but games like GTA should always have automatic difficulty

To me selecting different difficulty options needs to do more than change how much health you lose when you're hit or how many hits it now takes to take out an enemy.

Higher difficulty settings should mean harder AI, less resources (ammo, health), open new areas or paths, tougher puzzles, more enemies. You know, all things that would make the game feel and play different if your playing through again on a higher difficulty.

Why would you ever get rid of them. With all due respect, retarded question/article.

i like making a overpowered character and i love story so i choose easy all the time and work my way up to medium :p

i play mostly on ´´normal´´ , it´s when i want to enjoy story more then the challenge.or when there are collectibles to look for^^ then i go on hard or very hard and i either mage to complete or i give up if it´s too damn frustrating.but it´s always fun to give it a go,so yeah,there always should be option.

This is what happens when everybody and their brother creates their own lame gaming site, you get stupid articles because people want to write something "original".

Difficulty settings is a must have especially in FPS and Strategy. BUT maybe for RPG (JRPG) like Final Fantasy, etc, they should left it out.

Difficulty settings my A$$.. I see no difference on AI every settings, All I can see is when they hit you once on hard difficulty, you'll die!!

The problem with scaling difficulties is that it can cheapen the experience for some. Imagine playing a game on normal or hard and failing a few times. You keep on trying until you get better until you finally beat the challenge; that sense of accomplishment feels really good right?

But then if you found out that the game deliberately adjusted itself to you and made it easier without your knowledge, that accomplishment wouldn't mean anything. It's like playing a multiplayer game with someone and knowing that they're deliberately going easy on you. It's not as much fun.

So really, difficulty is a balancing act between frustration and boredom.

Games should have no option, but if you die alot the game could ask you if you want to lower the difficulty for the duration of the game.

I remember one game that did this, but cant remember what it was...anyone remember?

Well as you can see by many of the comments in here, a lot of people still use difficulties for ePeen boosters.

I like games with a single difficulty. Play purely as the game was created.

Demon's Souls and Dark Souls say no :P but yeah most games should have the option but Demon's Souls was so much better because it got harder and harder (thats what she said -_____-)

It depends , som games need the fixed difficulty settings , like demon souls .

The common approach is usuall to design obstacles and encounters around the default or esy difficulty then to bump up or down ennemy health , resistance , your health etc .

This would result it a few games like DS to be just different in design , and their difficulty only bumped up via artificial stats , rather than its usual harsh (and not even that hard) nature .

Tower Knight wouldnt be hard because you have to read according his pattern and react properly . He'd be superficial hard because he takes 10x more hits to die in hard , while you have 10x less life .

There should be some sort of AI what adapts to players skill.

Well, yes. For those who don't care about getting creamed. I usually play in normal or hard right off the bat.

dumb article. not every1 can play at the given settings right away. i think shift 2 changes difficulty based on tutorial performance.

As a general rule, yes, but there definitely are exceptions, though.

It's really dependent on the game.

Well it should balance between fun and impossible..i played bayonetta on normal and i almost snapped the disc but it has alot of fun moments...if its too hard youll give up on it..if its challenging but fun, thats alot better than just being fun

It's not so much of a stupid question.. Some games need it, some games don't.
It all matters on the game genre you are discussing, I would imagine.

Maybe they can give CoD a 2 year release window, for 2 years keep doing season and adding new stuff, it's cheaper, and brings in more money from DLC.

First year buyers pay $70 like normal, after that year, anyone not willing to buy it can get it on GP, and if they retain some players they can boost the player base and spend money on DLC.

.

This was a smart first move for the CEO. Happy for the price drop, especially since I don’t care for COD.

Huge W. Good move. Finally something went down in price this generation!

Would have liked it to be $20 for Ultimate but any price drop is better than none. Still a great value and service for my needs.

Hoping that all big single player games like the next Wolfenstien game are not available for free on Gamepass day 1. Single player big budget games needs the sales to cover the expensive cost of developing these games .

They realized how much money is lost on games not being bought. Call of duty prints money and you gave it away on a sub. Especially for something that was going to sell anyway. If you ask me, Forza Horizon, Gears, Halo, and other flagship games shouldn’t be on there. It should be for games that may struggle with sales or don’t have that impulse buy attraction. Microsoft would make more money and gamespass wouldn’t have to go up to offset losses.
I am personally over call of duty and have been for years. Having a lower price and excluding it is a great deal for me. Now if they’d give a year bundle with a discounted cost….

Edit** after seeing some of the comments, they basically realized what Sony already did. Day one games HURT financially when it’s a big game that sells. That’s why PlayStation plus does games coming to the service AFTER they had their sales run. Like Spider-man 2 and god of War 2 for example. It’s a nice thing, having day one games, but ultimately paying that high monthly sub to KEEP playing was you paying for games and continuing to pay past the worth of the game. Buying simply saves you in the long run. It’s why I bought Hollow Knight 2 for example rather than play it on games pass. Not enough interesting games on there and I don’t have to pay to keep playing. My gamespass has been cancelled since the price increase and I felt no pain because I buy my games. Otherwise I’d have to keep paying JUST to be able to play something.

I would like a tier without Ubisoft + and EA Play. I play games from those two publishers once in a blue moon.

if you wait a month or two it will probably be half price, with call of duty included

phil needs to rehire himself

This is a good move at the end of the day.

Now it’s at least worth considering but still too pricey to stay subscribed rather than subscribe one month at a time when a big game releases.

I guess losing the title of best selling game of the year to BF6 last year really hurt their pride

Last paragraph “we’ll continue to listen and learn” lol why are the Xbox leadership always talking about wanting to learn? Have some confidence man, I remember Phil Spencer always mentioning he’s going to try to keep learning in his answers during his interviews.

People are dumb. It was 19.99 July 2024. It went to 29.99 Oct 2025. Now it’s 22.99 and somehow that’s a win?! That’s $275.88 a year and a year of PS Plus Premium is $160.

Anybody who thinks this is a win needs to see a doctor.

Oh btw - not charging $29.99 mean less revenue/profit. You wanna know how Microsoft Helix will make up that difference? Enjoy the flood of ADS you’re about to see in your console. Morons.

Clever.

How do you manage – ideally without too much pushback from the community – to remove one of your highest-grossing IPs from a subscription service?

An IP that they bought at great expense just a few years ago and included in D1 specifically ‘to’ promote that very subscription?

I’m sure this move had been decided on for some time.

(… and another move they were able to make in the same breath: ultimately, to push through a price increase. With less content.)

“We will continue to listen and learn.”

… oh yes, of that I am absolutely certain.

lol
thats a drastic move but probably the best.

gonna make those billions back somehow

This is great news for everyone that never wanted CoD in Game Pass. We all know that anyone who wants it will buy it full price. For those that never cared for it, get a discount on the price. I think this will help Xbox keep their subscribers. Plus, most of the more recent CoD games are still having lobbies to play in.

That's cool, price drop is price drop, but wasn't ultimate PC like 10 bucks a month originally? Personally, I am not into having so many subs anymore. I had all and played practically nothing in them, the original sub of random games made "Free" Monthly was far better to me, because bare minimum I ALWAYS had access. Heck, I still have games from 360 they gave me and I don't have a sub at all anymore.

Now I left gamepass and have nothing, I think I will just stick to fewer subscriptions and just buy games as I desire.

People wanted a price drop but there was always gonna be some sort of tradeoff for it. They're not gonna keep CoD on Game Pass forever KNOWING people are gonna buy it anyway simply because it's CoD. People continue to buy it every year without questioning its quality and MS knows this.

But hey GP is cheaper... until the next price increase.