Question: Let's say you start up a new game, and you are allowed to start it with any of the four difficulty settings, which would you choose?

I normally choose Normal or whatever that is the default, because that's what I think how the developers wanted us to play. More than likely, I don't replay games, until after a few months, if I do, I would probably jump to the easiest setting.

Normal, then down a level, then up two levels, then a speed run on the easiest (if it can hold my attention for that long)

I always try to play at normal difficulty. Combat is not too easy but leaves the spotlight for the story.

I crank it up because few games have really smart AI. Game developers tend to make games so that the majority can beat them even on the hardest settings. The thing is that I have ADHD and an IQ of 172 (genius is considered around 150).

I can usually figure out how to beat a game pretty easily, might die 2 or 3 times.

Sept Starcraft, which I love, cause Starcraft is challenging. :goodjob:

I start on easy to get a feel for the game then I might bump it up a notch

My IQ is 148 :swear: [censored] MENSA

Ain't you the modest one ^_^

For a first time I always play at the default difficulty setting. Shouldn't be so easy that it gets boring, but not so hard that I do not finish the story out of frustration either. On what difficulty level I replay it depends on the game. For example, in the Mass Effect games I don't care about the combat but replay for different story outcomes, so there I always replay on the default difficulty setting. In more linear action games however, like The Force Unleashed, I like the challenge of replaying games on a higher difficulty.

It also depends on the manner in which the game becomes more difficult. In Rome and Medieval 2 Total War a difficulty above medium just means that the AI gets insane bonus stats and cheats for money instead of actually improving its strategy and tactics. There's no fun in that.

I usually leave it on normal, but if I go into a game knowing that it's brutal, I'll bump it down to easy. Likewise if it's supposed to be an incredibly easy game, I may play on hard right off the bat. I mostly play for the story and don't usually find harder difficulties all that bad to begin with, but it would seem bosses (if there are any) tend to scale ridiculously and nothing kills the fun more than getting stuck on a boss for hours. Good game design usually means that any obstacle, regardless of game difficulty, can be overcome by following the correct strategies, which makes for an enjoyable challenge rather than an impossible hurdle that only serves to frustrate you.

Normal unless I've never played a game of it's like, then easy. If I read up on the game beforehand and it says the hard difficulty isn't hard and gives achievements..I play it on the hardest difficulty. I'm doing that for Viking and Rise of the Argonauts. Their hardest difficulties aren't that bad.

I usually start out on normal to get to know the game. But for games like FO3 I never turn the difficulty higher because I don't think it's a good kind of higher difficulty (turning everything into bulletsponges).

I heard Torchlight was rather easy so I started on a higher difficulty from the start. It was still easy.

It really depends on the game. There are some games where I don't even bother doing a "real" playthrough. Like Crysis. I just popped it in, put it on the easiest difficulty setting, used some console commands to have every weapon, unlimited suit energy, and unlimited ammo, and played through. Something like Dragon Age, I put on the normal difficulty, then once I have a hang of it (not once I have beaten it), I start over, using what I have learned to play on the hardest setting. Something that I'm more confident in, like Oblivion (considering how well I knew the TES franchise), I just start at the hardest.

I usually don't like hard difficulties if it's done just by buffing stats. Like if enemies just have more health, and do more damage, that's not as fun as if they have better AI. Halo does a good job of it, I think, since while they beef stats, they make proper strategy more important. Taking down shields is still a one-hit affair with an energy pistol, and headshots with shields down are still one-hit-kills, but the AI is much, much harder.

If it's a game I've never played before, I'll usually start with the default difficulty, which usually means normal. After all, if it's my first time playing a game, I don't know how hard the game is going to be, so I expect that normal will offer the most balanced experience and play as the developers meant the game to. What difficulty I set it to later on depends on whether I felt the game was too easy, too hard, or just right. I want to find a difficulty I can get the most entertainment out of the game on, so if I decide the game is too easy, I might increase the difficulty, if it's too hard, I might lower it. It comes down to a matter of finding a difficulty level on which the game feels challenging but not to the point that it becomes frustrating rather than fun, and if no matter how I change the difficulty I can't do that... well, then I guess there's a bit of a problem.

Normal, then depending on how the diffculty is implemented i may go up.

Dead Space 2's difficulty requires being hit less due to rare helath packs and to rely more on kinesis due to lower amounts of ammo. It gets pretty difficult towards the end. Same with Starcraft 2, hard difficulty requires improved tactics.

Betheda's games have tediousness sliders, it only gets annoying.

Normal. Challenging but stillquick to get through the story.
Then maybe up a lvl depending on what changes. e.g ME2 adds shields and armour mmaking biotec powers useless, so I gave up on anything with those in.
Fallout NV just makes things more annoying, my legion character had a machete and tried to kill a fiend, by the time 1 fiend was dead it was half broken... [censored] that, it souldnt happen at alll. I would be fine with HC mode if it werent for companion deaths, because cazador poison kills them because they cant use antivenom. NV styas normal.

Only game I bothered completing on hardest was halo reach. Thats because I wanted the "I am a monument to all of your sins" but it was kinda doable it wasnt the missions that were the problem, just parts of the missions, like the last mission, I found killling the brutes quite fun, be the overshield zealots went to far (skipped past hunters ). The only 3 missions I hated with a passion were long night of solace, nightfall and the pillar of autumn. But aside from that I found it quite fun.

I also like RDR it dosent make enemies bullet sponges with sniper rifles, just removes the aim assist, I enjoy it in single player, much more fun, but balenced, a couger till dies in one shot, undead nightmare however I like casual (damn zombie cougers) so it depends on the game really. If your idea is to make extremely unbalenced gameplay e.g Fallout NV/3 then no, I am not going to find shooting them in the head 50 times to kill them and them shooting me once in the chest balenced. Should just be everyone dose huge damage, headshots are a 1 hit kill, you them, everyone. But if its done in a semi balenced way (RDR ) then sure why not.

I still think AI should improve with difficulty instead,

Normal, all the time, every time. There are few games, if any, that don't feel like all they do is give the monsters 10x more health and make them do more damage when you increase difficulty. I don't like that. I don't play games specifically to be challenged. I play games to experience them, if that's a thing. Don't get me wrong. I'm not saying I pay them for story or some such reason as that. I just like the other experience of being something I'm not in a world that's not ours.

Conversely I don't play on Easy because that would make me a pansy. My old roommate once played Bioshock on easiest. It was ridiculous. He could stand still and empty one machine gun magazine into a Big Daddy and it was dead.

I usually stick with normal difficulty. If that turns out to be too difficult for whatever reason I'll dial it down to easy, but that's pretty rare. (I did it with Resident Evil 5, but only because normal difficulty + Sheva-bot stealing all my ammo and shoving it into guns she then doesn't even use = I kept getting backed into unwinnable scenarios where I'd be out of ammo and there was a chainsaw man gunning for my face.) Likewise, I started Prince of Persia: Warrior Within on normal difficulty but then restarted on easy because I couldn't get past the first boss' ridiculous spam attacks that took off giant chunks of health. <_<

Sometimes on replays I'll decide to challenge myself and go for the hardest difficulty setting. I've done Half-Life 1 that way, and it was a lot of fun. Not something I'd ever do on a first run, though; dying repeatedly tends to interfere with my playing it for the story.

I always start at normal, then continue on up until I've played through the hardest difficulty.

Usually if it's a FPS or a competitive multiplayer game I play on hard. Not the hardest, just hard. I figure that if I get used to it being easy, doing the hardest is going to be just that much harder. Which brings me to replays, in which I go for the hardest difficulty. This is more for achievements than anything else. Plus, games last longer and require more dedication if you're doing more than just skimming through it.

I play every new CoD on Veteran for my first playthrough. If I play it again I'll probably play it on hard or normal.

Depends on the genre. If it's one that I'm comfortable with, like RPG, RTS, action or puzzle, then I'll do quite fine on Normal. But I generally dislike FPS games and most sports games, which by cause and effect means I play them little and therefore experience total svckage... And need to play on Easy frequently enough. I tend to avoid the Hard mode in any game, simple because I don't see the need to endure it when Normal will suffice for a single playthrough.

I always play on normal, cuz ever since I was 7 I was taught by my dad that only pansys start on easy. I usually replay the game on the same difficulty if its a game like mass effect or knights of the old republic, with tons of replayability. But if its just a shooter I usually wont replay it.

Depends on the game, really. Games in my most often played - and frankly, best played by me - genres of strategy and RPG are usually started at hard or worse. Many action games I start on normal, to get the hang of it.

I usually do easy for the story ect know where the goods are then I go to the hardest difficulty because I know where to go and what not. Did it with ME

The hardest possible because I like realism.

It depends what their definition of hard is, I played the Crysis games on "Delta" (the hardest difficulty) and didn't find it that hard. However some games, like Call of Duty, Veteran is just frustrating. I want a game to be challenging, I shouldn't be able to win the game without having to try. However I shouldn't have to repeat the same part 15 times before I get it perfectly so I can move on, which is what COD games are usually like on veteran. If I start a game for the first time I will usually put it on 'normal' difficulty and then change it in the options if that is to easy. If I have played the demo before I usually pick a more educated decision. But I don't have a difficulty level that I always choose since difficulties change with the game, I just want a challenge.