nearly as blatantly inflammatory or inciteful as you would on more populated sites, and if you do they typically get shut down very quickly.  So some people on this site who might be more inclined towards that troublesome behavior will attempt to be a little more subtle about it, and so you'll get threads similar to this where people pose questions and then express their opinion in a certain way, though the difference is that this TC is expressing interest in dissenting opinions (rather than outright fighting them).  I've seen it happen a few times before, and it seems when the moderators don't get on it the threads snowball into an awful mess.

[Interdimensional Observer]

I sorta recall how Valkyrie Profile: Covenant of the Plume, rewards you with extra goodies if you score 150 or 200% of the Sin quota for a given battle. Getting more Sin means taking more time to drop enemy HP as low as possible, then surrounding them with 3-4 of your crew and pounding them into Overkill. If you've other things to tend to on the map, this will make things harder. But at the same time, the extra challenge is rewarded with minor bonuses.

In a sense, FE does this on all difficulties with side objectives on various maps. Take beating thieves to chests, outside of like Battle Before Dawn, the easiest thing would be to turtle, but chest rushes force you to do more, and you're rewarded with whatever was in those chests.

 

Curiously, I heard secondhand that the brand new Kingdom Hearts III hides some ending scenes, with the criteria stated by Nomura himself for unlocking them being the number of hidden Mickeys you find. The quantity you need varies depending on difficulty- Easy needs the most, Normal some, and Hard the fewest. Not sure why this is, other than perhaps SE thinking if you're playing on a lower setting, you're not so into the gameplay and will as you casually take in the worlds be more likely to find the Mickeys?

 

One thing I wouldn't want to see is dialogue restricted to the higher difficulties. Since that is how we missed out on RD's Extended Script, and I wish we had those extra nuggets of dialogue, those I've read on this site, which is missing a lot of it, are really good.

[Arcphoenix]

Classic is a personal challenge. It shouldn't extend beyond an achievement or star on a profile, a feeling of self-achievement, and bragging rights.

Harder difficulties including more weapons and items appearing on maps not available on some lower difficulties (I can't think of too many examples at the moment) is fine in my opinion.

[Jotari]

Absolutely yes harder difficulties should incentivesed, but not through the acquirement of more in game currencies as the OP suggests. That would only end up making the harder modes easier. Fire Emblem is a game you play through, it's not like Heroes where you're building something just to have it. The thing that classic harder modes should have is more content. Extra Gaiden chapters or even extra cutscenes and character moments only available by achieving goals unique to the higher modes. I would even support giving extra scenarios for characters deaths, though not like they were handled in Shadow Dragon where arbitrarily something extra happened if half your army was slaughtered. We should get more stuff like the last Gaiden in Shadow Dragon where the plot plays out different because one relevant plot important character died. I have no problem with Casual mode existing, but I do think the games should still be designed around classic and that players should be encouraged to eventually "graduate" to playing classic mode, and that will only happen if they have some reason to try it beyond macochism.

[Djr7]

The only way I see this working is if you can replay stages at a harder difficulty.

I think the best implementation of risk/reward that has been in the Fire Emblem games is the simple addition of chests and enemy Thief's, among other map related side quests. As these chests usually provide some nice items but aren't exactly needed, and that they are part of the map and allow players to play the risk/skill or bypass it altogether. Beating FE without any deaths on higher difficulties is its own reward.