228 réponses à ce sujet

[Ingehira]

Dark Glasses wrote...

I pretty much agree everything Smudboy said in those videos, but unfortunately gaming is now marketing towards to Mainstream/Casual(dumb) players. You'll never see big developers making complicated games anymore.

You know, this is an argument I've heard before: in World of Warcraft. Legions of people complaining that WoW dumbed down x or y to appeal to casuals. Other people arguing that the changes made inherently helped the game, regardless of whether you were casual or hardcore. On and on and on since the beginning of the game. TBC came out and everyone was pining for the original. WoTLK came out and TBC was suddenly the golden age.

So if the game is constantly marketed towards casual...oh excuse me, dumb players, show me the pinnacle of gaming difficulty. Go ahead. Tell me about the best, super-difficult, game you have.  I will show you a game that confused annoying with challenging. I will show you a game that weeded out the "casual" players because it catered to people who could work around bugs, spend many hours perfecting play, and generally devote much more *time* to the game. Not all people who play casually are bad players. However, the more time you spend doing something, usually the better you become. If you're a player who can only do 1-2 hours a week because of work and a child, you're not going to enjoy a game that takes a ton of resources.

A game is made for people to enjoy. If you want something that will make you feel more elite, there are thousands of fields of study, sport, and leisure out there for you to participate in. Go study chemical engineering at Harvard or Oxford.

Which brings us to smudboy's actual game. A lot of what he talks about is very interesting. However, it combines RPG elements into a muddled disaster that will take 4 hours to get to the first mission objective.

*I do want to use the ship more. I do want my crew members to interact better. What I don't want is an "idle villager button". I don't want to micromanage my crew members as if they were drones, peons, wisps, or SCVs. I don't want to worry that I got distracted between planets and now Jacob and Dr. Chakwas are wasting their time. The reason for this: Any game that you pick up and put down will involve a certain amount of player memory loss. This could be solved with a screen of who is doing what when you log in. But what if I just have 30 minutes and want to shoot my way through a mission? I don't want to log on and be forced to do housekeeping (essentially).

*I'd love for mercs and factions to be more interactive. I also have played enough games that require literally days of reputation grinds that I don't want to bother with them here. Reputation quests, if any, should feel organic and natural. Let me become a favored of the elcor by slaughtering mercs in their name. If I land on Planet Y, I should have the option of sending some credits to the elcor and gaining their favor.

*More biotics and more biotic interaction. If I'm a Vanguard, I want some respect from the Asari, Jacob, or Miranda.

*Less stupid conversations would be great. I don't want to have to play ULTIMATE nice guy to be able to talk Miranda and Jack apart. Let me have some damn nuance.

*Why combine Zaeed and Jacob? That's an odd bit of wankery.

*Interrupts could be more interesting. I don't feel like the animators have the time to code six possible interrupts per situation. Bringing me to...

*I can wish for ponies all day and all night. I also realize that, logistically, I can't put a pony in my fish tank. I would respect him more if he created a game that were actually, you know, feasible. Aion was a graphically intense, micromanage-friendly MMO. Starcraft 2 is graphically intense, micromanage-friendly RTS. Now combine the work of those two games with ME2. It would bankrupt Bioware, especially if it flopped. Which it will, because...

*People play certain types of game for a reason. If you combine many types of game together, especially in this haphazard, messy way, people will simply not play it. Not because they're dumb or casual but because they don't want to worry about using an auction house in an RTS. If I want to play Civilization, I don't boot up Final Fantasy Tactics on my PS1.

Vanishingly few people would want to play the game he is describing. However, apparently that makes me a dumb fanboy. To which I say: eat me.

[KingDan97]

Bourne Endeavor wrote...

*snip for length's sake, seriously if you people want to see their post go read it*

Yet again, I see your points. As for his valid points, 1 million monkeys with typewriters etcetera etcetera. 7 vailid points in over an hour of ranting is hardly an accomplishment. In fact, it reminds me of something a teacher once told me about writing answers to Free Response Questions, "If you don't know the answer, just write. You may get lucky and and up having the right thing in there." That's largely what I find Smud equates to.

While I certainly agree that much of Shepard's death doesn't make sense that's where 200 years of technological advancement and the whole fiction element of science fiction come in. Eezo is an unobtanium. It's something that by all rights and means shouldn't be able to do what it does on it's own, and yet, we all accept it blindly. How about Shepard's implants from the reconstruction cinematic had Eezo in them? Would that fit for everyone here? Does it even matter?

Any way, I'm getting off topic. While I can agree that a small few of his points(that were vastly outnumbered by the amount of nearly incoherent blathering) have a large amount of merit in them, that doesn't mean his entire 6 hours of tyraiding is validated. I have read your intro sequence, as well as several other replacement scenes. And while I acknowledge that some of them are better than the original, none of you claim that you know the basic elements of storytelling better than Bioware, Smud does.

That is my issue with him, not that he disagrees with some of the things done in Mass Effect 2, we all do, on differing levels. It's the idea that he believes he knows their world better than they do that pisses me off about him.

My thoughts on the video, were posted before but seemingly ignored. However I have a better summary than my other one. He presents good ideas that then he himself ruins with overcomplications the likes of which I have never seen before. I honestly believe that were you to take a coding manual for C++, then Google translate it to Japanese, Russian, Spanish and then back to English, you would find a less complicated set of changes then exist in his supposed "fixes". it extends well beyond just his suggestions of squad interactions, it's everything that isn't just one line. It becomes a two minute tyraid about how he thinks Mass Effect 2 would've been better if Bioware had made no concessions to any gamer. Because if nothing had an interaction reticle(as he suggested to promote "exploration", apparently as opposed to frustration) it would have kept out the casual gamers.

Modifié par KingDan97, 21 mars 2011 - 05:48 .

[Niddy']

Wow, i agree with almost everything this guy suggests. After listening to him go into detail about how missions/gameplay could be compounded so heavily on makes mass effect 2 seem half assed and laughable.

[KingDan97]

Ingehira wrote...

You know, this is an argument I've heard before: in World of Warcraft. Legions of people complaining that WoW dumbed down x or y to appeal to casuals. Other people arguing that the changes made inherently helped the game, regardless of whether you were casual or hardcore. On and on and on since the beginning of the game. TBC came out and everyone was pining for the original. WoTLK came out and TBC was suddenly the golden age. 

Welcome to the ways of the internet, where everything sucks until something newer comes along to hate. Your jacket will come in the mail as soon as you stop being so badly written, get better gameplay and fix all of your bugs. Or you know, one of your relatives join...

/joking

[squee913]

Ingehira wrote...

*I can wish for ponies all day and all night. I also realize that, logistically, I can't put a pony in my fish tank.

Damn but I would love to see someone try!

You make a very good point, that I considered making. Casual gamers do not equal dumb gamers. My girl's favorite games include Circus Charlie and the Cabbage Patch Kids. Both of these are nes games that have one button... jump. Yet she is one of the smartest people I know. As Ingehira stated, games are meant to be enjoyed. Now, I can't be called a casual gamer by any means, but this does not mean I expect most people to be willing to invest as much as I do into games. And it certainly does not give me the right to insult them just becasue they don't.

[Niddy']

Ingehira wrote...

Dark Glasses wrote...

I pretty much agree everything Smudboy said in those videos, but unfortunately gaming is now marketing towards to Mainstream/Casual(dumb) players. You'll never see big developers making complicated games anymore.

You know, this is an argument I've heard before: in World of Warcraft. Legions of people complaining that WoW dumbed down x or y to appeal to casuals. Other people arguing that the changes made inherently helped the game, regardless of whether you were casual or hardcore. On and on and on since the beginning of the game. TBC came out and everyone was pining for the original. WoTLK came out and TBC was suddenly the golden age.

So if the game is constantly marketed towards casual...oh excuse me, dumb players, show me the pinnacle of gaming difficulty. Go ahead. Tell me about the best, super-difficult, game you have.  I will show you a game that confused annoying with challenging. I will show you a game that weeded out the "casual" players because it catered to people who could work around bugs, spend many hours perfecting play, and generally devote much more *time* to the game. Not all people who play casually are bad players. However, the more time you spend doing something, usually the better you become. If you're a player who can only do 1-2 hours a week because of work and a child, you're not going to enjoy a game that takes a ton of resources.

You're the exact reason why WoW was destroyed. (Also destoryed FFXIV)  People with no time do not play MMOs; period, f*&^ off.  People who don't have the mental capacity to think should not play a RPG.  The game should not be adjusted to the player.

Stop being a fat person trying to lose weight and complaining that dieting and exercise is too complicated.

Modifié par Niddy', 21 mars 2011 - 06:18 .

[MisterDyslexo]

His ideas may not be practical for making a typical retail videogame, but I think if he had the resources, he could create an amazing MMO.

[KingDan97]

MisterDyslexo wrote...

His ideas may not be practical for making a typical retail videogame, but I think if he had the resources, he could create an amazing MMO.

That would fail, because no one has the kind of time to devote to a game that just his tutorial would take.

[Mongerty2]

Niddy' wrote...

Wow, i agree with almost everything this guy suggests. After listening to him go into detail about how missions/gameplay could be compounded so heavily on makes mass effect 2 seem half assed and laughable.

Like everyone else said, he doesn't have bad ideas, just impossible ones. Basically, he is at the first stage of gamemaking when all of the great ideas are thrown onto a white board. The problem is that as they go along, game designers have to cross off more and more of the ideas because the game has to be shipped at some point. 

Really, the way he wants to "fix" Mass Effect 2 is to throw complex and redundant systems on top of each other. 
For example, instead of Renegade and Paragon, we now have options for each with differing levels of effectiveness depending on how well you follow the path. We also have groups each with approval ratings, and all of our squadmates now have levels of training and stress, etc.... (I think he had a few more, but I am not watching that again)

It is a logistical nightmare for a player as well as for a developer. This doesn't even count the crazy amounts of extra dialogue. Being a game developer requires tricks that keep the game accessable while adding depth, not just adding depth for the sake of it. The game would overflow a Blu Ray if it had all of his ideas.

[Ingehira]

Niddy' wrote...

Ingehira wrote...

Dark Glasses wrote...

I pretty much agree everything Smudboy said in those videos, but unfortunately gaming is now marketing towards to Mainstream/Casual(dumb) players. You'll never see big developers making complicated games anymore.

You know, this is an argument I've heard before: in World of Warcraft. Legions of people complaining that WoW dumbed down x or y to appeal to casuals. Other people arguing that the changes made inherently helped the game, regardless of whether you were casual or hardcore. On and on and on since the beginning of the game. TBC came out and everyone was pining for the original. WoTLK came out and TBC was suddenly the golden age.

So if the game is constantly marketed towards casual...oh excuse me, dumb players, show me the pinnacle of gaming difficulty. Go ahead. Tell me about the best, super-difficult, game you have.  I will show you a game that confused annoying with challenging. I will show you a game that weeded out the "casual" players because it catered to people who could work around bugs, spend many hours perfecting play, and generally devote much more *time* to the game. Not all people who play casually are bad players. However, the more time you spend doing something, usually the better you become. If you're a player who can only do 1-2 hours a week because of work and a child, you're not going to enjoy a game that takes a ton of resources.

You're the exact reason why WoW was destroyed. (Also destoryed FFXIV)  People with no time do not play MMOs; period, f*&^ off.  People who don't have the mental capacity to think should not play a RPG.  The game should not be adjusted to the player.

Stop being a fat person trying to lose wieght and complaining that dieting and exercise is too complicated.

*blinkblink*

In open beta. My first piece of level 60 loot was a Giantstalker belt that dropped off the first molten giants in MC. It was a big enough deal that my GL was incredibly proud that I got it. Got red scepter shard when it was hard to do that. Helped get world first AQ40 event on Medivh with Fury and Ascent. Remember when there was no DM, when T2 dropped off of Rag, and when the beastmaster set was colored like an easter egg.

Oh, and let me add: Did the hunter quests when you had to get the food from the bugged plants in Felwood and could exploit dwarf-only fear ward with the one in Silithus. Remember silithus when it was mostly AQ, then when it was changed, then when it was changed back. Kited bosses to Stormwind. Have the original tabard from the 24 hour TBC opening event. Lolacerate.

Full T1, T2, T4-T10. I missed T3 because I had to date my fiance, sorry. Included heroic versions of a bunch of those; they're long since destroyed. Ironbound, rusted, bloodbathed drakes. Hand of Adal. Champion of the Naaru. Hit 85 three days after launch while working full time. Helped two of my guildies get their Heroic drakes within that first two weeks. Raided 20 hours a week for half of TBC and most of WoTLK.

7 80s, 2 70+. Only one 85 because I got bored and swapped to Rift with most of my guild.

Don't tell me what I am and am not. Once again: eat me.

Modifié par Ingehira, 21 mars 2011 - 06:25 .

[GuardianAngel470]

KingDan97 wrote...

Il Divo wrote...

KingDan97 wrote...
Here's the fun bit of irony though. He tried to make games aparently, it's one of the few bits of information about him that he actually said. He also said promptly that he'd failed and that he "wasn't proud of it". So I just have to ask myself who the hell he thinks he is to criticize and disseminate the works of people who have been doing it for much longer than him, and in such a pretentious and elitist way too. That's why I disagree with him, not because he's always wrong, but on principle. Because he thinks he's always right.

Critiquing a game and making a game are two entirely different things. If a director chooses to create a film and make it available to the general public, he is offering his work to public opinion. I don't need to be good at making video games to judge them because I wasn't the one who chose to submit anything in the first place.

Smudboy doesn't need to be good at making video games to be good at taking them apart.

I can understand your point, and on a certain level I can agree with it, but it's not just that he criticizes. It's that he insults their skill on a basic level as writers and storytellers. A skill he aparently holds no aptitude at, despite his self-proclaimed mastery of the elements of. Bioware have been making games for a long time, they know what's good and what's bad about their games and while I agree that they do screw up in their games his aparent refusal to acknowledge any positives about their games and his inability to present his manner in ways other than sounding like a complete douchenugget.

And there's a difference between deconstructing and destorying. Deconstruction requires the knowledge of both what makes it good and bad something Smud's "criticisms" seem to ignore half of the equation of. Destruction on the other hand consists of hitting it till it breaks and claiming that it's a fault. Does the fact that my toaster can't take a hit from a sledgehammer mean it was badly made? No, and the fact that Mass Effect 2's story can't stand up to the scrutiny of a man who likely recorded his playthrough and ran it over after the fact just looking for things to complain about doesn't make it flawed.

Even his suggestions ooze of overanalyzation and tedium that likely consume his entire life. He takes perfectly good ideas(Reward exploration/Different mission types/class based interrupts/Increased inter-squad interaction) and ruins them by suggesting systems that would dissuade even actuaries from persuing the ideas. His entire basis of how the suicide mission could be improved seems to all stem from essentially going back to the beginning of the game and "training" the right people the right way through the entire game. As though their past experiences should make no bearing on whether they can lead a group or be a tech expert.

In addition, as many others have stated, he doesn't even listen to those who deconstruct(note the difference) his points and suggest improvements to his own narcissistic fantasies. Because he can't stand the idea that he might be wrong about anything. Trust me, when he was still here I'd butted heads with him on a multitude of topics. Not dismissing his ideas entirely but pointing out ways in which his arguments were lacking, not constructively, I was fueling my own arguments in his logical falacies but none the less, the holes in his logic were there.

Of course, to him there were no issues. He was right and that was it and that's all he looks at as he goes on his own ideas. "This is fantastic, but I know how to make it better, MAKE IT TAKE LONGER!"

Most of his video's "improvements" whined about the casualization of Mass Effect, and seemed to desire nothing less than the absolute polar opposite of anything even mildly approachable to humans. Tasks only fit for robots is his idea of fun apparently.

One bit of appreciation I've gained from writing Fan fiction is how freaking hard it really is convey a point, describe a setting, describe a character, describe an action, and use all of the five senses WHILE not repeating words too often AND being concise.

Seriously, it is a heck of a lot harder to WRITE something than to criticize it. I actually don't think anyone should be able to criticize something without being a successful producer of said product, at least as far as creative works and military go.

Sometimes you need to step back and think about how much of the game is BAD and how much is GOOD. I made a nitpicky post on Bioware's writing with Samara and while I can remember the line almost perfectly, I know that it was a small fraction of an otherwise excellently written game.

[Niddy']

Ingehira wrote...

*blinkblink*

In open beta. My first piece of level 60 loot was a Giantstalker belt that dropped off the first molten giants in MC. It was a big enough deal that my GL was incredibly proud that I got it. Got red scepter shard when it was hard to do that. Helped get world first AQ40 event on Medivh with Fury and Ascent. Remember when there was no DM, when T2 dropped off of Rag, and when the beastmaster set was colored like an easter egg.

Oh, and let me add: Did the hunter quests when you had to get the food from the bugged plants in Felwood and could exploit dwarf-only fear ward with the one in Silithus. Remember silithus when it was mostly AQ, then when it was changed, then when it was changed back. Kited bosses to Stormwind. Have the original tabard from the 24 hour TBC opening event. Lolacerate.

Full T1, T2, T4-T10. I missed T3 because I had to date my fiance, sorry. Included heroic versions of a bunch of those; they're long since destroyed. Ironbound, rusted, bloodbathed drakes. Hand of Adal. Champion of the Naaru. Hit 85 three days after launch while working full time. Helped two of my guildies get their Heroic drakes within that first two weeks. Raided 20 hours a week for half of TBC and most of WoTLK.

7 80s, 2 70+. Only one 85 because I got bored and swapped to Rift with most of my guild.

Don't tell me what I am and am not. Once again: eat me.

Thisismecaring.jpg

A game should not be adjusted to the player. Ever. Period.  'Everyones' a winner' is casual cancer.

[GuardianAngel470]

Sable Phoenix wrote...

I liked the videos, for what they were. Some of the ideas were great. Some were good. Most were bad. I think smudboy is right on when he criticizes ME2's story, which was weak, slipshod and riddled with plot holes big enough to fly Sovereign through.  Even just adding a few extra and very specific sentences of dialogue to various points in the game would make the story hang together a whole lot better than it does.  But trying to revamp the entire game and replace everything with your own version is a bit over the top.

I'm obliged to point out that I honestly think Bioware are freakin amazing with how well their story fits together with itself. There aren't any GLARING inconsitencies (by that I mean a character refering to an event that was in planning but wasn't implemented) and pretty much everything, apart from story set pieces, fits just fine together.

I mean think about it, how many lines of dialog are there in this game? Hundreds? Thousands? And how many inconsistencies within that dialog? Lines that directly conflict with some other line (because the codex doesn't count).

I honestly can't think of any, and to me that's really amazing. The fact that multiple authors for multiple characters and multiple stories could operate on the same page to that degree is extremely impressive and I don't think most people give developers enough credit for that.

[Ingehira]

Niddy' wrote...

Ingehira wrote...

*blinkblink*

In open beta. My first piece of level 60 loot was a Giantstalker belt that dropped off the first molten giants in MC. It was a big enough deal that my GL was incredibly proud that I got it. Got red scepter shard when it was hard to do that. Helped get world first AQ40 event on Medivh with Fury and Ascent. Remember when there was no DM, when T2 dropped off of Rag, and when the beastmaster set was colored like an easter egg.

Oh, and let me add: Did the hunter quests when you had to get the food from the bugged plants in Felwood and could exploit dwarf-only fear ward with the one in Silithus. Remember silithus when it was mostly AQ, then when it was changed, then when it was changed back. Kited bosses to Stormwind. Have the original tabard from the 24 hour TBC opening event. Lolacerate.

Full T1, T2, T4-T10. I missed T3 because I had to date my fiance, sorry. Included heroic versions of a bunch of those; they're long since destroyed. Ironbound, rusted, bloodbathed drakes. Hand of Adal. Champion of the Naaru. Hit 85 three days after launch while working full time. Helped two of my guildies get their Heroic drakes within that first two weeks. Raided 20 hours a week for half of TBC and most of WoTLK.

7 80s, 2 70+. Only one 85 because I got bored and swapped to Rift with most of my guild.

Don't tell me what I am and am not. Once again: eat me.

Thisismecaring.jpg

A game should not be adjusted to the player. Ever. Period.  'Everyones' a winner' is casual cancer.

In other words: I was totally owned by my assumptions and now I have to result to internet tropes.

Game. Set. Match, darlin'.

[KingDan97]

GuardianAngel470 wrote...

KingDan97 wrote...

*snip*

One bit of appreciation I've gained from writing Fan fiction is how freaking hard it really is convey a point, describe a setting, describe a character, describe an action, and use all of the five senses WHILE not repeating words too often AND being concise.

Seriously, it is a heck of a lot harder to WRITE something than to criticize it. I actually don't think anyone should be able to criticize something without being a successful producer of said product, at least as far as creative works and military go.

Sometimes you need to step back and think about how much of the game is BAD and how much is GOOD. I made a nitpicky post on Bioware's writing with Samara and while I can remember the line almost perfectly, I know that it was a small fraction of an otherwise excellently written game.

I'm not quite if you're agreeing with me, defending Smud or both. I have written some, I'm not a great writer but I have writen. I know just how hard it is and I have dealt with realizing I used a word multiple times just when it got to the point where I needed to turn a piece of creative writing in. As for the idea that you should need to be successful to criticize, I disagree. I know when a painting is garbage, whether I can paint or not. I feel it's a lot of that mentality that allows "modern" art to get away with being a single brushstroke and calling it a masterpiece.(Not to say all modern art is this, I don't need set in stone shapes, just some kind of emotion be able to be drawn from it)

Conversely however, I feel that to have such a high and mighty position on everything you take, that everything is only done right if it is done your way is the issue Smud has. He suggests replacements for things he takes issue with, once even debating openly with a dev that Shepard was somehow moving at 1000 mph right after the Normandy explosion(insisting that was the speed of an explosion) despite the fact that a dev told him he wasn't, and the fact that 1000 mph on a massless explosion would result in a much lower speed on a fully grown person in an armor suit that weighs god knows how much.

[Mongerty2]

Niddy' wrote...

Thisismecaring.jpg

A game should not be adjusted to the player. Ever. Period.  'Everyones' a winner' is casual cancer.

You went and directly insulted the guy for being someone who doesn't have enough time. He disproves you and you insult him......

God the internet is fantastic.

Also, this thread is not about WoW. It is a very different beast from anything that Mass Effect will ever be, so comparisons are sort of a moot point. 

[Niddy']

Ingehira wrote...

Niddy' wrote...

Ingehira wrote...

*blinkblink*

In open beta. My first piece of level 60 loot was a Giantstalker belt that dropped off the first molten giants in MC. It was a big enough deal that my GL was incredibly proud that I got it. Got red scepter shard when it was hard to do that. Helped get world first AQ40 event on Medivh with Fury and Ascent. Remember when there was no DM, when T2 dropped off of Rag, and when the beastmaster set was colored like an easter egg.

Oh, and let me add: Did the hunter quests when you had to get the food from the bugged plants in Felwood and could exploit dwarf-only fear ward with the one in Silithus. Remember silithus when it was mostly AQ, then when it was changed, then when it was changed back. Kited bosses to Stormwind. Have the original tabard from the 24 hour TBC opening event. Lolacerate.

Full T1, T2, T4-T10. I missed T3 because I had to date my fiance, sorry. Included heroic versions of a bunch of those; they're long since destroyed. Ironbound, rusted, bloodbathed drakes. Hand of Adal. Champion of the Naaru. Hit 85 three days after launch while working full time. Helped two of my guildies get their Heroic drakes within that first two weeks. Raided 20 hours a week for half of TBC and most of WoTLK.

7 80s, 2 70+. Only one 85 because I got bored and swapped to Rift with most of my guild.

Don't tell me what I am and am not. Once again: eat me.

Thisismecaring.jpg

A game should not be adjusted to the player. Ever. Period.  'Everyones' a winner' is casual cancer.

In other words: I was totally owned by my assumptions and now I have to result to internet tropes.

Game. Set. Match, darlin'.

Totally bro.

[squee913]

Niddy' wrote...

Thisismecaring.jpg

A game should not be adjusted to the player. Ever. Period.  'Everyones' a winner' is casual cancer.

A game should not be adjusted to a player? Isn't that like saying food should not cater to the consumers taste, or that a shoe should not be made for the person who wears it? If you are not making a game for the players, then who the heck are you making it for? Yourself? I don't think that is a good marketing strategy...

Now that I think about it, aren't you a player? If games should not adjust to the player, why are you complaining that developers aren't making complicated games anymore? You just stated that they should not listen to you... 

[Niddy']

Mongerty2 wrote...

Niddy' wrote...

Thisismecaring.jpg

A game should not be adjusted to the player. Ever. Period.  'Everyones' a winner' is casual cancer.

You went and directly insulted the guy for being someone who doesn't have enough time. He disproves you and you insult him......

God the internet is fantastic.

Also, this thread is not about WoW. It is a very different beast from anything that Mass Effect will ever be, so comparisons are sort of a moot point. 

Wasn't dircetly targeted towards him, I hate the mentality that every game should be a "everyones' a winner"; meaning, I can be brain dead and still be able to beat the game having no idea of whats even happening.

When you start breaking down your game to accommodate people who have no real vested interest in the game everyone loses.

You don't study;  you fail.
You don't score;  you lose.
you don't participate; you get exculded.

So on and so forth, gaming should be no different.  Stripping me of choice and consequence because "it's too" is game breaking.

[MisterDyslexo]

squee913 wrote...

Niddy' wrote...

Thisismecaring.jpg

A game should not be adjusted to the player. Ever. Period.  'Everyones' a winner' is casual cancer.

A game should not be adjusted to a player? Isn't that like saying food should not cater to the consumers taste, or that a shoe should not be made for the person who wears it? If you are not making a game for the players, then who the heck are you making it for? Yourself? I don't think that is a good marketing strategy...

Now that I think about it, aren't you a player? If games should not adjust to the player, why are you complaining that developers aren't making complicated games anymore? You just stated that they should not listen to you... 

Ever hear of a "refined pallete"?

Now, would somebody with a refined pallete rather eat from a famous chef or McDonalds?

Now say the same, but with a game like Mass Effect 1, and a game like Call of Duty 6L ModernWarfare 2.

Personally, I'll refine my pallete, but still enjoy McDonalds. I just get so much more out of something made by the master chef, once I finally do refine my pallete.

This metaphor doing anything for you?

[Niddy']

squee913 wrote...

Niddy' wrote...

Thisismecaring.jpg

A game should not be adjusted to the player. Ever. Period.  'Everyones' a winner' is casual cancer.

A game should not be adjusted to a player? Isn't that like saying food should not cater to the consumers taste, or that a shoe should not be made for the person who wears it? If you are not making a game for the players, then who the heck are you making it for? Yourself? I don't think that is a good marketing strategy...

Now that I think about it, aren't you a player? If games should not adjust to the player, why are you complaining that developers aren't making complicated games anymore? You just stated that they should not listen to you... 

More like the students are failing, then lower the difficulty of the questions asked.  It isn't the test that should change it's the student.  A game should be how the designer wishes it to be and who it's targeted towards. It shouldn't have to be forced accommodate everyone to survive.

Modifié par Niddy', 21 mars 2011 - 07:22 .

[Lunatic LK47]

Niddy' wrote...

More like the students are failing, then lower the difficulty of the questions asked.  It isn't the test that should change it's the student.  A game should be how the designer wishes it to be and who it's targeted towards. It shouldn't have to be forced accommodate everyone.

Ever factor in learning disabilities and incompetent teachers? Get off your high horse, ******.

[squee913]

MisterDyslexo wrote...

squee913 wrote...

Niddy' wrote...

Thisismecaring.jpg

A game should not be adjusted to the player. Ever. Period.  'Everyones' a winner' is casual cancer.

A game should not be adjusted to a player? Isn't that like saying food should not cater to the consumers taste, or that a shoe should not be made for the person who wears it? If you are not making a game for the players, then who the heck are you making it for? Yourself? I don't think that is a good marketing strategy...

Now that I think about it, aren't you a player? If games should not adjust to the player, why are you complaining that developers aren't making complicated games anymore? You just stated that they should not listen to you... 

Ever hear of a "refined pallete"?

Now, would somebody with a refined pallete rather eat from a famous chef or McDonalds?

Now say the same, but with a game like Mass Effect 1, and a game like Call of Duty 6L ModernWarfare 2.

Personally, I'll refine my pallete, but still enjoy McDonalds. I just get so much more out of something made by the master chef, once I finally do refine my pallete.

This metaphor doing anything for you?

Not really, since a master cheif can charge 100 dollars for a meal. In fact, he has to since fewer people enjoy his food. In order for a developer to make games for your "refined pallete" they would have to charge three times the price (or more) since so few would buy it. I wonder how many of these refined gamers would than complain that their game cost $150 

[KingDan97]

MisterDyslexo wrote...

squee913 wrote...

Niddy' wrote...

Thisismecaring.jpg

A game should not be adjusted to the player. Ever. Period.  'Everyones' a winner' is casual cancer.

A game should not be adjusted to a player? Isn't that like saying food should not cater to the consumers taste, or that a shoe should not be made for the person who wears it? If you are not making a game for the players, then who the heck are you making it for? Yourself? I don't think that is a good marketing strategy...

Now that I think about it, aren't you a player? If games should not adjust to the player, why are you complaining that developers aren't making complicated games anymore? You just stated that they should not listen to you... 

Ever hear of a "refined pallete"?

Now, would somebody with a refined pallete rather eat from a famous chef or McDonalds?

Now say the same, but with a game like Mass Effect 1, and a game like Call of Duty 6L ModernWarfare 2.

Personally, I'll refine my pallete, but still enjoy McDonalds. I just get so much more out of something made by the master chef, once I finally do refine my pallete.

This metaphor doing anything for you?

If that chef and the McDonalds were selling their meals for the same price and were being sold from a batch that a portion of costs less than one one thousandth of what it cost to make you can damn well bet he'll start popping out some damn big macs.

[squee913]

Niddy' wrote...

squee913 wrote...

Niddy' wrote...

Thisismecaring.jpg

A game should not be adjusted to the player. Ever. Period.  'Everyones' a winner' is casual cancer.

A game should not be adjusted to a player? Isn't that like saying food should not cater to the consumers taste, or that a shoe should not be made for the person who wears it? If you are not making a game for the players, then who the heck are you making it for? Yourself? I don't think that is a good marketing strategy...

Now that I think about it, aren't you a player? If games should not adjust to the player, why are you complaining that developers aren't making complicated games anymore? You just stated that they should not listen to you... 

More like the students are failing, then lower the difficulty of the questions asked.  It isn't the test that should change it's the student.  A game should be how the designer wishes it to be and who it's targeted towards. It shouldn't have to be forced accommodate everyone to survive.

This isn't the educational system, it is a business. I dare you to go to any successful game company and tell them to stop making games to fit their consumers, but to instead tell the consumers they have to buy the game and force themselves to adapt to the game. Their laughter would follow you out the front door.