Nintendo's Ungaming

[hopeneverdies]

This reminds me of the idea to make video games more like a DVD where you can skip "chapters" of the game if you get stuck so you could just pass the boss fight and get onto the next level without having to actually play it.

You mean like the new Alone in the Dark?

Anyway I commented on this when the news came out a few weeks back. Now I don't know who in their right mind would do this, but they could easily just let the game play the whole level for them if the entire thing is too hard.

You know what a good idea that has stood the test of time, a gentle learning and difficulty curve with difficulty settings that set where this curve ends. Maybe platforms move more slowly on easier difficulties or enemies are more frequent on higher difficulties

 

[XerxesQados]

When I was a kid, not so long ago, we had these things called "difficulty settings."
[...]
And see, if you played a game, and you weren't getting very far, you could go down a difficulty setting, which would make the game easier to play.

Assuming every game has both perfectly balanced difficulty settings which flawlessly accommodate their respective skill levels at all times, and gives they player the option to change the difficulty setting without starting a new game, then yes, this is the solution to all of our problems.

Unfortunately, this is not the case with every game.

 

[microhive]

Why ain't I surprised? Seems like Nintendo will make playing games absolute in the long run.

Are you saying that Nintendo is making gaming perfect? If not, look up the word absolute because I think you're looking for obsolete.

I was wondering why it sounded so odd. Thanks.

 

[theultimateend]

Just another reason that I read books now.

At least literature (twilight aside) hasn't gone to such shitty depths as gaming.

I am starting to wonder if I'll even be playing games 5 years from now. They have gotten so poor its almost insulting.

 

[Jsnoopy]

An excellent example of the first solution being offered in a game can be seen through Guitar Hero's practice mode. A tough section failing you? Switch to practice mode, select that section, nail the finger movements at slower speeds, then return to regular mode to kick that part's ass.

 

[ZippyDSMlee]

I disagree with the OP its not a problem or a "ebile" idea, and the only thing hardcore about gaming these days is consumption since modern gaming is the epitome of shallow gameplay and design, sure its pretty and compelx eye candy but thats abotu it.

What this dose is allow gaming to compete with film, you put it in and you can play it if you want and if you do not wish to be mired in poorly implemented gameplay or something that was rushed and unfinished you don;t have to play it merely watch it and hopefully in time that will expand the market enough to were games are the price of a film, sure it won't happen in the next 5 years but hopefully the indutry will make the switch sometime in the next 10.

 

[SatansBestBuddy]

I’ve been in and out of this argument since this patent was announced so many months ago, and I’ll say the same thing here as I have elsewhere: wait till it’s out, then see how it works before you write it off completely.

I mean, we’ve got the gist of it, but I still haven’t heard the details of how it all works.

How does it activate, through a menu, or with the press of a button?

What does it show, the specific part of the level where it’s used, or the whole level from beginning to end?

Does it show what buttons are being pressed, or simply run the movie assuming the watcher knows how to do a butt stomp?

Does it reveal secrets?

Does it actually skip parts of the level for the gamer and let them continue on without having to play that part, or does it show them how it’s done then dump them back at the spot they started the video, armed with the knowledge of how to do it?

I haven’t heard any definitive answers for any of these questions, mainly cause I haven’t heard of anyone, anywhere, getting any hands on time with this Kind Code thing.

It’s still a complete mystery to people, and I, for one, am gonna wait till I try it out myself before I condone Nintendo for trying something new.

 

[HobbesMkii]

When I was a kid, not so long ago, we had these things called "difficulty settings."
[...]
And see, if you played a game, and you weren't getting very far, you could go down a difficulty setting, which would make the game easier to play.

Assuming every game has both perfectly balanced difficulty settings which flawlessly accommodate their respective skill levels at all times, and gives they player the option to change the difficulty setting without starting a new game, then yes, this is the solution to all of our problems.

Unfortunately, this is not the case with every game.

No, see, my point was that there was an easier fix already at hand, not that such a fix had already been applied. That was the point of the NASA space pen story. Sometimes, you don't need to reinvent the wheel, you just need to change tires.

 

[LewsTherin]

If someone wants to pay $60 to watch a game play itself, that's none of my business. I just get to sit back and laugh if they ever want to try and play online/multiplayer.

 

[Revenile]

The problem I have with people's reactions on this is Nintendo said the demo mode won't keep scores, or allow you to save past the demo mode, so something like zelda, you couldn't save after solving the puzzle using demo mode.

 

[theultimateend]

If someone wants to pay $60 to watch a game play itself, that's none of my business. I just get to sit back and laugh if they ever want to try and play online/multiplayer.

Unfortunately if the game sells well they will omit quality gameplay for a play itself game. This will become common and you will find yourself playing nothing because all new games will be mediocre poorly balanced AI driven software.

As it stands there is a note able drop in quality already, it will only get worse considering the sales they still get.

 

[Credge]

The response to this is pretty terrible. What is wrong with you people?

Have any of you ever played a Nintendo game that was ever hard? Was Metroid on the SNES even made by Nintendo?

I mean, look guys. They made this for kids. Kids. You know, 2-5 year olds.

Some of you really miss the point of some of this stuff.

It also sounds like some of you don't really understand what this is at all.

 

[Woe Is You]

I mean, look guys. They made this for kids. Kids. You know, 2-5 year olds.

I always find this argument interesting. When I was 5, I was kicking my parents' ass in games. And as a kid, I had way way way more time to play them than my parents ever did. No, it's actually the adults that are vocal about wanting it easier (they have kids, they have wives, they have jobs, they tell us). I can bet your sweet ass that your average kid has way more patience with, say, jumping puzzles than your average adult does.

But yes, if it's an option that I don't have to touch during the game, it doesn't concern me in the slightest. Besides, I've been more excited about smaller but harder games like White Butterfly and Spelunky than big hitters this year (or the last). I'm not afraid for my gaming at least.

As it stands there is a note able drop in quality already, it will only get worse considering the sales they still get.

If you don't like what the big companies make, have you tried going outside of that pool of games? There's plenty quality stuff floating around.

 

[theultimateend]

I mean, look guys. They made this for kids. Kids. You know, 2-5 year olds.

I always find this argument interesting. When I was 5, I was kicking my parents' ass in games. And as a kid, I had way way way more time to play them than my parents ever did. No, it's actually the adults that are vocal about wanting it easier (they have kids, they have wives, they have jobs, they tell us). I can bet your sweet ass that your average kid has way more patience with, say, jumping puzzles than your average adult does.

But yes, if it's an option that I don't have to touch during the game, it doesn't concern me in the slightest. Besides, I've been more excited about smaller but harder games like White Butterfly and Spelunky than big hitters this year (or the last). I'm not afraid for my gaming at least.

As it stands there is a note able drop in quality already, it will only get worse considering the sales they still get.

If you don't like what the big companies make, have you tried going outside of that pool of games? There's plenty quality stuff floating around.

Yeah I've played plenty of great indie games.

World of Goo, Defense Grid, the likes. But I miss the days when I could also pick up large scale games and be genuinely entertained.

 

[Avatar Roku]

*Preface: I consider myself a "hardcore" gamer, and my post reflects this POV*

Sorry I stopped listening to you because you started using those labels. Labels which I am sick of and serve only to further the image of gamers as misanthropic people with social problems and only try to compare the size of their e-boners. Apparently you can only game if you "earn it". And that you shouldn't try at all or be helped by anything. I suspect you've used cheat codes and strategy guides before, I would be pleasantly surprised if you didn't. I've played games for 19 years, and I don't act like an elitist up my own ass with delusions. Gaming should be accessible to all who wish to play, not just those of us who spent countless hours playing just to get an achievement that ultimately means nothing in the grand scheme of things, or those of us who only think FPS's belong on a certain platform, or those of us who think PC gaming is the alpha and the omega of all gaming.

Time for more reiteration as I drag this back on topic. This "feature" or "bane of existence" or whatever you want to call it is optional and if affects nobody here, least of all anybody who professes to be "hardcore". I do not fear something optional destroying gaming as we know it. And if you are afraid, then I believe it's because you're afraid you might use it.

This is basically how I felt from the beginning, minus the "I've been gaming for 19 years" thing, that's longer than I've been alive

But yeah, this whole notion of how the "casual" are apparently going to destroy the "hardcore" is just wearing so thin. Why does everything need to be Us Vs Them?

When I was a kid, not so long ago, we had these things called "difficulty settings." They ranged from "Easy" which was often the easiest setting, and would give you lots of ammo, or health, or lives, or reduce the number of enemies, or types of enemies, or how much damage they did, etc. etc. to "Very Hard" which was often the most difficult setting, and basically did the opposite of "Easy."

And see, if you played a game, and you weren't getting very far, you could go down a difficulty setting, which would make the game easier to play.

That, however, ignores one of the problems pointed out. Look at the basketball analogy on the second page, and watch the video he links to there. The problem is that difficulty levels only make things easier for those who have some idea what they're doing, the "hardcore" (god I hate that term), if you will. If I can't figure out the timing for this jump, or figure out that bosses Achilles' Heel, it doesn't make a difference whether I have 3 lives or 5. This tutorial program might not be the correct response, but at least they're acknowledging that there is a problem.

 

[WhiteTigerShiro]

*Preface: I consider myself a "hardcore" gamer, and my post reflects this POV*

I use the old tidbit: give a man a fish, he's fed for a day. Teach a man to fish, he's fed for the rest of his life.

The "hardcores" earn their beaten games. They earn their achievements, their K ratios, their bragging rights. They have mastered the double jump, the spin drift, the headshot. They have put time and effort into perfecting their skills, mastering levels, memorizing spawns, shaving nanoseconds off of times. They have INVESTED in the games in a way that most people don't.

This is the equivalent of putting an untrained driver in Nascar and letting him push a button that lets the car drive itself, while everyone else is fighting their way through it. Then when he crosses the finish line first, saying he won fair and square. What this does is furthers the gap between the hardcore (who will damn well grind their way though anything) and the casual (who can now just sit back and let the game beat itself and feel proud of having beaten it).

But more so, why even bother playing these games? I mean really, if the game literally plays itself why are you going to spend $50 or $60 or more on something you are going to not even bother playing yourself? But then if there are people out there willing to shell out videogame dollars for glorified DVDs, I guess Nintendo has already won this round.

A big problem with this argument, though, is that people don't get satisfaction from watching something happen if they are not a part of it. People don't feel proud that they watched an entire movie because they didn't do anything. What people will feel like after watching a game beat itself is "so that's what the ending is." I think haze had a level skip feature, but nobody heralded that as the death of gaming. The demo mode won't make people feel accomplished, it will just make them bored.

Hacking.

Go to any Counter Strike (or whatever FPS title) and try to pitch that same theory. People will feel pride for having "beaten" the game for the same reason that hackers enjoy racking-up a large number of headshots. Neither person has actually played the game, but both people are beating the game, and outside of the hacker eventually getting banned from the server, no one can tell him that he isn't beating it, just look at his K/D ratio.

Gamers dislike this new feature Nintendo is announcing for the same reason they tend to dislike when there are hacks and cheats available for the game: Because it cheapens their ability to say "I beat this game", because it quickly comes with any number of counter-arguments about methods of which they could have made that easier on themselves. As the days go on and on, beating a game is more of a personal victory that only you really get to celebrate. Bragging rights are basically a thing of the past, and this new "Demo Mode" feature just takes it away from gamers even more.

"Hey, I just beat that new Mario game and got all the stars!"
"Yeah? Who hasn't?"

:/

 

[Avatar Roku]

*Preface: I consider myself a "hardcore" gamer, and my post reflects this POV*

I use the old tidbit: give a man a fish, he's fed for a day. Teach a man to fish, he's fed for the rest of his life.

The "hardcores" earn their beaten games. They earn their achievements, their K ratios, their bragging rights. They have mastered the double jump, the spin drift, the headshot. They have put time and effort into perfecting their skills, mastering levels, memorizing spawns, shaving nanoseconds off of times. They have INVESTED in the games in a way that most people don't.

This is the equivalent of putting an untrained driver in Nascar and letting him push a button that lets the car drive itself, while everyone else is fighting their way through it. Then when he crosses the finish line first, saying he won fair and square. What this does is furthers the gap between the hardcore (who will damn well grind their way though anything) and the casual (who can now just sit back and let the game beat itself and feel proud of having beaten it).

But more so, why even bother playing these games? I mean really, if the game literally plays itself why are you going to spend $50 or $60 or more on something you are going to not even bother playing yourself? But then if there are people out there willing to shell out videogame dollars for glorified DVDs, I guess Nintendo has already won this round.

A big problem with this argument, though, is that people don't get satisfaction from watching something happen if they are not a part of it. People don't feel proud that they watched an entire movie because they didn't do anything. What people will feel like after watching a game beat itself is "so that's what the ending is." I think haze had a level skip feature, but nobody heralded that as the death of gaming. The demo mode won't make people feel accomplished, it will just make them bored.

Hacking.

Go to any Counter Strike (or whatever FPS title) and try to pitch that same theory. People will feel pride for having "beaten" the game for the same reason that hackers enjoy racking-up a large number of headshots. Neither person has actually played the game, but both people are beating the game, and outside of the hacker eventually getting banned from the server, no one can tell him that he isn't beating it, just look at his K/D ratio.

Gamers dislike this new feature Nintendo is announcing for the same reason they tend to dislike when there are hacks and cheats available for the game: Because it cheapens their ability to say "I beat this game", because it quickly comes with any number of counter-arguments about methods of which they could have made that easier on themselves. As the days go on and on, beating a game is more of a personal victory that only you really get to celebrate. Bragging rights are basically a thing of the past, and this new "Demo Mode" feature just takes it away from gamers even more.

"Hey, I just beat that new Mario game and got all the stars!"
"Yeah? Who hasn't?"

:/

I somehow think that online hackers do it more to ruin others' experiences (think a troll, but not on a forum) than for a feeling of accomplishment. Alternatively, it could be to show off their "1337 h4x0r 5ki115", but even then, it's showing off their ability to hack rather than their inability to play.

 

[The_Echo]

Could people stop complaining about this? If you don't want to use it, you don't have to.

 

[WhiteTigerShiro]

I somehow think that online hackers do it more to ruin others' experiences (think a troll, but not on a forum) than for a feeling of accomplishment. Alternatively, it could be to show off their "1337 h4x0r 5ki115", but even then, it's showing off their ability to hack rather than their inability to play.

I'm sure that for every hacker who's doing it for troll-level reasons, you have just as many who do it because they want to round corners and pop-off easy headshots without having to go through the hassle of learning how to aim properly. The "casual" gamer is generally a beast who wants instant satisfaction. He doesn't want to have to work towards being good at the game he has fun playing, so if he knows of a program he can download that makes him "good", then he'll do it so he can focus more on just running around and shooting.