Ibanez RG 350EX
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Feb 13, 2024
That and the ludicrous difficulty spikes in a handful of fights make the game absolutely infuriating. I abuse the shit out of save states when emulating FFT or Tactics Ogre with no shame.
Truly difficult games
- Thread starter Xarpho's Return
- Start date
-
Want to keep track of this thread?
Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
Create account
- Joined
- May 22, 2025
Never beat it as a kid despite beating 1-3 on NES, tried it decades later as an adult and wondered what my problem was as a kid, it's definitely one of the easier titles in the series, the easiest next to the Igavanias (apart from Order of Ecchlesia, which i find to be unreasonably difficult and have never beat). Perfectly beatable without save states. Graphically it still blows me away, it's crazy what the SNES was capable of and that game showcased that perfectly. Came out early in the consoles life cycle and still looks better than the majority of games towards the end of the consoles life span. Not to mention the soundtrack.
Cliche at this point but if you didn't get assfucked via saving before the Wiegraf fight you haven't played video games
The game already pushed my shit in in Dorter and that's what, the third main quest fight? I heard they changed the save game trap before Wiegraf in the remake, for shame.Edit: There's not only the Wiegraf fight where you can get trapped hopelessly if you only have a single save file, later on there's the part in Mustadio's city where a fight starts if you leave with no indication whatsoever beforehand, i remember i sent my key party members on errands before that and had no chance of winning that fight, having to start the game over yet again.
Only ever played it on emu a million years back but i remember it being ridiculously difficult right of the bat. While i love Mega Man and owned the majority of the NES and SNES titles i used to struggle even with the easier titles, 2 on NES took kid-me forever to beat. I even struggled with Sigma in X1 back then.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Feb 19, 2020
It was already cited as an example of a game that akshually isn't hard. Note that OP wasn't asking for the hardest games ever, just games that aren't akshually not hard for various akshually reasons.
- Joined
- Mar 17, 2023
i actually agree with his take, but with a caveat: enemies in video games should never, ever have iframes. it's only okay for the player to have them otherwise it's retarded bullshit.
and fir me, a generally challenging to hard game of note, or series rather, is Ys.
Ibanez RG 350EX
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Feb 13, 2024
It's embarrassing how little some of you seem to know about the most basic functioning of the medium. You're like "movie buffs" who know nothing about writing, direction, lighting, acting, or cinematography, but speak authoritatively on filmmaking anyway.
- Joined
- Nov 11, 2024
The most exciting, difficult, and challenging game I ever played was AI War: Fleet Command and there's no contest. Hands down best AI I've ever played against. I recommend the original, not the sequel, (which is visually too busy for my eyes.)
Aside from the excellent AI scripting. There's a few things that make it truly difficult without being a cheat.
Autistic variety: There's about 300 unit types but only ~50 are selected for each playthrough. Both for you and the opponent. So both sides deploy a 'work with what you got' strategy that you can't repeat between sessions. You'll have to use your brain because your advantages change with each playthrough.
Escalation: Your opponent has better things to do with its time and ignores you at first; but every action you take increases its perception of you as a threat and it will devote more of its infinite power to your destruction. You have to weigh the pros and cons of each asset you capture. You will never, at any point, be more powerful than the opponent.
Two Foes: On top of this there are two AIs, with 46 personalities, which strongly alters their behaviour.
I only beat this once, on 7.5 & 8 difficulties, though that's partly because it's a timesink. I captured some enemy technologies which raised the threat level too aggressively. Was able to destroy some data centers to lower that threat and put together a force to destroy one AI's core. That sent the other one into a fury that began collapsing everything I had. So I cobbled together a fleet of shield ships, nested an enormous nuclear warhead under their umbrella, and blitzed it to the second AI's core planet.
- Joined
- Aug 18, 2020
- Joined
- Dec 23, 2020
Imagine an army of IGN reviewers walking up to the first skeleton in Dark Souls and dying repeatedly without trying anything differently until finally ragequitting and posting about it online. That's what's going on there with a couple tutorial bosses designed to make sure you aren't playing like a spaz.
It's tougher than Hollow Knight, but that's not saying much.
Shroom King
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Dec 22, 2014
Try beating it without the Candle. Some sick fucks have done it.
- Joined
- Feb 19, 2020
This is what I see every time I ragescroll through Steam user reviews
- Joined
- Jul 4, 2024
I can't imagine it being more technically difficult than one of those spreadsheet simulator games
lichen
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Dec 22, 2019
You’re making this sound kind of like Clock Tower which has me intrigued.
- Joined
- Jan 2, 2020
Yes, but unlike Clock Tower, there is no dialogue, so as soon as you press start, you're off to the races.
There is a map that you can check during the game (pause or select, I forget which button it is) to show where the CPUs are, where the dropped items are, and how much time you have left. But I never really found it helpful.
Last edited:
Ughubughughughughughghlug
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- May 14, 2019
If that’s not the most important thing in life, what is?
Ibanez RG 350EX
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Feb 13, 2024
- Joined
- Jan 16, 2019
Chicago 1932: Don Capone. A gangster RTS where you need to build your empire and fight rival mobsters for 22 missions. The hard part stems from you cannot save during the mission and if one thing fucks up and everything falls apart, you'll need to start from scratch (also some maps can randomize with the starting location), furthermore the AI will always outpace you in terms of getting better units and money (by the time you get your 1st sniper or enforcer, the AI will already have assassins and guys with Tommyguns heading for your base)
Last edited:
Wait what game? That doesn't sound like the SNES game.
- Joined
- Jan 2, 2020
Because it's not the SNES game, it's the 8bit NES game
I'm sure there are differences between the two, but I've never played the SNES version so I wouldn't know.
RSU 1741
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Apr 13, 2021
I'm amused no one went truly back. There's a lot of "historical" (oldass games from the 90ies or the 80ies) that are hard as balls because the developers were incompetent, but there's the occasional game that was kind of insane by design. Have you ever heard of Wizardry? Today it ain't a name well-known bar in psychotic online communities or japanese derivative games, but back then it was a huge deal.
Let's talk about Wizardry 4: The Return of Werdna.
Wizardry is a blobber, you have your group of adventurers and wander around a labyrinth to kill stuff and reach an objective. All fine and dandy. Wizardry 4 was designed from the ground up to be an expert level blobber and it was built in 1987. No FAQs, no walkthrough (bar the tidbits the manual gave you).
So what makes Wizardry 4 difficult? You control the resurrected Bad Guy of the first game Werdna and play in a sort of anti-blobber:
- You don't create a party. You control a party of monsters that act independently from your character. Better pray they do something adequate.
- You level up at pre-defined points, and fighting gives you nothing.
- There's loot. It's almost all plot-items or useless chaff. There's no good way to understand beforehand what's chaff and what's not.
- Enemy adventurers are capable of killing you in one or two hits.
- It's an old-style RPG. You are expected to take extensive record keeping, and the floors are essentially puzzles: teleports and tricks are commonplace.
- A enemy ghost follows you in real time (the game is turn based) and if it catches you, it's game over. You have a limited amount of key-strokes to properly finish the game.
- The final boss(es) are between the devilish and insane. To kill Lord Hawkwind, for example, you need to get a (useless) monster from the first level and the only hint is that the walls of some levels form the letters of the name of the aforementioned monster . No automaps.
- The True ending is esoteric. I hope you had your Qabbalah ready, because the game won't explain it to you.
It's a fascinating example of "difficulty" in another era entirely. The point was to make a sequel that would truly challenge for weeks experts in the first three games, and it's an interesting design for such an objective.
Let's talk about Wizardry 4: The Return of Werdna.
Wizardry is a blobber, you have your group of adventurers and wander around a labyrinth to kill stuff and reach an objective. All fine and dandy. Wizardry 4 was designed from the ground up to be an expert level blobber and it was built in 1987. No FAQs, no walkthrough (bar the tidbits the manual gave you).
So what makes Wizardry 4 difficult? You control the resurrected Bad Guy of the first game Werdna and play in a sort of anti-blobber:
- You don't create a party. You control a party of monsters that act independently from your character. Better pray they do something adequate.
- You level up at pre-defined points, and fighting gives you nothing.
- There's loot. It's almost all plot-items or useless chaff. There's no good way to understand beforehand what's chaff and what's not.
- Enemy adventurers are capable of killing you in one or two hits.
- It's an old-style RPG. You are expected to take extensive record keeping, and the floors are essentially puzzles: teleports and tricks are commonplace.
- A enemy ghost follows you in real time (the game is turn based) and if it catches you, it's game over. You have a limited amount of key-strokes to properly finish the game.
- The final boss(es) are between the devilish and insane. To kill Lord Hawkwind, for example, you need to get a (useless) monster from the first level and the only hint is that the walls of some levels form the letters of the name of the aforementioned monster . No automaps.
- The True ending is esoteric. I hope you had your Qabbalah ready, because the game won't explain it to you.
It's a fascinating example of "difficulty" in another era entirely. The point was to make a sequel that would truly challenge for weeks experts in the first three games, and it's an interesting design for such an objective.