Should ComputerGames Adapt To the Way You Play?

Many games use 'rubberbanding' to adapt to your skill level, making the game harder if you're a better player and easier if you're not. Just think of Mario Kart and the obvious ways it punishes you for driving too well by giving the people who are hopelessly behind you super-weapons to smack you with. It's also very common to just increase the skill of the NPCs as you get better — see Oblivion. In my research group, we are working on slightly more sophisticated ways to adapt the game to you, including generating new level elements (PDF) based on your playing style (PDF). Now, the question becomes: is this a good thing at all? Some people would claim that adapting the game to you just rewards mediocrity (i.e. you don't get rewarded for playing well). Others would say that it restricts the freedom of expression for the game designer. But still, game players have very different skill levels and skill sets when they come to a game, and we would like to cater to them all. And if you don't see playing skill as one-dimensional, maybe it's possible to do meaningful adaptation. What sort of game adaptation would you like to see?

http://games.slashdot.org/story/09/1...e-Way-You-Play

The rubberbanding in Burnout 3 completely ruined that game...

and the respawn in Modern Warfare made me return that game...


So IMHO, dynamically adjusting the difficulting ruins games and I wish they'd stop doing it.

I don't like Rubberbanding on by default in a game but if they made it as an option that's fine, they even have Rubberbanding in real life racing, i mean Bernie Ecclestone's trying to speed up the back of the F1 grid with testing bans and spending limits.

Hmmm for Racing Games i would say it would be most efficient, easy and optional if the Game See's that you lost the track now like 3 times in a row and then just ASK you if you want to lower the difficulty. Or the other way arround... if you are in place one after the first round and keep it for the rest of the race it should tell you to try a higher difficulty.

That question need's a *dont ask me again* box because many people would get annoyed by it VERY fast!


For RPG's...
i played a few, Oblivion did a bad job at it and i ruined my char by sleeping to much and choosing bad skills.

Fallout 3 was better but did get to easy when you had a almost perfect char. Now that is something that needs to change! In an RPG i allways try to get the maximum out of a char but what is the use when i can beat the game with a badly skilled char allready?
Why do i get through the trouble of getting my char up to LVL30 if there is nothing to do after that?
There are no enemys arround that are even worth getting killed by my awesome char OR even worse they are (refering to Point Lookout here!) enemys that are almost naked (jeans, shirt mostly 1 point Damage Reduction from the looks of it) and only armed with a lame Axe but they still eat 2 rounds of amunition from my 200+ Damage Mini Gun ...seriously WTF?
I get that the Aliens from Mothership Zeta which have energy shields are hard to kill but those almost naked Swamp Folk???

-> Realism sometimes is more important then pure ballance.



If the enemys are to easy... give me BETTER enemys!
But dont just change the Stats, that is to obvious and not very rewarding, just cheap!

And finally give me a Reason inside the game to max out my char! I dont need the best Perks, the rarest Weapons & Armor to kill just the usual 3 types of Enemy's.


For Hack & Slay RPG's like Sacred 2... let's just say i don't want to continue killing boring, annoying, useless, cheap RATS after 30 hours with lvl 60 !!! And when you finally beat the game, it starts again with a higher difficulty... and AGAIN Rats everywhere -.-
Thanks i'll rather wait for Diablo 3 then.

Rubber-banding works in racing games. Although I think the whole Mario Kart Blue Shell Bombing was a reaction to the cry to reduce rubber-banding in the actual CPU player behavior (be careful what you wish for, folks). Still, while you should be rewarded with an easier time if you find all the shortcuts to cruise ahead, it shouldn't leave you untouchable by anything but homing missiles from the rear. Mario Kart 64 had it right.

In a non-racer I can't see it working well. In fact in some games attempts at rubber banding lead to a complete conflict of interest. Take MegaMan Zero, you'd think that bosses unleashing new attacks in response to a high rank would make some level of sense, but when your rank tries to "reward" you for foregoing upgrades, the end result is that the boss is only at their strongest when you're at your weakest.