You look at old classic games and a lot of the thrill and excitement came from overcoming the challenges the games presented. It made finishing the game that much sweeter.

I absolutely see where you’re coming from with Football Manager. Some of the greatest stories in history come from two teams competing against each other. Seeing the Flyers overcome all the turmoil of their 2009-10 season and eventually make it to the Finals was incredible. A team like that is far more interesting than one that cake-walks to the Finals.

You look at movies like Inception, and the film wouldn’t be half as great if everything went according to plan. If the characters didn’t go through all the crap that they did, then you’d end up with The Twilight Saga where nothing happens for two and a half hours.

With Braid, it’s interesting because you can’t die, but the game is quite complex and challenging. I personally thought the challenge made the story that much more vibrant. Obviously, clearing a puzzle with no help is gratifying, but I thought it worked so well alongside its theme in the end. But I see where you're coming from.

I definitely see where you’re coming from. With video games, there are so many variations that it’s tough to pinpoint what the best solution is. You’re absolutely right that dying in a game really hurts the immersion and eliminates some emotional value. You also make a good point in saying how for certain games, dying won’t kill immersion, or it’s built into the game. Limbo is a great example of this, since dying is part of the game mechanic.

That’s why I have so much respect for games like Resident Evil 4, Zelda: Link to the Past, or games that don’t have a difficulty setting (I know it makes games more accessible, but it takes balls to only have one setting and have it work out). You don’t die often in RE4 or LttP, but there’s always that sense of fear and looming danger, making success so sweet and immersive. It makes surprises that much more startling. I vividly remember running away from the giant stone statue in RE4. I just barely managed to clear that section in one go and it was exhilarating.

In the Resident Evil Remake, I didn’t want to enter certain rooms because I was low on ammo and health, and I wasn’t sure if I left a Crimson Head lying on the ground, ready to pounce up and kill me. You don’t get that feeling in any other medium, and it comes from great pacing and handling the difficulty well.

Obviously, knocking pacing out of the park is one of the developer’s biggest challenges, but when they pull it off, it creates classics in my eyes.

I wasn’t too excited when I heard what the true ending of Braid was. I enjoyed the normal story, though, even if the twist had been pulled in two very popular games in the previous console generation.  The books before each world were fairly confusing, I’ll give you that. I totally agree with you on all of your actions and the conflicts you go through during gameplay contributing to the overall narrative.

You’re right; it sometimes comes down to how you play games. I have various reasons why games engross me, but what I described above is the feeling I most desire. Some of my friends prefer seeing the story, being able to destroy anything in their path, or simply collecting and discovering everything the game has to offer. My one friend hates the feeling of being cornered, which is a huge part of Resident Evil games.

As far as difficulty settings go, I totally understand why they’re there. When playing Halo, I don’t choose Legendary on my first go, but at the same time, I don’t choose Normal because it’s too easy. I’m really getting back into classic gaming where there’s one difficulty and you just have to deal. (God I hated the Grim Reaper in Castlevania.) However, that kind of locked out players from enjoying games.

Guess it comes down to preference in the end. Thanks for commenting.

Absolutely. From my personal experience, I've never met someone who was frustrated with Resident Evil 4, and I think that's what separates a rewarding and challenging game from a frustratingly difficult one. Designers need to create situations where if the player fails, it's their fault, not the creators’.

You haven't done anything to support this claimed irrelevance. You've come up with a thesis but you've not offered anything to back it up.

He has, and some of the rest of us were easily able to follow along--including the bitmob staffer that found it.

If you have discussion points you'd like to bring up, I think they'd be great to read, but dissent with no content is as useless with story with no conflict.

Oh, and to wit, the author is arguing that challenge does not negate storytelling while Blow claims the two are at odds.

The argument made by this bitmob writer seem clear to me, and to many of us. You seem to have missed the point and failed to make any. I'm open to your actual point, but I just don't think I understand it.

The author did not provide any evidence that challenge did not negate story telling.  Yes he stated he was going to argue that, but he actually only stated that he had no fun playing a non-challenging game and had fun playing a challenging game.  And listed reasons why.

Hardly the opposite of what Blow seems to be saying.  

 It is not that I disagree with the author.  It is that he doesn't seem to be replying to Mr. Blow's thoughts.

The author seemingly took Blow to mean that challenge in games is bad.  I don't think Blow said that.  I think he said it at odds with story telling.  

One example as mentioned by a commenter  is that replaying sections of a game tends to kill the excitement of any narrative.  

That doesn't mean that games should be less challenging so you don't have to repeat sections and thus make it easier to tell a narrative.  I think it means games should be games.  Less focus should be on narrative.  More focus should be on challenging interesting gameplay.  

I didn't listen to Jonathan Blow's lecture, but I'd say that Matt supports his thesis quite well. Resident Evil 4 had a silly narrative with campy dialogue (in the traditional storytelling sense), but the sustained tension wrought by the well-paced action sequences tells a story of its own.

I'm not necessarily of the belief that video-game storytelling is driven entirely by gameplay, but Matt provides compelling evidence in favor of that view.

Well he backs up why he likes challenging games.  But that hardly relates to Mr. Blow's thoughts.

The author states that Mr. Blow is talking about straight forward narratives conflicting with the challenge in games.

But then in the next sentence he inexplicitly changes what Blow said. Suddenly "straight forward narratives" is now the more vague "story."

That is where he goes awry.  Now he is changing the argument.  Suddenly the conflict between straight forward narratives and challenge is now "story" conflicting wtih challenge.  

And  the more vague "story" is then equated to gameplay by the author.  And thus the author is now arguing that challenge doesn't conflict with gameplay.  It makes it more rewarding.

Great.  I happen to agree.  But again what does this have to do with Blow?  It doesn't have anything to do with Blow.

That was more my opinion than anything else. I’ve been creeped out watching movies before, but nothing that hasn’t kept me up more than one night. However, when I was a kid watching my brother play the original Resident Evil, I spent a few weeks fearing my dark bedroom.

I felt that the lighting in the original Resident Evil was very unsettling. And like I mentioned in a comment above, I always felt a true sense of horror while playing the remake when I needed to pass through a hallway where I left a zombie lying on the ground, possibly mutating into a Crimson Head. The chanting and rituals present in the second part of Resident Evil 4 always sent a chill down my spine. Obviously, Silent Hill is also up there as far as scare-factor goes. Maybe it’s just me, but I feel more terror when engrossed in a good video game as opposed to a solid horror novel or film.

Still, neither you nor I can say what medium establishes the best feeling of horror, so I feel that statement in the article is valid.