The Nintendo/NES Hard list

[G-type | 2,482]

games that have savepoints that give you infinite attempts should also be factored in... it might be hard on the first few tries... but with patience you will beat it.

[RH | 4,910]

51 minutes ago, DoctorEncore said:

I agree completely. Difficulty is tough to define, but there a few objective ways it could be measured. The most straightforward is, of course, completion percentage. This would require very specific wording and specific gameplay instructions to remove outliers. Additionally, those who participated in the activity would need to answer a poll regarding why the game was difficult (i.e. gameplay challenge, glitches, technical problems, poor controls, confusing instructions, etc).

Some ways to present the data:

• 50% of people on VGS who made a concerted effort to beat this game were successful.
• 50% of people on VGS who made a concerted effort to beat this game were able to do so within 10 hours.
• The average player on VGS who played for 10 hours made it 50% of the way through the game.
• This game was deemed difficult due to gameplay
• This game was deemed difficult due to poor controls

It's a stats nerd's dream come true.

 

This... this needs to be a site.  Something like a backlog site, but every time you beat a game (or for any game you recall beating in the past) you can fill out a simple 5-10 question survey.  (Did you beat it, did you 100% it?  Scale of 1-10, how difficult was it.  Scale of 1-10 how broken/buggy did it seem?  Scale of 1-10 how difficult was it to 100% it (vs. simply beating it.)

With enough time and usage, data entry like that could give a pretty decent list that's not crafted by "experts".  Of course, the outliers would be the random crap games that are hard because so little effort went into development, but at this point, how many people are playing NES tapes and wouldn't care about getting those things correct?

[Link | 2,714]

You can't make a wikipedia article out of this. It's all too subjective. It would get clobbered with "citation needed" marks. 

Maybe an article documenting an event with tournament-style ranking of difficulty could fly there. Or not

 

EDIT: ↑ a website of its own like that (or a section here) is much more workable than the gatekeeping requirements of wikipedia.

Edited January 14, 2022 by Link

[DoctorEncore | 3,691]

3 hours ago, RH said:

This... this needs to be a site.  Something like a backlog site, but every time you beat a game (or for any game you recall beating in the past) you can fill out a simple 5-10 question survey.  (Did you beat it, did you 100% it?  Scale of 1-10, how difficult was it.  Scale of 1-10 how broken/buggy did it seem?  Scale of 1-10 how difficult was it to 100% it (vs. simply beating it.)

With enough time and usage, data entry like that could give a pretty decent list that's not crafted by "experts".  Of course, the outliers would be the random crap games that are hard because so little effort went into development, but at this point, how many people are playing NES tapes and wouldn't care about getting those things correct?

That's actually a really cool idea. If I was a younger man with more time, less family, and some website know-how, I'd probably pursue something like that. Instead, I'll have to leave it to some young motivated videogamesman.

[guitarzombie | 924]

4 hours ago, G-type said:

games that have savepoints that give you infinite attempts should also be factored in... it might be hard on the first few tries... but with patience you will beat it.

I agree.  Mutant Virus is really hard but its more of a game of patience because you have infinite continues, which is why you've seen people who have beaten it, leave their NES on for hours/days.  I think when I beat it, it took 3 hours which must be some kind of record cuz I still have no idea what to do for that last level haha.  Even with that, I haven't beaten Battletoads because its a game of memorization and chipping away.  I think also replayability should be factored.  The example is Maniac Mansion.  You get someone to play it that has no idea what to do and yeah its really hard.  But ive had it memorized since I was a kid and can beat it in 10 mins.  Battletoads, although similar, requires more memorization and reactive, skill, which to me, is more indicative of a games difficulty, than memorization.

[T-Pac | 7,560]

I understand that infinite continues cushion a game's difficulty, but they don't automatically make a game "beat-able" by persistence alone. By that logic, I probably would've cleared Ninja Gaiden and Castlevania by now.

I know some people who are more naturally-talented at gaming have trouble understanding this, but a lot of us have skill-ceilings that some games are just too far above. Telling me that I can beat Mike Tyson in NES Punch-Out if I "just keep trying" isn't much different than telling me I can K-O Mike Tyson in real life if I "just keep trying"...

-CasualCart

[twiztor | 851]

51 minutes ago, CasualCart said:

I understand that infinite continues cushion a game's difficulty, but they don't automatically make a game "beat-able" by persistence alone. By that logic, I probably would've cleared Ninja Gaiden and Castlevania by now.

I know some people who are more naturally-talented at gaming have trouble understanding this, but a lot of us have skill-ceilings that some games are just too far above. Telling me that I can beat Mike Tyson in NES Punch-Out if I "just keep trying" isn't much different than telling me I can K-O Mike Tyson in real life if I "just keep trying"...

-CasualCart

definitely agree!  i like to think i'm pretty decent at video games.  i powered through Castlevania a couple years ago. after also beating CV2 and 3, i thought "i should be able to tackle Ninja Gaiden next". NOPE!

for another example, i've beaten Mike Tyson. but, for the life of me, i cannot beat Soda Popinski. never have.

skill ceilings are real.

[Nintegageo | 582]

@cj_robot I think they mean it's the easier NES Hard. So like an intro to actual hard games.

According to the site I think NES Hard were games people knew about and thought were so hard during that time.  So no hidden gem tough games. I think that is why games such as Contra are considered.

[Nintegageo | 582]

Oh, it says the games need to be hard due to challenge, not glitchy or crappy coding problems.