Nintendo's Ungaming

[BehattedWanderer]

Just as long as they allow us to turn it off, and as long as they don't include any of those damn Windows Vista reminders of asking 'Do you want to have the AI make you feel inferior?' every five minutes, I don't really care.

Bit of a prick move on nintendo's part, though.

 

[Ben66]

Like so many have said here, the feature will be optional and you won't have to use it. And like someone else said, we don't even know the specifics of this feature yet so it's silly to jump to conclusions. And yet no one has quoted these two facts posted here, instead choosing to ramble on about how it cheapens hardcore games for casual gamers, etc.

 

[veloper]

Nintendo's Ungaming is good news for everyone.

1. casuals gamers now enjoy the demo mode, because playing the game is too hard for them
2. demo mode will ensure casual gamers will always remain casual and unskilled, so the hardcore crowd will always have a dog to scoff at
3. the patent will isolate the casuals on Nintendo consoles, while the other consoles will have to continue to cater to gamers.

 

[irrelevantnugget]

An easier solution would've been to include more checkpoints. Or in Prince of Persia terms: if you mess it up, you get teleported back to right before the challenge you had failed.

Prinny: Can I Really Be The Hero? was a terribly hard game, yet it doesn't punish you THAT hard. You've got 1000 lives to start with (and you really need to try your best to lose all of them), but are incredibly vulnerable.
The game is ridiculously hard in the later levels, BUT there's checkpoints past every 2-3 "chokepoints", which kept the flow going. The big exception is the final boss, which is so damn hard, I never even got to beat him. You're basically forced to spam the attack button, taking down literally 1/750th of his health per hit, since he has NO weaknesses AT ALL. But anything before that, was done really well.
The game even offered a 'soft reset' option, which lets you save your points, but restart the game progress if you'd like to try a different level order (you can pick any level you want right from the start, and once you finish a level, the game ends up an hour later. The later it is in the world, the more dangerous the areas become).

I'd love to see more games executed like this. It can keep the "hardcore" challenge, yet is open for new gamers.

 

[Jumplion]

Thank you for realizing this complete patent abuse here! Nintendo is overhyping this thing way too much as there have been plenty of games with a sort of "demo mode" to it to keep it from getting too hard. Them patenting the thing only makes it worse for games that do something similar in the future, and it's much too simple to even need a patent.

I do agree with alot of the things you've said in this, that it's only delaying the problem or changing it entirely. If we want "casuals" to become "hardcore" or something inbetween this, we shouldn't hand them off a game that can essentially play itself. People abuse help, I've done it tones of times with walkthroughs and cheats for games.

To make "casuals" into "hardcore" we have to gradually make them into one, not assume that they're retards who can't figure out where the jump button is. Unfortunately, most developers thing "stupid" when they think "casuals" and so they make everything dumbed down for them, which is not how we want to introduce them to games (though to be honest, I don't know exactly how to introduce them either).

 

[bjj hero]

I don't think its the best way to make things easier but its no skin off my nose as I wont be using it (I'd have to buy a wii first)

I feel games should be difficult. I'm 29 and have been gaming longer than most gamers have been alive. I beat most games I play unless I get bored (GTA4, Fable 2, yawn). The last game I got stuck on was Ninja Gaiden on the xbox.

The Dragon in the lava pit. I couldnt figure his attack pattern for love nor money. Re did the fight a tonne of times. The answer? put on my fire ball shield, jumped in the lava and pain war'd him to death. Think outside of the box.

Games are getting easier and easier. Teenagers now have never played a difficult game. They're designed so anyone with at least one thumb can finish them. Difficulty settings can help but there is an audience that wants that hardcore experience. Its why I ground out CoD4 on the hardest setting. Not my crowning achievement but it kept me entertained for a while.

The best recent example of this balancee between HC and casual was the original Guitar hero. It was new to most gamers, you couldnt rely on your years of playing contra/thunderforce/street fighter to help. You started on medium (or easy if you had no coordination through inner ear damage) and worked your way up to expert. The transition to 5 buttons was painful but you worked through it.

Its still accessable (your grandma can play with just 3 frets and 20 notes a song) but it has the hardcore 5 fret, carple tunnel inducing, difficulty if you want it. Win win, everyones happy.

 

[Manji187]

To make "casuals" into "hardcore" we have to gradually make them into one, not assume that they're retards who can't figure out where the jump button is. Unfortunately, most developers thing "stupid" when they think "casuals" and so they make everything dumbed down for them, which is not how we want to introduce them to games (though to be honest, I don't know exactly how to introduce them either).

The only way a casual gamer turns into a hardcore gamer is through perseverance i.e. his will to become better. It's just that the average casual gamer wants some simple, fast fun. They don't want to invest a lot of time figuring out the controls/ gameplay. They don't want to grind...don't want to train. They want their fun to be effortless. Their satisfaction instantaneous. It's all about instant gratification.

Although the transition from casual to hardcore is not obligatory (it's a choice)... casual gamers should be encouraged to 'ascend' for they are the majority and the gaming industry is a business in the end.

How to encourage them? Invite your casual friends to your house for a 'hardcore' evening/ night. Play some co-op games, go online...explain stuff...be patient..serve food and beverages. Basically you should 'convert' them .

 

[ErGo]

Shame on you Nitendo, shame on you.

 

[Aedrial]

This definitely brings a new meaning to wii-tard. (nothing against wii owners)

I think nintendo need to wizen up and stop stabbing non-casual gamers in the back and attempt to bring back the old ways.

Are they trying to make themselves outmoded and obsolete?

 

[Jumplion]

To make "casuals" into "hardcore" we have to gradually make them into one, not assume that they're retards who can't figure out where the jump button is. Unfortunately, most developers thing "stupid" when they think "casuals" and so they make everything dumbed down for them, which is not how we want to introduce them to games (though to be honest, I don't know exactly how to introduce them either).

The only way a casual gamer turns into a hardcore gamer is through perseverance i.e. his will to become better. It's just that the average casual gamer wants some simple, fast fun. They don't want to invest a lot of time figuring out the controls/ gameplay. They don't want to grind...don't want to train. They want their fun to be effortless. Their satisfaction instantaneous. It's all about instant gratification.

Although the transition from casual to hardcore is not obligatory (it's a choice)... casual gamers should be encouraged to 'ascend' for they are the majority and the gaming industry is a business in the end.

How to encourage them? Invite your casual friends to your house for a 'hardcore' evening/ night. Play some co-op games, go online...explain stuff...be patient..serve food and beverages. Basically you should 'convert' them .

Basically, yes, you're right. I won't deny this new (patent-abusing) technology won't possibly help encourage "casuals" to "hardcore", but I am very doubtful of it.

Super Mario Bros. definately turned "casuals" into "hardcore" gamers and it didn't need some sort of auto-play to make those gamers (technology like that being available at the time, notwithstanding), it was simple and fun and gave you achievment.

All you hvae to do is make a similar game that's simple and easy to play, but at the same time challenges you to "save the princess" or something. What companies like Nintendo, Activision, THQ, EA, and countless others assume with "casual" gamers that they need their hand held the entire way. In other words, "casuals" to them means "stupid" or "retarded". This is not what "casuals" are at all and it pains me to see some developer trying to make a controll method or something that's "both for the hardcore and the casuals!" when it boils down to them using 1-3 button combat (though that can be "hardcore" or something).

With this technology, Nintendo basically confirms that they think "casual" gamers are stupid. Such a simple concept, used in various other games, shouldn't have to be patented at all and yet Nintendo is doing it saying "it's a new revolution in gaming!" or something. You don't need to patent something this simple, you just need to use something like it in the damn game!

Not to mention that with this in place, this means that no other developer could either use this system on the damn Wii because Nintendo owns it and now nobody can do something similar because of the patent.

I'll admit, I'm probably overblowing this rather out of proportion, but it's really annoying when I see companies pull this "for the casuals!" bullshit.

 

[hagaya]

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.

Anytime. I love being a constructive jackass.

 

[HobbesMkii]

Graphite gets into the instruments, particularly in zero-gravity conditions where small fragments of the graphite will float around uninhibited. Graphite is also a good conductor of electricity, causing potential short-circuits, messing up your expensive space mission.

Jeez, I'm having to defend my statements in this thread more than I have anywhere else. Let me direct your attention to a key word I used in the sentence before I started the story:

I guess the best way to illustrate my point is to relate an apocryphal story about the early days of space exploration...

I'm aware of the actual dire necessity for inventing the space pen, and it's use. Just because it didn't happen, doesn't mean it's not a good folktale with a good message. I mean, I know elephants didn't get long trunks by crocodiles grabbing their noses and stretching them out, but I never called Rudyard Kipling out on it. I enjoyed the story. But cheers for ruining a good story with the truth.

 

[GoldenRaz]

This actually might work, if they would use it as a sort of in-game walkthrough instead of using it to actually play the game.
Think about it; someone hasn't got the "skills" to beat that boss or make that jump all by themself, but after they see what they ought to do, it's that much easier to finally succeed.

BTW,

Tales of Symphonia had a system that offered various levels of automation so the player could decide how much or how little they wanted to be involved with the twitchy gameplay elements.

Is it just me who thinks that description also fits EA's FIFA games?

 

[Tullio]

Hah, why am I not surprised to see these responses? This is an idea for something OPTIONAL that you DON'T HAVE TO DO and people are taking it as reasons not to buy a games console.

Elitists. Says it all, really

 

[ProjectileVomit]

I totally agree with this article. Watching someone beating a difficult part of a game does not constitute for beating it yourself. No matter how good the computer is at game, the "newbies" will never get good without actually playing the game and learn what they fail at. Nintendo's patenting this automated playing device is just despicable to me.

 

[syndicated44]

Easy Medium Hard nuff said. Super Mario Bros was the first game I ever played me and a buddy spent an entire day beating that little devil and I will never forget that moment. It actually makes me sad that kids wont feel that accomplishment and that kids now have another way to be lazy. I would be pissed if I shelled out 150 bucks for a console then 60 for a game and my kid just got to sit back and watch the thing play itself.

 

[Yokai]

Oh my god this may be the dumbest game-related thing I've ever heard. I hadn't heard of this until now and I really wish I hadn't. I have to agree with Seamus on this. Why the hell would anyone want this feature? Not only does it defeat the purpose of playing a video game in the first place, but where's the satisfaction? If I were unable to beat a game and then suddenly the game beat itself for me, there's no sense of achievement there. If the player can't do something for themselves, then there's no point in doing it. Plus, imagine someone new to games playing some exceptionally difficult Nintendo creation. Finally they go "fuck this" and let the stage complete itself. Are they going to be thinking, "Yay, now that I'm past that part let's move on to the rest of this exciting diversion!"? No. The most likely train of thought will be something along the lines of "If the game plays itself, why am I sitting here wasting my time playing something too hard for me anyway?" This will not work and repel more people than it attracts.