 
AMD Contest Group
Final Round FiringSquad-Intel Edito...
Round 3 Editors Challenge Sponsored...
Top 10 Challenge Round Sponsored by...
Editors Challenge Sponsored by Inte...
FiringSquad Editors Challenge Round...
Lord Of The Rings Online Beta Conte...
FiringSquad Editors Challenge Round...
 hipcheck (301)
 email_atif (19)
 Yoda_Blues (263)
 DaugWok (85)
 indigo196 (258)
 Dant (697)
 qmakowski (800)
 OgreFade (150)
 FS-Pongky (1138)
 xts (27)
 Knuckles (1565)
 p4l1ndr0m3 (499)
 GrapeApe (36)
 Itchyeyes (77)
 Kessandra (1008)
 OldFriend (178)
 Beefysworld (290)
BellBoy (19)
robinsnest4 (2)
Fedor (19)
 Disavowed_RuBiX (8)
Lollypop (1)
mdunn
matt1097
march1
conted
godfather
kenrobbins
Campdad
![View mike547[TeamATi]'s User Page](http://media.firingsquad.com/data/2007-07-28/8154570e2f7ea4f10dfa9303562392ec.gif) mike547[TeamATi] (15)
iNoMaD
|
|
|
|
17 entry(ies) in this category
|
  Make me a gamer again! (30 comments )
by: CanadaDave (303) | Posted in cluster FiringSquad Editors Challenge Round 1 Prelim 2
Posted 75 months ago ( edited 75 months ago ) in category DEFAULT
» MEDIA (5)
Okay - so controllers are better than they were.
No aphids were harmed...
My dinners were cold. Often.
Oh, the shrieking..
Creating cold dinners for 25 years.
|
Note - this is a rework of an article I'd submitted in Round 1 incorporating some of the advice I received.
My name is Dave, and I’d like to once again become addicted to video games.
I can talk for hours about what my addiction used to mean to myself and my family. I could bring a tear to your eye with tales of my youth, which was spent guiding my Lady Bug in search of aphids on my Colecovision system. My mother could make your mouths water, describing the wonderful meals that she made… only to watch me gulp it down in mere seconds in a mad rush to finish the last treasure room in Venture. My teacher… well, Gameboy hadn’t been invented yet, so my teacher just thought I was a nuisance.
Ah…. Those were lonely, selfish, wonderful times. Times that, sadly, have come to an end.
I, like most of us (okay, SOME of us) have been forced to grow up. I’m now a father of two beautiful children, a husband, an IT guy, a volunteer (usually a volunteer IT guy – many of you know my pain)… and, at the bottom of the list, I’m a gamer. This last category, though, is becoming harder and harder to claim as a part of my repertoire.
Why? Simple.
I no longer have the time to get good enough at games to compete. If I can play a game (say, Halo 2) for an hour per week, I'm really quite happy with that - until I venture online. An hour a week is roughly enough time to die in combat 45 times, while amassing about 8 kills of my own (if I happen to have primed a grenade and die a close-quarters death). I end up being reduced to what I loathe most - a camper - sitting motionless and hoping that someone wanders into my crosshairs so I can pull the trigger.
I can still say with confidence: I know that isn’t gaming.
Technology has moved a VERY long way from the era of Donkey Kong, Missile Command and Berzerk. It is truly amazing to wander into a store and see the new games on display; games have evolved to a point where graphics really are a good approximation of reality. We have sound effects that absolutely mirror real life. We have on-screen physics that are so close to real life that they often need their own processor just to calculate movement. What lags, however, is the intuitive interface between real life (remember that place, basement-dwellers?) and video games.
I’m well aware that a good FPS *gamer* can pick up a controller and be able to competently play most FPS titles within a half hour of opening the box. I’m well aware that an average RTS gamer can play most RTS games pretty competently without any training at all. Put a good RTS gamer in front of an FPS game, however, and the compartmentalization of today’s video game industry shows its ugly head – frustration sets in, and you hear shouts of “wait until we’re playing Age of Kings!” from across the LAN party floor.
Why can’t your Uncle Fred pick up the controller and play Gears of War without ending up pointing his gunsight at the ground and running around in an endless loop? Sure, it’s hilarious to watch (add alcohol to intensify effect), but it shows a lack of intuition in the control design that is keeping people from becoming actively involved in video games. This (while a good thing in that your Uncle Fred isn’t always coming over to play your X-Box 360) hurts us in the long run by keeping hardcore gamers socially isolated from the rest of the population… and it hurts game development by limiting the potential audience to, well, “gamers”.
Video games need an additional step of evolution that bridges the gap, so that people who have normal lives can actually play – with reasonable competency – most games without an enormous learning curve. It works with playing cards (how hard are the rules of Poker, *really*?).. and whoever can figure out how to make it work in video games will be a venerated hero to those of us Real-Lifers who miss our game time.
Nintendo has made an important step with the Wii - I think we've all seen it - and that needs to continue. I've now had invitations from three separate friends to come over and try their Wiis (I've not had the time as yet), but you can see it.. the gleam in their eye is back. They can pick up a game and actually PLAY it with their sons and daughters and have genuine FUN doing it. More - it becomes a SOCIAL event. Mom watches (and even plays!). The kids take turns. Mini-tournaments are set up. Bets are made over who has to do the dishes.
This is what gaming is SUPPOSED to be, everyone. This is the true "convergence" that we have been hearing about for so long. Forget about playing movies on your game machine. Convergence includes that one all-important aspect that Nintendo has finally scratched the surface of with its Wii console - the importance of the SOCIAL element of games.
Nintendo’s Wii isn’t the first to get it, however. Go into a Best Buy with Guitar Hero 2 on display. Pick up the guitar (if someone else hasn’t beat you to it), and you’re guaranteed to have a spectator or two within 5 minutes. Guitar Hero 2 has sold 1.3 million units in 2006 alone – on a console not even considered “Current-Gen”. This, despite its considerable price tag of $79.99 (a premium of 25% over the $59 Gears of War) and the fact that far fewer units of the game will actually fit on a retailer’s shelf due to the larger footprint of the box.
For my daughter’s 5th birthday, I bought her a Strawberry Shortcake adaptation of Dance Dance Revolution (stand-alone unit which connects directly to the TV). She loved it – she and her friend danced around on the pad, squealing (randomly and, frankly, annoyingly) for hours. She ignored the Barbie stand-alone joystick game I bought her, despite the fact that it had a “storybook princess” theme which she vastly prefers (and emulates).
I’m not suggesting that we need to reduce the complexity of games to what a 5 year old can handle. What I AM saying, however, is that video games need to start taking advantage of people’s urge to gravitate to what feels natural to them. If game controls (and games themselves) are given more natural controls (and gameplay), we will see an expansion of the video game market at a rate that vastly exceeds anything we’ve encountered in history.
I can see that there is light on the horizon. Here's hoping that in another couple of years, we’re all reaping the benefits of gaming companies which have - finally – figured out the next step in developing the technology that we have available to us.
Please, gaming companies… make me a gamer again! |
|
| 30 User Comment(s) • 11 root comment(s) |
Heavy_Storm (4)  Feb 23, 2007 - 10:07 am
| Damn, your writing is so stylish that I, in spite of disagreeing with you, I think this article is very good.
However, I think that you missed one thing. Games are very simple to play. Sure, RTS titles are a lot harder than, let's say, Street Fighter. Soul Edge is a game for veterans. But heck, grab a mouse and play Doom 3 and tells me there's a steep learning curve in it? As long as you are coordinated to move the mouse and use the keyboard at the same time, the game is simple.
And when you say that playing Halo online is a pain, well, that is true with any title. Get Dance Dance Revo and play with a hardcore gamer -- it's almost fun to realize how much you suck. Hardcore gamers (who you usually find online) will beat casual gamers to shame faster than you can say OMG!.» Login to reply to this   CanadaDave (303)  Feb 23, 2007 - 12:15 pm | Edited on Feb 23, 2007 - 12:18 pm
| Man.. I love the downvoting. Good times. :) I've decided that I'm no longer going to look at what keeps happening to my rating, and just focus on the comments. :)
Anyhow - thanks for the comments and compliments - I really appreciate it.
As for Street Fighter being easy - well, it is and it isn't. To jump, punch and kick - yep, no problems. But how INTUITIVE, really, is "back-back-forward-punch"? :)
You're (HeavyStorm and ItchyEves) both right - experience wins the day. No question about it. Early frustration, however, kills the experience for people. That is exactly why we have a "beginner" skill level... if every game was as hard as it could possibly be right out of the box, people would get frustrated and quit. If you take the frustration out of the controls, then you open up the gaming scene to a wider variety of gamer - once you've done that, you're improving the social aspect of gaming, and you sell a heckuvalot more games as a result.» Login to reply to this  SFtheWolf (571) Feb 28, 2007 - 12:12 pm | Edited on Feb 28, 2007 - 12:13 pm
| As an aside in a somewhat less formal tone, you know what REALLY pisses me off? When casual gamers demand that games not only have portions they are capable of doing well at, but that the absolute hardest difficulty levels provided be catered to their effort dodging ideals, to the detriment of all others' enjoyment. Fans of Half-Life 2 know what I mean about this. The whining on the Steam forums got so incessant that Valve significantly dumbed down portions of Episode 1, which all but ruined what some considered to be the painfully short game's high points. Not only that, they made retroactive changes which also affected the original game, to the point where the helicopter gunships would not even attempt to shoot one's rockets down any more. They will just hover around acting defenceless while you pop, shoot, duck repeatedly. It's this same philosophy that's ruining so much of gaming, rewarding rote persistence over analysis or skill (just look at most of Blizzard's games).
If you can't beat a game on hard, don't play it on hard! Moreover, don't ruin hard for everyone else, especially when hard was already too easy.» Login to reply to this |
|
|
brodelicious (1) Feb 23, 2007 - 08:20 am
| » If that were only possible
I really like the tone and content of the article. I just got married last year and have had to give up some of my gaming time (happily I might add). I think thought that what you are asking for is sort of impossible. With any activity in life there is a law of diminishing returns. The more time you spend with something the better you get...but at a slower rate. I don't think that any interface changes to any genre of game would remove the inherent advantage that a teenager who spends 30+ hours a week practicing is going to have over you. Doing something longer and repeatedly is almost automatically going to make you better at it.
Interface changes may make games initially more accessible but it can't and shouldn't automatically take away the benefits that those who are dedicated to it enjoy.» Login to reply to this CanadaDave (303) Feb 23, 2007 - 08:27 am | Edited on Feb 23, 2007 - 08:30 am
| You're right, of course - but look at my Poker example. Once you've learned the *rules* of Poker, you can sit at a table and play. You'll lose 80 out of 100 times to a good player, but you can have fun doing it (and, in the case of Poker, often win on a chance factor).
In the RTS example, look at Paintball. *ANYONE* can pick up a Paintball gun and play. An experienced guy will beat you, but you'll have a blast doing it, and the frustration won't be that you couldn't work the gun.
You need to eliminate the "stupid controls!" factor from games to make the next step. DDR, Guitar Hero and the Wii all do that to some degree.» Login to reply to this SFtheWolf (571) Feb 23, 2007 - 10:00 am
| There's another flaw in that reasoning however. There are only so many actions you can perform with a paintball gun, point and shoot, and yet many people do get incredibly frustrated with how inept they are at holding a large stocked paintball gun. An RTS has hundreds to thousands of commands that need to be performed competently (you are controlling an army after all) and any RTS which has attempted to water that down has ended up being shallow and pointless. It is a fundamental trait of the genre's gameplay and not of its controls.
As for Poker, that game effectively has no controls. You are manipulating small objects with your hands (which is a skill people had to develop anyway, just at a very young age) and that's all. Also, the rules are absolutely brain dead simple, even compared to the most basic run and gun first person shooter. On a side note I want to add that a new player being able to win by chance is a mark of a very poorly designed game (i.e. Counterstrike), a game should be deterministic and a master who is paying attention frankly should beat a new player every single time (Go would be a good example). That's not to say the new player can't take small landmark advantages as encouragement, but winning is something that should be reserved solely for the superior player, otherwise we all may as well play Mario Party, or better yet coin toss.
To go back to Guitar Hero (really GuitarMania should be mentioned since it did it first, and in many ways better), take basically any tween or slightly older, even one who doesn't game at all and hand them the guitar controller. With a little persistence they'll be playing the easy songs and doing reasonably well, and more importantly having fun. Do the same with anyone similar except 30 or older and they'll stare at the screen like a deer in headlights, too vacant of mind to even experiment with the buttons to see what they do, swear at the game violently when they lose, and then quit forever.
My point is, that frankly people need to adjust to games more than games need to adjust to people, specifically those of last generation and onward. I agree that many games nowadays have needlessly counter-intuitive controls, but no set up however approachable will change those who refuse to put any effort into trying something new. Frankly interactive media shouldn't even bother trying to tap into that market because it's a hopeless cause, leave them to their television sitcoms.» Login to reply to this
|
|
|
» Note: You need to be logged in to write a comment!Login here, or if you don't have an account with FiringSquad, register here, it's FREE! |
My Media-Blog categories
|
Previous Page
