Jump to content

New patent from Nintendo and Miyamoto


HarMGM
 Share

Recommended Posts

Half the enjoyment for me is not knowing everything about the game before I jump in. This is a stupid idea for lazy, cowardly morons.

Right... So anyone who finds games difficult are lazy, cowardly and morons. Hardcore gamers really don't like anything which lets people play in their exclusive club do they?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Surely the biggest danger of this is that some developers will choose not to polish their most tedious bits into something fun because, you know, the player could just skip past it anyway.

The car escape bit from Alone In The Dark springs to mind. In fact... almost all of AITD springs to mind.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Right... So anyone who finds games difficult are lazy, cowardly and morons. Hardcore gamers really don't like anything which lets people play in their exclusive club do they?

It's funny how many people Nintendo have suckered into believing this shit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nah, I just ain't slummin' it like you guys, or pretending to, to be more accurate.

I mean, I'm fine for books to have simple words and pretty pictures for the kiddies, that even appeals to an extent, but I'd get a pissed off if they started sticking them in every book to the detriment of more serious literature. I guess it might never happen.

I do find it amusing that the same people who've fallen most for Nintendo's schtick are the ones most blind to gaming's recently broadened scope. We've reached a point where you don't have to defend it as a whole, don't have to pretend to be interested in every facet of it. There's room for more specific tastes these days, and if I think something sounds like a shit idea for an audience I care little about, I'll say so, thanks.

But yeah, any criticism of 'casual' gaming is predictably met with the same wonderfully nuanced 'U R A HARDCORE ELITIST PRICK LOL' diktat. Keep it coming though, I can hardly deny it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Funny, every time i see something that's remotely positive about casual gaming i see the usual 'casual is the death of gaming'bullshit.

If anything, thanks to a bunch of pricks who felt insulted by the very existence of WiiFit, gaming community's have become very divided.

You're either a lover of hardcore games the likes of Fallout 3 with it's post-apocalyptic setting and revere the older Zelda's and are disgusted with "waggle-fests"(with the emphises on the quotation marks) or you're a gamer who welcomes casual gaming and thinks every "hardcore game"is the usual mess of brown and Space marine's not to mention the heavy dose of SONYLOL you take every fucking second(altough i do admit a certain schadenfreude myself when it comes to Sony).

The only thing i have to say in regards to this little discussion is this: Fuck you basterds and i'll happily be enjoying my healthy dose of both Street Fighter 4 and WiiSports Resort with the rest of the sane world when they come out while you're all either weeping for:

a) the death of gaming(LOL)

b)the ignorance of gamers worldwide(because having personal taste is of course overrated...prick. Oh and before i forget: MASSIVELOL!!!).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Surely the biggest danger of this is that some developers will choose not to polish their most tedious bits into something fun because, you know, the player could just skip past it anyway.

I imagine that Sonic Team would fucking love it, stopping the pesky gamer from discovering the amount of areas where you fall straight through the ground*.

*This has been in every Sonic game since Sonic Adventure, and that during the playtesting of Sonic 2006, they asked playtesters not to notify them of it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nah, I just ain't slummin' it like you guys, or pretending to, to be more accurate.

I mean, I'm fine for books to have simple words and pretty pictures for the kiddies, that even appeals to an extent, but I'd get a pissed off if they started sticking them in every book, to the detriment of more serious literature. I guess it might never happen.

I do find it amusing that the same people who've fallen most for Nintendo's schtick are the ones most blind to gaming's recently broadened scope. We've reached a point where you don't have to defend it as a whole, don't have to pretend to be interested in every facet of it. There's room for more specific tastes these days, and if I think something sounds like a shit idea for an audience I care little about, I'll say so, thanks.

But yeah, any criticism of 'casual' gaming is predictably met with the same wonderfully nuanced 'U R A HARDCORE ELITIST PRICK LOL' diktat. Keep it coming though, I can hardly deny it.

You described people who find games difficult as cowards who are morons and lazy. That's not a criticism of casual gaming. That is a criticism of casual gamers. You weren't complaining about the idea, you were complaining about who the idea was aimed at. I can read political biographies. I can read books about wars. And the most crazy thing is that whilst doing those things I happily live with people reading Jordan's latest book and people who only read celebrity magazines. You know the ones with simple words and pretty pictures.

Because as much as I like the books I read, I don't think they are for everyone and frankly I wouldn't want them dumbed down for everyone. You should be in favour of this idea. You should be loving this idea. Because whilst you get to play your hardcore tough as nails traditional game, it can also be played by many other people. Because unlike books games cost an incredible amount to make. To get a return they have to appeal to a lot of people. Now you can either accept Nintendo's idea to help people who get stuck and don't know how to play it, or you can start to whine whilst Nintendo dumb down their games to be played everyone.

This is a good idea, since it is a way to make games accessible to more people without dumbing them down. Nintendo, MS and Sony all have figures from how many people finish their games and I suspect they will all be looking for ways to allow more people to finish their games. Now they can either dumb them down or do what Nintendo are suggesting here and provide tips and walkthoughs for the player if they need it. Hardcore gamers should be loving this since it is a way to keep games hardcore.

And if you think this will make developers lazy with regards to difficulty jumps, I would suggest they have been criminally inadequate in this area for many years. How many times have we as gamers complained about a jump in difficulty or a mission that is unfairly hard. If developers can't police their own games properly then it was only a matter of time before something like this came along. Gamefaqs shouldn't exist if games were properly developed in the first place, but of course it does becuase developers have never been able to tailor their games to the abilities of all thier players hence a large amount of people have been excluded from seeing and playing the game they have paid for.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You make a good point, Charles. I agree that if this can give us the best of both worlds then it'll be great. Perhaps where we differ is that I have little faith in developers to not use it as an excuse for laziness. We'll see.

I can't deny the accusation that I have little patience for so called casual gamers, much as I don't really have much time for those who aren't willing to read challenging books, or give difficult music a chance. I'm the first to admit that I'm no genius, but I'll always have a go, y'know? I think there's a danger of pandering to those who aren't willing to push themselves.

If anything, thanks to a bunch of pricks who felt insulted by the very existence of WiiFit, gaming community's have become very divided.

The notion of a gaming community is pretty funny, really.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Presumably the people complaining about this idea are equally critical of DVDs which allow you to skip straight to the last scene, and books which let you read the last page first. And if not, what's the difference?

I can't imagine anyone doing that with a film or book.

Most of the games I love are all about that discovery of new skills, of exploring a new world for yourself, of taking on that role and experiencing it on your own terms. Removing that initial difficulty in favour of a cut-scene you can jump into during the easy bits seems a little sad to me.

I think it'd be much more valuable to figure out better ways to 'train' the player in the initial stages of the game. I'm not even sure that watching someone else play is going to be particularly helpful anyway. It sounds like learning to play Street Fighter II by watching some YouTube videos.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You make a good point, Charles. I agree that if this can give us the best of both worlds then it'll be great. Perhaps where we differ is that I have little faith in developers to not use it as an excuse for laziness. We'll see.

I can't deny the accusation that I have little patience for so called casual gamers, much as I don't really have much time for those who aren't willing to read challenging books, or give difficult music a chance. I'm the first to admit that I'm no genius, but I'll always have a go, y'know? I think there's a danger of pandering to those who aren't willing to push themselves.

I don't see it as pandering. I think pandering is Nintendo dumbing down their games like they have done in some instances recently. If 'casual' gamers struggle with more traditional games I don't think it's because they're lazy or not willing to try. We don't realise how much, as experienced gamers, we take certain logic and actions for granted and I see this as a way for Nintendo to try to teach this to less experienced gamers without patronising those who understand it. I've mentioned this before, but when I first played Ocarina, I didn't understand the puzzles. While I had played platformers for years, the idea of lighting a deku stick to light the torches in a room to unlock a door was utterly beyond me. It wasn't because I'm lazy or stupid. I ended up playing the first few dungeons with a guide from n64 magazine on my lap to help me through it. The idea that Nintendo is proposing would have been very welcome at the point where I was trying to get to grips with more complex games.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't see the point in watching someone else play but how many games have you stopped playing never to pick up again because of some stupid badly designed level/jump/boss? Imagine Halo where you could skip the Library :wacko: .

Of course the alternative is just for developers to make better games. How can Nintendo patent this anyway?

It would be cool if you could rewind any game to any level to replay your favorite bits I guess.

The Zelda formula's fine, even for casuals. My mum had never played a game before and then she completed twilight princess.

Is this true? :unsure:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't see it as pandering. I think pandering is Nintendo dumbing down their games like they have done in some instances recently. If 'casual' gamers struggle with more traditional games I don't think it's because they're lazy or not willing to try. We don't realise how much, as experienced gamers, we take certain logic and actions for granted and I see this as a way for Nintendo to try to teach this to less experienced gamers without patronising those who understand it. I've mentioned this before, but when I first played Ocarina, I didn't understand the puzzles. While I had played platformers for years, the idea of lighting a deku stick to light the torches in a room to unlock a door was utterly beyond me. It wasn't because I'm lazy or stupid. I ended up playing the first few dungeons with a guide from n64 magazine on my lap to help me through it. The idea that Nintendo is proposing would have been very welcome at the point where I was trying to get to grips with more complex games.

That's a failure on the part of the tutorial aspect of the game. I see what you're saying, but the logical conclusion for developers should be to improve that initial stage, to educate the player in the game's logic in a more natural way than just showing them a video of someone else playing.

I found Valve's commentaries interesting in this regard. The way they tried to explain the logic of something like Portal through the staggered introduction of various implementations of the portal gun is something a lot of developers should take note of.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Perhaps that's a failure on the part of the tutorial aspect of the game? I see what you're saying, but the logical conclusion for developers should be to improve that initial stage, to educate the player in the game's logic in a more natural way than just showing them a video of someone else playing.

But isn't the problem that different players will need different levels of education? Put in an extensive tutorial and the hardcore complain about hand-holding. Put in a minimal tutorial and casuals are confused and never get started.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, the challenge will be to make a comprehensive tutorial section for those who aren't familiar with games without patronising the more experienced gamers.

I just think it's better to take on such challenges than to cop-out in the manner Nintendo are proposing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's a failure on the part of the tutorial aspect of the game. I see what you're saying, but the logical conclusion for developers should be to improve that initial stage, to educate the player in the game's logic in a more natural way than just showing them a video of someone else playing.

I found Valve's commentaries interesting in this regard. The way they tried to explain the logic of something like Portal through the staggered introduction of various implementations of the portal gun is something a lot of developers should take note of.

But that's the thing, Portal was very linear and also because the game was divided into stages it was easier to add the implementations of the gameplay in the game. It would be quite difficult to do such thing in a non-linear experience(well, to a degree) in Zelda where you need to travel quite a bit before encountering some new gameplay mechanics(puzzle's for example).

The more i think about it, the more interested i am in it. Yes it could easily lead to developers becoming lazy and i am still very sceptical about it's implementation, but the positives are beginning to equal the negatives of the initial idea.

If there's at least one thing positive to note about it though: we can definately expect to see Zelda in the coming months.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't see it as pandering. I think pandering is Nintendo dumbing down their games like they have done in some instances recently. If 'casual' gamers struggle with more traditional games I don't think it's because they're lazy or not willing to try. We don't realise how much, as experienced gamers, we take certain logic and actions for granted and I see this as a way for Nintendo to try to teach this to less experienced gamers without patronising those who understand it. I've mentioned this before, but when I first played Ocarina, I didn't understand the puzzles. While I had played platformers for years, the idea of lighting a deku stick to light the torches in a room to unlock a door was utterly beyond me. It wasn't because I'm lazy or stupid. I ended up playing the first few dungeons with a guide from n64 magazine on my lap to help me through it. The idea that Nintendo is proposing would have been very welcome at the point where I was trying to get to grips with more complex games.

You've touched on one of the main problems with games and one I particularly struggle with. Each game has its own intervidual logic and rules. You can't apply real world logic to games which immediately makes them harder for casuals to figure out and, speaking as a hardcore gamer, harder for me to figure out what the game expects of me. In Zelda OOT you can use fire to burn cobwebs but not to burn down the wooden door in your path. In Far Cry 2 I can stealthily sneak in the undergrowth but I can't climb a gently slope? In Resident Evil 4 I can unlock a door by matching the symbols to a dial seen in the grave yard but I can't smash in though a window or a door. In Halo 3 my marine buddies can die and I can proceed, in COD4 if specific members of my squad die then its a restart. You have to be a gamer to understand what the game expects of you otherwise you're stood there with any number of real world possibilties available to you and no idea which apply in this specific game.

I'm sure we can all name examples when games do not adhere to real world logic, and we've accepted that games have special video game logic which are unique to the specific game. Link can burn cobwebs but can't cut them with his sword? It's times like that that catch me off guard because its a game expecting you to use a real world solution to a problem but hoping you use the right real world solution. Remember Sonic 3 and the big thing that went up and down that you can never figure out. We figure it must be a gravity puzzle and we should time our jumps right, in actuality we just have to press up and down on the d-pad at the right time. Apart from pure trial and error if you choose the wrong method it can be very frustrating.

I've been playing games for years and I don't know what the hell any given game expects of me? Do I need to find a rocket launcher to take down said wooden door, or a wooden key? But we for all intents and purposes get video game logic and how they function. Blue door we can't get though - find the blue key. Found a dead end - obviously need to trigger a pre planned event - are there are switches nearby? I have utmost sympathy for new gamers because gaming is quite often an incredibly fiddly and requiring science and the only way you can win is by knowing the special gaming conventions which half the time even the gamers don't know that. That's why magazines give away tip books and Gamefaqs have answers and guides to every game. That's why people come on here and say 'How do you get past this spot, I've been trying for ages and can't do it'. One of us replies and they say 'Ah, I never even thought to do that, that's really simple!'.

I hate developers. I think they are arrogant, self serving and don't spend near enough time play testing their games. I hate getting stuck and not knowing what to do. I hate getting stuck because I'm not good enough to get past their boss or obstacle. Yeah I'm sure I would if I spent 40 hours playing the game and focussed on nothing else but guess what I've got other things to do and can't be arsed to spend all day figuring out your game because you can't play test it properly or give me ways to skip sections I'm stuck at. We have lists here all the times about finishing our games. Why did we give up? Usually because we got to a point and we got stuck and we just can't be arsed to try and visulise what the developers were thinking when they created this little problem so we move on to something else. For far far too long developers have been so neglectful of the people who paid good money and never finished their game, surely that is the biggest failing of an entertainment product - that someone gives up on it. But as of yet we've had very few concentrated stabs are fixing it. Where are the tips or the instructions to tell us what we are doing wrong when we get stuck - on Gamefaqs, not in the game. Where's the option to skip this level and get to the next one - not there because they swore you'd love playing though the Library for 5 hours. You just spent an hour on a mission and died at the end? Oh well, back to the start you go because that's fun and not extremely annoying and liable to make you throw the disc out the window. What's that, you forgot to pick up a keycard an hour ago, well don't waste time standing here, off you go to go and fetch it and then come back.

The gaming industry has been stuck up its arse for far too long a time, developers have been woefully slow at adapting to new users or creating pleasurable games for everyone to play and not frustrating chores to be completed before we get to the next unfairly frustrating level. This new Nintendo idea is great, not only for casual gamers but for any of us that have had to use a tip guide, or look something up on Gamefaqs or come on here to ask a question. None of those things add to the games and Nintendo are just adding an in game solution to help. And Nintendo are not the first to display such thinking - adaptable difficulty for Resident Evil 4, skipping levels in World of Goo, checkpoints in Halo, adaptive story lines in True Crime whether you succeed or fail in a mission. Nintendo are doing what they have always done, taken a half formed idea and made it successful and integrated it properly and I have no problem with it. I'm sure it will be optional and I'm sure it will help a lot of people avoid a lot of frustration and have more fun with their games.

I wish it wasn't necessary, I wish developers could have by now tackled the problem themselves by making games suitable for everyone. But they haven't, most haven't even tried so once again it falls to Nintendo to show them how its done. Like Nintendo or loathe them, over the past 10 years they have been some of the best trend setters in software and hardware for this industry and look to continue to do so. Bemoan Nintendo all you like but this type of thing should have been done yonks ago and as I've demonstrated not only helps casual gamers but also any of us who've ever been stuck in a game and had to resort to the forum or Gamefaqs for the answer. And when the hardcore get stuck and need help, what chance is their for new gamers to succeed? This is not a symptom of a industry changing for casual gamers, this is a symptom of an industry that has for far too long happily accepted that people never finish their games, happily accepted the existence of Gamefaqs and profited from the sale of strategy guides. The games industry will be criminally wasted if it only ever tried to appeal to teenage boys with little else to do. Games should be able to be enjoyed by everyone and its about time some hardcore gamers got over the fact that their exclusive club is been taken over by girls and old people and accepted that there have been cracks in the way games are made and the way we are expected to play them for a long time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The games industry will be criminally wasted if it only ever tried to appeal to teenage boys with little else to do. Games should be able to be enjoyed by everyone and its about time some hardcore gamers got over the fact that their exclusive club is been taken over by girls and old people and accepted that there have been cracks in the way games are made and the way we are expected to play them for a long time.

You were doing so well until this point. :unsure:

I really do see what some of you are saying, and I agree that in principal it'd be great if anyone could get a certain amount of enjoyment from every game on the market, but I think that it's a totally unrealistic expectation. In my opinion, the sooner the games industry matures to the extent that it can support games that don't have to appeal to everyone, the better.

I'm quite happy for things like this to exist if they don't have a negative effect on the type of games that I enjoy myself, but I guess we'll have to wait and see what happens.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just wanted to say what a great post that was Charles.

It always has been up until now, very difficult to communicate the appeal of a good game to those that don't play. The logic in games and their increasing control complexities are an absolutely enormous barrier to entry. No-one wants to sit down and study a manual for half an hour or more or go through some half hearted tutorial before they can even begin to see where the fun is at.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You were doing so well until this point. :unsure:

I really do see what some of you are saying, and I agree that in principal it'd be great if anyone could get a certain amount of enjoyment from every game on the market, but I think that it's a totally unrealistic expectation. In my opinion, the sooner the games industry matures to the extent that it can support games that don't have to appeal to everyone, the better.

I'm quite happy for things like this to exist if they don't have a negative effect on the type of games that I enjoy myself, but I guess we'll have to wait and see what happens.

Absolutely. There should always be games aimed at experienced gamers and games aimed at casual gamers, the elderly, women etc. Like with any industry. But I would always say Nintendo blockbuster titles should be akin to the big Hollywood blockbusters - can be enjoyed by everyone equally. In every industry there should be titles that appeal to everyone, books that everyone can read and enjoy, films that everyone can watch and enjoy. And in every industry there should be sub sections devoted to certain audience - horror movies for horror fans, rom coms for women, sci fi for geeks etc. And I'm sure the games industry will mature into such an entity. However I think we've also got to accept that there have been cracks in the ways games have been made for a long time and even for hardcore players we're tired of uneven difficulty settings and games which betray their own logic when it suits them. I post on Rllmuk therefore I am probably a hardcore gamer. But I regularly have to ask for help, read a tip book and check Gamefaqs. Am I in the wrong or is the industry in the wrong for not providing an in game solution to these problems? Maybe I'm a rubbish gamer, but as long as the developer pockets my money the same as everyone elses then I expect them to enable their games so that I can get all the enjoyment I want from them.

I think this issue goes beyond the new found casual audience. I think this issue has been simmering for a long time and, for me at least, it's getting to the point where if they want to take my £40 then its about time they can start by making games more user friendly. Play testing them. Skipping levels. Adaptable difficulty. Hints and tips for when you get stuck. Nothing that is mandatory, but if I need it I want it to be there. You might come back and say to me that putting those features in will mean they don't bother play testing the games. And I'd probably agree with you. But at the end of the day developers have made very little concerted effort to sort out these problems and I have no confidence that these problems will be sorted out any time soon so it is time to start thinking for more universal ways of enabling people to play games rather than relying on Gamefaqs and guides to solve any problems neglected during play testing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You've touched on one of the main problems with games and one I particularly struggle with. Each game has its own intervidual logic and rules. You can't apply real world logic to games which immediately makes them harder for casuals to figure out and, speaking as a hardcore gamer, harder for me to figure out what the game expects of me. In Zelda OOT you can use fire to burn cobwebs but not to burn down the wooden door in your path. In Far Cry 2 I can stealthily sneak in the undergrowth but I can't climb a gently slope? In Resident Evil 4 I can unlock a door by matching the symbols to a dial seen in the grave yard but I can't smash in though a window or a door. In Halo 3 my marine buddies can die and I can proceed, in COD4 if specific members of my squad die then its a restart. You have to be a gamer to understand what the game expects of you otherwise you're stood there with any number of real world possibilties available to you and no idea which apply in this specific game.

I'm sure we can all name examples when games do not adhere to real world logic, and we've accepted that games have special video game logic which are unique to the specific game. Link can burn cobwebs but can't cut them with his sword? It's times like that that catch me off guard because its a game expecting you to use a real world solution to a problem but hoping you use the right real world solution. Remember Sonic 3 and the big thing that went up and down that you can never figure out. We figure it must be a gravity puzzle and we should time our jumps right, in actuality we just have to press up and down on the d-pad at the right time. Apart from pure trial and error if you choose the wrong method it can be very frustrating.

I've been playing games for years and I don't know what the hell any given game expects of me? Do I need to find a rocket launcher to take down said wooden door, or a wooden key? But we for all intents and purposes get video game logic and how they function. Blue door we can't get though - find the blue key. Found a dead end - obviously need to trigger a pre planned event - are there are switches nearby? I have utmost sympathy for new gamers because gaming is quite often an incredibly fiddly and requiring science and the only way you can win is by knowing the special gaming conventions which half the time even the gamers don't know that. That's why magazines give away tip books and Gamefaqs have answers and guides to every game. That's why people come on here and say 'How do you get past this spot, I've been trying for ages and can't do it'. One of us replies and they say 'Ah, I never even thought to do that, that's really simple!'.

I hate developers. I think they are arrogant, self serving and don't spend near enough time play testing their games. I hate getting stuck and not knowing what to do. I hate getting stuck because I'm not good enough to get past their boss or obstacle. Yeah I'm sure I would if I spent 40 hours playing the game and focussed on nothing else but guess what I've got other things to do and can't be arsed to spend all day figuring out your game because you can't play test it properly or give me ways to skip sections I'm stuck at. We have lists here all the times about finishing our games. Why did we give up? Usually because we got to a point and we got stuck and we just can't be arsed to try and visulise what the developers were thinking when they created this little problem so we move on to something else. For far far too long developers have been so neglectful of the people who paid good money and never finished their game, surely that is the biggest failing of an entertainment product - that someone gives up on it. But as of yet we've had very few concentrated stabs are fixing it. Where are the tips or the instructions to tell us what we are doing wrong when we get stuck - on Gamefaqs, not in the game. Where's the option to skip this level and get to the next one - not there because they swore you'd love playing though the Library for 5 hours. You just spent an hour on a mission and died at the end? Oh well, back to the start you go because that's fun and not extremely annoying and liable to make you throw the disc out the window. What's that, you forgot to pick up a keycard an hour ago, well don't waste time standing here, off you go to go and fetch it and then come back.

The gaming industry has been stuck up its arse for far too long a time, developers have been woefully slow at adapting to new users or creating pleasurable games for everyone to play and not frustrating chores to be completed before we get to the next unfairly frustrating level. This new Nintendo idea is great, not only for casual gamers but for any of us that have had to use a tip guide, or look something up on Gamefaqs or come on here to ask a question. None of those things add to the games and Nintendo are just adding an in game solution to help. And Nintendo are not the first to display such thinking - adaptable difficulty for Resident Evil 4, skipping levels in World of Goo, checkpoints in Halo, adaptive story lines in True Crime whether you succeed or fail in a mission. Nintendo are doing what they have always done, taken a half formed idea and made it successful and integrated it properly and I have no problem with it. I'm sure it will be optional and I'm sure it will help a lot of people avoid a lot of frustration and have more fun with their games.

I wish it wasn't necessary, I wish developers could have by now tackled the problem themselves by making games suitable for everyone. But they haven't, most haven't even tried so once again it falls to Nintendo to show them how its done. Like Nintendo or loathe them, over the past 10 years they have been some of the best trend setters in software and hardware for this industry and look to continue to do so. Bemoan Nintendo all you like but this type of thing should have been done yonks ago and as I've demonstrated not only helps casual gamers but also any of us who've ever been stuck in a game and had to resort to the forum or Gamefaqs for the answer. And when the hardcore get stuck and need help, what chance is their for new gamers to succeed? This is not a symptom of a industry changing for casual gamers, this is a symptom of an industry that has for far too long happily accepted that people never finish their games, happily accepted the existence of Gamefaqs and profited from the sale of strategy guides. The games industry will be criminally wasted if it only ever tried to appeal to teenage boys with little else to do. Games should be able to be enjoyed by everyone and its about time some hardcore gamers got over the fact that their exclusive club is been taken over by girls and old people and accepted that there have been cracks in the way games are made and the way we are expected to play them for a long time.

Agree with the vast majority of this.

All media rely upon consumers having a certain knowledge of the particular medium's rules but gaming is by far the most wilfully obscure at times. If it takes Nintendo to "dumb down" a few of their most profitable / high profile games by educating a wider audience to gaming's most frequent quirks then so be it. The sooner we normalise gaming within the general population, the sooner we reach the point when the "new titles" section is as diverse and welcoming to all as films, books and music. I'd hazard a guess that it'll drive a few people out of gaming, but these people are the types who always revel in being in a knowing minority and in the end their particular medium of choice ends up suffering as it degrades into an incestuous obscure mess as it caters for an ever dwindling but increasingly hardcore minority.

Fuck the hardcore, I welcome the "mainstream" with open arms.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. Use of this website is subject to our Privacy Policy, Terms of Use, and Guidelines.