Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

New Super Mario Bros. Wii To Include Official "Cheat"

Soulskill posted more than 5 years ago | from the i-can-wiin dept.

Nintendo 275

phlack writes "Yahoo Games has an article describing a new mode in Nintendo's upcoming New Super Mario Bros. Wii that will allow the player to activate a 'demo' mode to get out of a hard situation. Nintendo plans on incorporating this into future games. Is this a good idea (to help relieve frustrations) or just sanctioned cheating?" They actually patented this system as well.

cancel ×

275 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Only for casual gamers (2, Insightful)

s1lverl0rd (1382241) | more than 5 years ago | (#28387191)

Winning by cheating just isn't the same as winning 'for real'.

I may catch on with the casual gamers, though.

Re:Only for casual gamers (1)

Haxzaw (1502841) | more than 5 years ago | (#28387677)

I may catch on with the casual gamers, though.

I wouldn't count on that.

Re:Only for casual gamers (2, Interesting)

Devout_IPUite (1284636) | more than 5 years ago | (#28388315)

I would count on this damaging gameplay experience. Gran Turisimo 3 includes an auto-pilot mode. When you first start playing the game it's not infeasible that the auto-pilot is a better race car driver than you... So you might end up using it a bit and before you know it, you can only use the auto-pilot because you're not good enough to compete on your own at the current difficulty.

Personally, when this happened to me I went back and restarted without using B-Spec mode on a race I hadn't already won at least once (using B-spec to farm for credits to buy competitive cars for other races was a different story). I enjoyed the gameplay experience MUCH more the second time.

Re:Only for casual gamers (5, Insightful)

murdocj (543661) | more than 5 years ago | (#28387793)

Winning by cheating just isn't the same as winning 'for real'.

True, but sometimes it's necessary to bypass some ridiculously hard part of a game. For example, in one WWII game (Medal of Honor?) I was stuck at this one point where I was in a town with a sniper. I tried everything I could to get the guy and he just kept nailing me. After hours of game time spread over a few weeks of realtime, I finally activated a god mode code and went outside and looked for him where a walkthru said he would be. Even with all that, he was hard to see. Once I nailed him, I switched off the cheat and enjoyed the rest of the game. If I hadn't done that, I would have simply given up.

I recently have had an experienece in a game where I was really frustrated by the final battle. I looked it up and it turned out I simply wasn't strafing around that much, I was trying to use cover, which didn't work. That was cheating too, to get the strategy, but it's the same thing... I gave it a good try of many, many attempts and finally gave in and looked up a cheat.

Ultimately, looking up a strategy or using a code isn't as satisfying as doing it on your own, but sometimes you just want to move on and see the rest of the game.

Re:Only for casual gamers (1)

Stormwatch (703920) | more than 5 years ago | (#28387999)

Talking about Medal of Honor, it pisses me off because of friendly AI. I mean, in a certain level, I have to keep my squad alive, and there's a load of German snipers around us; how the fuck do I tell my buddies to GET INTO A BUILDING AND STAY THERE while I go outside and hunt down the snipers?

Re:Only for casual gamers (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28388433)

I totally see this happening in Afghanistan.

- Stay in this hut until I have hunted down all enemies.
- But Sir, we outnumber them and have superior weaponry!
- Shut up! I cannot afford to lose any or you as it would make me lose face to other commanders. You all stay here it is an order!

Re:Only for casual gamers (1)

conspirator57 (1123519) | more than 5 years ago | (#28388609)

for some reason huts irl aren't impenetrable to bullets/rpgs/explosives and human intelligence recognizes the need to storm one full of bottled up opponents where game AI tells the sniper he's only and always a long distance sniper.

Re:Only for casual gamers (1)

beerbear (1289124) | more than 5 years ago | (#28388061)

Winning by cheating just isn't the same as winning 'for real'.

Especially in single player games I don't play to win; I play to have a good time. That is usually synonymous, but doesn't have to.

Re:Only for casual gamers (1)

Llian (615902) | more than 5 years ago | (#28388077)

I remember that level in MoH. Was good fun. Frustrating for about an hour until you get it.

Whilst I don't think that people should cheat, or look up strategy guides, in some games, the developers do not do a good enough job to let you know whats required to move on. In a GOOD game, its not needed. In a mediocre game, it can be.

Re:Only for casual gamers (2, Insightful)

KillerBob (217953) | more than 5 years ago | (#28388591)

Part of the problem is that they need to find a balance between hardcore gamers and casual gamers. A level like he's describing from MoH would have me, a casual gamer (well, except for Warcrack) saying "fuck this" and finding a different game.

Assuming I'd even pick up the game in the first place, which I probably wouldn't.

The problem is that in order to appeal to the casual gamers, the game has to be easy enough that most hardcore gamers won't touch it. By adding the "demo" mode, they can make parts of the game very challenging, to appeal to the hardcore gamers, but can also give casual gamers the ability to avoid the frustrating and annoying content that presents too much challenge and commitment to keep a casual gamer interested.

Re:Only for casual gamers (2, Insightful)

rjejr (921275) | more than 5 years ago | (#28388789)

Many games have a hard part that's too difficult to get through, so using this ocassionally doesn't seem so bad. I don't remember this much uproar when God of War let people play in "easy mode" after dieing a few times, and there are other games that do this as well.
I would have liked this option in the Jak and Daxter series. In the first admittedly easy but very fun game there is a fish catching mini-game which has absolutey nothing to do with the rest of the gameplay. In Jak 2 there is a mission where you have to destroy 5 ships but I could never get more than 3, so I sold the game back, only to rent it again months later and finally beat it. There is also an on-rails level where you ave to destroy 40 jet-packed bad guys which was really hard. Again, that series is about having fun as I don't think there is a "Game Over" screen anywhere to be found, so if you can't actually lose, is it "cheating" to win?

Why Play The Game? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28388677)

Just go watch a movie. It's in "demo" mode, all the time.

Sounds like a good idea. (5, Insightful)

Bluebottel (979854) | more than 5 years ago | (#28387205)

Getting rid of the stupid moments and rushing towards the fun ones. Hope they include a 'unlock-all-so-i-dont-have-to-just-to-play-the-whole-game' cheat as well.
Way to many games assume that i want to grind 25 hours to get that tiny little game mode which just happens to be the most fun part of it all.

Re:Sounds like a good idea. (0)

robbyjo (315601) | more than 5 years ago | (#28388147)

Agreed. In many cases, especially in party games like Mario Party or Super Monkey Ball, this is very useful. I don't need to play it to completion to play the party mini games. If I bring it to my friend's house, I don't need to bring my saved games just to unlock these stupid things.

Re:Sounds like a good idea. (1)

somersault (912633) | more than 5 years ago | (#28388271)

You may find that the reward doesn't seem as valuable if you haven't had to spend 25 hours of your life working so hard just to get it.. of course, some games do take the grinding too far in an effort to make things more valuable, but there will always be plenty of unemployed or people or kids willing to waste their entire holidays to get something and then the developers have to make the next reward even more difficult to get to keep it rare/valuable.. :s

Good idea (3, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28387207)

I did my grind through Super Mario Brothers. I dropped a missile or twenty on mother brain. I actually beat Tyson after a couple of months. I flipped through contra, shooting my red, oversized, round bullets the entire way. Kid icarus was my bitch. It was all hard as balls, and I didn't have any built in cheats (Justin Bailey doesn't count and you know it.)

It makes my elitist heart warm knowing that now I can add one more example into my video game "get off of my lawn" play-book.

Re:Good idea (3, Insightful)

bigstrat2003 (1058574) | more than 5 years ago | (#28388015)

Justin Bailey doesn't count and you know it.

Why, exactly, shouldn't it? For that matter, Contra also had a cheat built-in. Or does that one "not count" too?

There's nothing wrong with having cheats available, really. For players who want to just breeze through the game, it saves them frustration, and for players who want a challenge, they don't have to use it. Everyone wins.

Re:Good idea (1)

IceCreamGuy (904648) | more than 5 years ago | (#28388587)

Why, exactly, shouldn't it?

Uh... because when you're getting wrecked by those goddamn green hopping jerk bug things, you can't press "start," type in "Justin Bailey," kill them, turn the cheat off and then continue on.

For that matter, Contra also had a cheat built-in. Or does that one "not count" too?

Correct, it does not count. You can only activate it at the very beginning of the game, just like with Justin Bailey; you can't turn it on, pass a hard part, and then turn it off. That's what the summary is talking about.

Instant Satisfaction (1)

addsalt (985163) | more than 5 years ago | (#28387243)

Good marketing is giving people what they want and Nintendo has done well in understanding just that. Unfortunately, most people would rather get something without any effort than they would to actually practice, learn, then succeed.

Re:Instant Satisfaction (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28387309)

Extended frustration isn't good when playing videogames. Most people play them to either relax, have fun, or spend time with friends/family.

I don't care about this Demo mode, because I won't use it. If someone actually has to use it, then I'm glad it enhanced their game experience. If someone is foolish enough to use it to get to the end quicker when they didn't have to... then thank goodness they'll never have enough patience to get good at the online games I play. :)

+1 Insightful for you.

Re:Instant Satisfaction (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28387375)

The need for such a feature at all is a design failure in itself though. A game can still be difficult and not frustrating because of it. Instead of this feature, Nintendo should be going back and looking at what they did wrong and fix that instead.

Re:Instant Satisfaction (1)

Shadow of Eternity (795165) | more than 5 years ago | (#28387507)

THIS.

Some of the later levels in the genesis sonic games were cant-win-with-infinite-lives hard but they didn't come across as cheap shots like 2/3rds of Sonic Rush does.

New Super Mario Brothers (DS) for example is the same way, at least half the time I died in that felt like the game just saying "Whatever, close enough" and killing me even when I otherwise would've survived.

Re:Instant Satisfaction (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28387837)

THIS.

Some of the later levels in the genesis sonic games were cant-win-with-infinite-lives hard

I'm pretty sure I got through all the Sonic genesis games before I was 7 years old. I don't think I'm alone in this. Do you suffer from some sort of physical handicap?

Re:Instant Satisfaction (1)

FatAlb3rt (533682) | more than 5 years ago | (#28388663)

No child left behind?

Re:Instant Satisfaction (5, Funny)

flitty (981864) | more than 5 years ago | (#28388293)

Extended frustration isn't good when playing videogames

The most intriguing part of the patent for this "demo mode" was how it was activated. The Wii-mote will detect when it is thrown against the wall and Implement Demo-mode for you.

Re:Instant Satisfaction (2, Interesting)

grumbel (592662) | more than 5 years ago | (#28388371)

Imagine for a moment that your DVD player didn't have a fast forward button, after all you should watch the movie, not skip through it to the end for instant satisfaction.

Doesn't sound to great, does it? With video games its the same thing. Sure a challenging game is fun, but being forced to play through those challenging parts is not. It should be the users choice of how he wants to enjoy the game and if books and movies are any indication, it works quite fine when the user has instant access to the end of it.

The only real trouble I see with this is that games have progression, you learn skills in earlier levels to use them in later ones. So if you skip those learning parts, because you find them to hard, you mind end up being even more screwed later on, as you haven't learned how to play the game, thus a hard game becomes an impossible one.

But in the end: You payed for the game, so you should have the right to see all of it, if cheats and autoplay allow that, so be it.

Grammar is good. Fix the summary. (0, Offtopic)

NIVRAM (105867) | more than 5 years ago | (#28387247)

Perhaps they can ACTIVATE a 'demo' mode, too?

Re:Grammar is good. Fix the summary. (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28387399)

This is slashdot. Good grammar has no place here.

Well, it never has, so why should it now? :)

Re:Grammar is good. Fix the summary. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28387577)

Maybe they could implement a demo mode where the article is written for them.

Great idea! (2, Insightful)

ZmeiGorynych (1229722) | more than 5 years ago | (#28387265)

I want my games to be not very challenging but spectacular looking and amusing interactive movies, little more. Really hard intricate challenges is what work is for (well I'm lucky enough to have one of those).

If other gamers want to derive a sense of achievement from really hard-to-master games, good for them - but with this, Nintendo is reaching another market, namely people like myself, who couldn't care less about whether it's 'cheating' or not because 'winning' is not the reason why they play games at all.

Both (5, Insightful)

physicsphairy (720718) | more than 5 years ago | (#28387267)

Is this a good idea (to help relieve frustrations) or just sanctioned cheating?"

Yes and yes. It does help who just want to see the next level and it does let people bypass the essential struggle of the game, thereby 'diminishing' the meaning of playing it.

But, hey, you paid for the game, I say you should be able to access all of its content, regardless of your playing skill. I would never use the cheat option, but I'm not going to fret myself into a furor that elsewhere in the privacy of their own homes people are enjoying the game differently.

(I will however mercilessly mock any of my friends who are less uber than me. :p )

Re:Both (4, Insightful)

techtoad (1068024) | more than 5 years ago | (#28387391)

I agree with physicphairy, even though many users will see this "demo" option as a cheat option that will diminish the game, its a nice idea for those who choose to use it. There have been so many games I have played for weeks, got stuck on a single level and not played the game again for years due to bordem and frustration. What about those times you lose your game saves by accident and want to make a quick journey back to the stage you reached in the game?* I say this is a good idea, cheaters can use it to cheat, genuine players have the option to bypass a stage that ruins their gameplay experience. *Obviously, some games that are more involved with choices and "collectable" itmes may not be this straight forward, but hey, its better than having to go all the way back to the begging after losing your gamesaves!

Re:Both (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28387403)

Is this a good idea (to help relieve frustrations) or just sanctioned cheating?"

Yes and yes. It does help who just want to see the next level and it does let people bypass the essential struggle of the game, thereby 'diminishing' the meaning of playing it.

But, hey, you paid for the game, I say you should be able to access all of its content, regardless of your playing skill. I would never use the cheat option, but I'm not going to fret myself into a furor that elsewhere in the privacy of their own homes people are enjoying the game differently.

(I will however mercilessly mock any of my friends who are less uber than me. :p )

Yes and yes. It does help who just want to see the next level and it does let people bypass the essential struggle of the game, thereby 'diminishing' the meaning of playing it.

But, hey, you paid for the game, I say you should be able to access all of its content, regardless of your playing skill. I would never use the cheat option, but I'm not going to fret myself into a furor that elsewhere in the privacy of their own homes people are enjoying the game differently.

How, in your opinion, does this concept extend into online play? People who "grief" in online games often say things such as "I paid $X for this, I can spend my time ruining everyone else' gameplay if I want to." Barring any Terms of Service violations, these people are often right. What does that do to the quality of the game, however? If a player can impede another player's enjoyment of a game that they both purchased, who's happiness should get preferentrial treatment?

The second example are cheats (such as aimbots or wallhacks in first person shooters or drophacks, maphacks, and bots in rpgs/mmorpgs) often claim that "Well, I paid $X for this game, I can do whatever I want in it. It's just a game. You're a tryhard." I know several people who get a lot of enjoyment out of cheating in online games. By cheating, they are able to "see the next level" of the game and "bypass the essential struggle of the game". They paid for the game and online content, right? So they should "be able to access all of it's content, regardless of [their] skill".

I agree with your sentiment. One pays for the game, they should have access to the content. I am interested in if you believe that your point of view is equally valid on online play.

Re:Both (1)

dangitman (862676) | more than 5 years ago | (#28387457)

How, in your opinion, does this concept extend into online play?

It doesn't. Online multiplayer, and offline single player are fundamentally different beasts.

Re:Both (1)

silanea (1241518) | more than 5 years ago | (#28387543)

[...] who's happiness should get preferentrial treatment?

That of whoever can get enough support for their voteban.

In single-player people can 'access' whatever content they please, online they will have to play by the rules of whatever server they are on or suffer the consequences.

Offline multiplayer (1)

tepples (727027) | more than 5 years ago | (#28387681)

In single-player people can 'access' whatever content they please, online they will have to play by the rules of whatever server they are on or suffer the consequences.

Aren't you forgetting a third way: neither single-player nor online?

Re:Offline multiplayer (1)

dyingtolive (1393037) | more than 5 years ago | (#28388525)

Aren't you forgetting a third way: neither single-player nor online?

Doesn't matter. Everyone else forgot it too. :(

Re:Both (1)

PGC (880972) | more than 5 years ago | (#28387441)

I disagree with "you should be able to access all of its content, regardless of your playing skill." . Because, just as you said, you paid for the GAME. Not for a level-viewer. If the game is to difficult for you, than that is too bad, you get what you paid for.

Re:Both (1)

jellomizer (103300) | more than 5 years ago | (#28387475)

Aren't games made for entrainment as its primary goal. If the person is getting frustrated at one spot the game looses its entertainment values and because an obsession or not worth the time. Now they may loose the reward of actually getting pass that point. But that is up to them. Sometimes in games there are spots that you just can't quite get threw, say an action sequence in an adventure game, or that one spot where you can't make the jump. Having a cheat to get threw it is helpful.

LOL Patents (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28387289)

I can't be bothered to RTFA, but whatever cheat it is, prior art is in MAME cheats.

Nice, an AI system in reverse! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28387321)

So a button that would allow Nintendo players to enter a "learn this move for next time" mode.
Why didn't I think of that?
How about one that switches into a particular portion of a previously recorded ghost? (send my portion of the royalties to the Pakistani refugees)

Perfect platform for this (1, Insightful)

JohnConnor (587121) | more than 5 years ago | (#28387323)

This is a good idea for the Wii. This platform is not supposed to be for hardcore gamers and the focus is more on the general public. Take myself as an example: I play the Wii but unlike my kids I don't have time to repeat a game sequence hundreds of times until I get it right. If I get stuck somewhere in a game I don't waste my time and I move on (read I drop this particlar game). I'm looking forward to be able to skip a frustrating part and get on with the rest of the game. I am not playing to get frustrated

THE REDS ARE GETTING CLOSER!!!! (1)

bhunachchicken (834243) | more than 5 years ago | (#28387331)

In Soviet Nintendo, game plays you!

... and laughs all the way to the bank.

The reds have been here for decades (2, Insightful)

tepples (727027) | more than 5 years ago | (#28387695)

The reds aren't "getting closer"; they're already here. Tetris, the greatest Commie plot ever to hit the video game industry, has been on Nintendo platforms for two decades.

Fantastic (4, Interesting)

Jarlsberg (643324) | more than 5 years ago | (#28387379)

Having kids (5 and 9), I would have to say this is fantastic. Games like Super Mario Galaxy are too hard for my youngest, and I constantly have to step in and help with the levels. Now, Super Mario Galaxy is quite fun, but any game gets quite dull after having to go through the same stuff over and over. Let's have cheat/demo modes and let the kids have fun. :)

By the way, my youngest have no problems with Super Mario Sunshine - it is a much easier game for kids. Maybe it's the controller?

Re:Fantastic (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28387521)

Maybe it's not walking upside down and on walls all over the place.

Re:Fantastic (2, Insightful)

zwei2stein (782480) | more than 5 years ago | (#28387659)

I would be worried myself rather than celebrating it.

Game with 'easy way out' can make children expect something like that later in their life subconsciously and become frustrated.

There is big deal made out of fact that most games expose children to very fast and very direct and simple reward-effort situations, that makes them less able to handle distant rewards.

But again, kids were playing games before computers were around and Deferred gratification was there before computer games too.

Re:Fantastic (3, Insightful)

sesshomaru (173381) | more than 5 years ago | (#28388627)

Up-Down-Up-Down-Left-Right-Left

Help Me

Heck, I'm 39, and after being killed by Rift Entities one too many times I decided to go to "Casual" mode in the Ghostbusters video game. You know why? Because I don't care anymore...

This is because after a hard grueling day of work (or for a child, school), I don't want to come home to a hard/grueling video game, and never did.

We challenge our kid by making sure she keeps her grades up, if she wants to play Cooking Mama in her free time, that's her own affair.

I'll admit, I always thought it was dumb to play through a game on God mode from the very start. I knew kids who did it, and I didn't understand the point. I never thought it was bad to have God mode though.

On the other hand, the games where I get to "that one boss" and give up in frustration, what do those teach a child? If life is too hard you can always give up?

I like options (4, Insightful)

Phoenix (2762) | more than 5 years ago | (#28387383)

For the hard-core gamer I'm sure that this is considered the height of EVIL and is something of a hell-worthy trespass for them.

However for the casual gamer (say someone who doesn't have the time required to develop the "Mad Skillz" needed to play these games) this is a godsend.

There are games out there with very in-depth stories and as the game progresses and gets harder, many find that a particular section is flat-out beyond them and the only way they'll ever get to see the end of the story is to look up cheats, walkthroughs...or now this new system.

There are times when I've asked someone to get me through one little annoying section that I've tried for hours to defeat...at times even WITH the walkthrough. Being told how to do something is not the same as being able to do it with some of the "twitch" games out there where the solution involves precise timing that many hard-core and/or avid gamers develop. I get help with that "one" spot and I'll beat the rest of the game on my own in my own time.

This is a good thing and it gives an option and a choice for the players. They can choose to beat the game on their own, or they can choose to get a little help. Let the game give these options and let the players decide. It's the best way.

Re:I like options (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28387689)

For the hard-core gamer I'm sure that this is considered the height of EVIL and is something of a hell-worthy trespass for them.

For the hard-core gamers, *optional* ways to make games easier is a godsend. This way there is also an option for the hardcore, as opposed to just cutting off the minority and making everything extremely easy (which to those such as myself is boring).

w...t...f (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28387389)

So I'm almost finished reading the article summary, already thinking up my response and about to post, when as I get to the end of the summary I read

"They actually patented this system [slashdot.org] as well."

Just like that. With a link. FROM THE EDITOR.
Just an offhand reference to something they happen to remember, right? WRONG because it belies the fact that THE EDITOR TOOK IT UPON THEMSELVES TO DIG AROUND BEFORE POSTING AND SERIOUSLY LINK TO PERTINENT EARLIER COVERAGE!! Where am I, engadget? What is happening? Who did this? It must be Taco, right, he's the only one who takes Slashdot for journalism. Nope: the editor is "soulskill". W...T...F

I have to go for a walk, air out my mind a little. This is some serious shit going on right here.

Probably a good thing... (3, Insightful)

dr_wheel (671305) | more than 5 years ago | (#28387415)

... especially for casual gamers and kids. I have a young daughter who loves the original SMB that I downloaded through the VC, but her frustration level can get to the point where she doesn't want to play it anymore. Something like this would be nice for her and casual gamers if implemented properly. But I also think they should also insert some sort of bonus ending or perk for players who don't need to cheat to win.

Is it fair to give her an advantage when I didn't have one myself at her age? I think so. At least maybe she won't start throwing nintendo controllers across the goddamn room like I used to.

Re:Probably a good thing... (2, Funny)

SausageOfDoom (930370) | more than 5 years ago | (#28387675)

I wonder if that's actually something against it. Say what you like about games, but at least they teach children that if you persevere at something you'll eventually succeed.

Although I guess my relentless practice and eventual awesome skill with quake didn't translate through to relentless revision and eventual awesome skill with exams. Which is why I failed most of them and am now unemployable.

Never mind.

Re:Probably a good thing... (2, Insightful)

Spatial (1235392) | more than 5 years ago | (#28388159)

Assuming it's a 2D platformer, I think one of the most elegant solutions would be alter the level layout after repeated failures, or if you're on your last life.

It's what I'd do if I were making a platformer. It's really easy to implement and levels the playing field a bit. Perhaps literally!

Re:Probably a good thing... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28388731)

Yeah, instead of leveling the playing field, they are "playing the level field." Get it? Because the game is playing. Haha. I'll be here all week.

Lego series works pretty well (1)

tjstork (137384) | more than 5 years ago | (#28387421)

I have to admit I like the way the Lego Indiana Jones series does it. You die, but, you immediately respawn fairly close to where you died.

"cheating" (4, Insightful)

Tom (822) | more than 5 years ago | (#28387423)

When I'm competing against other humans, "cheating" is an appropriate term.

In a single-player game, that I paid for, the interaction is between me and something owned by me. Its purpose is my entertainment. Challenge is part of that, but if I want to use an easy way, what could anyone possibly have against it? Seriously, that's like saying your favourite poet can only be read in candle light on a stormy night, because doing it any other way would ruin the atmosphere.

No, "cheating" does not describe this at all. There's no party that is being cheated on, after all.

Re:"cheating" (1)

tepples (727027) | more than 5 years ago | (#28387721)

When I'm competing against other humans, "cheating" is an appropriate term.

In a single-player game, that I paid for, the interaction is between me and something owned by me.

When you play offline but upload your score online, such as achievements in Xbox 360 games, the line between single-player and multiplayer becomes blurred.

Re:"cheating" (1)

Tom (822) | more than 5 years ago | (#28387823)

Which is an extremely easy to solve problem, especially when the cheat mode is official - just mark whether the score was reached with or without cheating, or even with how much cheating.

Re:"cheating" (3, Interesting)

bigstrat2003 (1058574) | more than 5 years ago | (#28388113)

In a single-player game, that I paid for, the interaction is between me and something owned by me. Its purpose is my entertainment. Challenge is part of that, but if I want to use an easy way, what could anyone possibly have against it?

I agree, but there are some jackass gamers out there who feel that the very presence of such a cheat option is something offensive and terrible. It's not enough to challenge themselves, they must force everyone else to take on the same challenge.

Then again, that's why those idiots have no friends.

Re:"cheating" (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28388439)

Agreed. Most of my friends approach cheating like it's a big ethical dilemma. I have never understood this view. If you pay for a game (even if you don't) you should be able to do whatever you want with it, as long as you don't gain an unfair advantage over other players during multiplayer play, that would be a little unethical. I personally don't have as much time as I did when I was younger to play games, and when I get the time I would like experience it without having to kill Boars in Elwynn Forest for 2 weeks.

I think Nintendo is doing something that should have been done a long time ago. I remember using Game Genie when I was younger to unlock those really cool abilities. Its not really going to change the amount of people who will use these cheats, just make it a little more convenient for them.

all seeing eye (1)

Ruede (824831) | more than 5 years ago | (#28387437)

instead of writing articles yahoo could push all seeing eye again.

Is the really that new? (1)

asdf7890 (1518587) | more than 5 years ago | (#28387445)

Is this really a completely new idea, or just an extension of what Valve games have done for ages?

In all the HL2 series (and maybe before that) you've been able to change the general difficulty between the three levels mid-game. I normally do fairly well on "normal" settings in games, but I did once find this feature useful (in HL2, the prison complex, I forget exactly where on the level) for getting past a frustrating point so I could stop banging my head against it and get on with enjoying the rest of the game. I imagine that people looking for a more-casual-but-not-always-set-to-too-easy experience would use the feature quite a bit.

What Nintendo are talking about here seems to me to just be going one step beyond this, changing the available levels from Hard/Normal/Easy to Hard/Normal/Easy/Autopilot. Nothing revolutionary.

Re:Is the really that new? (1)

Jarlsberg (643324) | more than 5 years ago | (#28387547)

You can take it too far as well. The new Prince of Persia is going too far, in that you really can't ever die, and that gets boring real fast. Pity, because the previous Prince of Persia games were rather good.

Re:Is the really that new? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28387783)

The new Prince of Persia was boring because it was too repetitive, not because you couldn't die. Although I loved this one (not as much as the previous ones, but still) there wasn't enough variety, everything was in the same scheme.

Depends on the implementation. (1)

Jartan (219704) | more than 5 years ago | (#28387493)

I think this could be used a lot differently than people are imagining. In just about any game with an "easy" mode it's already absurdly easy to play. The big problem as I see it though is there are probably a lot of people who can play on normal/hard who don't even bother. Past history has taught them that if they play on harder difficulties they'll eventually run into some nasty spot that was poorly designed and is so frustrating that they just want to quit. Thus a lot of people might choose more difficulty instead of less with this feature. Sure there will be people who just coast through the game with it but they were already doing that with easy mode anyways.

Desperately needed for puzzle games (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28387501)

I'm not a fan of puzzle games yet most games have puzzle aspects to them. One of the first ones to annoy me was Myst. I wanted to see the graphics but the constant puzzles quickly became annoying so never got far in the game. I got a little skill game for my iPod touch which technically wasn't a puzzle game but you had to accomplish certain things to access new areas. The problem with it was it wasn't all that clear what you had to accomplish and even after I had collected everything there was nothing indicating that I had finished the game. Poor instructions and puzzles in shooter games really can ruin an otherwise enjoyable game.

NOOOOOOOOOO!!!!! (1)

mcfatboy93 (1363705) | more than 5 years ago | (#28387593)

Nintendo why have you betrayed us, now really guys its just super mario there is no need for any cheats unless you "REALLY" suck.

Might be good (2, Interesting)

Ksempac (934247) | more than 5 years ago | (#28387613)

If this means game companies can stop worrying about frustrated casual gamers and start making their game harder and longer then I say "go for it".

I'm sick and tired of both the debilitating trend and shortening trend in the video game industry. I've got a friend which enjoys video game but isn't good at it and even him was disappointed that he finished Star Wars Force Unleashed in only 7 hours. I thought it couldn't be worse, but I've been proved wrong with a test I saw on the latest Terminator video game : apparently, you can finish it in 4 hours (and I'm not even talking about the price/hours ratio). Sure theses two games use well-known licenses, but this trend is occuring for almost every video game serie.

On the other hand, I'm currently playing Ninja Gaiden Black, which is reputed for its difficulty. I'm at the 2/3 point, it took me 30h to get there, and I've enjoyed every minute of it.

Re:Might be good (1)

ProppaT (557551) | more than 5 years ago | (#28388301)

I agree, if it keeps companies from watering down games, I'm all for it.

I think the better solution for this would be a "demo" mode that showed the player how to beat the stage and then let the player at it or an in game "ghost mode" that would show the player how to beat the stage as they play. Heck, even enabling something akin to the "rewind" in Braid or a retro NES "slow motion" mode might help alleviate some frustrations.

Games such as Mario Galaxy have proved that you can make games that appeal to casual players but have enough challenge to test avid gamers when you get into the weeds. This might help bridge the gap even more.

Re:Might be good (1)

Stormwatch (703920) | more than 5 years ago | (#28388423)

Short games are not necessarily bad; you can beat Strider [wikipedia.org] in 15 minutes (if you're good enough), and that's one of the best action games ever.

Re:Might be good (1)

effigiate (1057610) | more than 5 years ago | (#28388571)

Playtime has more to do with what you want out of the game than the "run through time". My first playthrough of Force Unleashed was on the hardest difficulty available with me looking for every item. I think it took me close to 30 hours to get through the game, and I consider myself a relativley seasoned and skilled gamer. You can beat Diablo in three minutes if you want (see the Speed Demo Archive), just because you played it that way doesn't mean everyone else has.

Thumbs up... for kids games (2, Insightful)

pinkushun (1467193) | more than 5 years ago | (#28387633)

But for the rest of us, temptation to try again and again (read:perfect the game) will feel crippled.

Well, they usually provided them anyway (1)

LarrySDonald (1172757) | more than 5 years ago | (#28387647)

I doubt all those "pause, up, down, left, x, down, right" cheats were exactly programming bugs.. All they're dropping is the pretense.

What's the need? (1)

Arakun (1444095) | more than 5 years ago | (#28387665)

I never beat most of the NES games I owned. The exception was the Super Mario games where you could skip most of the game by warping. Did this bother me? No. Did this frustrate me? Not much. I didn't have to beat them, I enjoyed just playing them. Sometimes I made it to a new area and I'd feel the adrenalin start flowing.
I don't get people playing through a computer game with an invincibility code - and doing it over and over. I'm no hardcore gamer (I'm on a Mac Mini dammit!), but I grew up with hard games and enjoyed the challenge. I also believe many of today's games are too easy with their infinite lives and checkpoints/respawn points once every minute. I don't get the same adrenaline kicks anymore since I don't need to be afraid of dying.

Two-fold situation. (1)

MrCrassic (994046) | more than 5 years ago | (#28387673)

I should disclose now that I'm not a very avid gamer. I play games pretty infrequently, but when I do, I like a challenge that gets me thinking. At least for me, games stimulate this by presenting difficult situations that requires strategy, thought and patience to get out of.

Thus, on one hand, incorporating this system will promote more "thoughtless" solutions in areas where the game is actually supposed to aid in developing the mental capacity of the gamer. However, it's not like this doesn't exist already, since game developers already incorporate various shortcuts to avert these scenarios. On the other hand, "fun" games aren't supposed to really stimulate too much thought on the gamer and are really supposed to just deliver a steady stream of "action."

In short, I really don't see this being a bad thing, especially considering that cheating is prevalent now.

Please stop bashing/praising the Wii. (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28387741)

I'm tired of geeks commenting on Wii, period. It's the new third pillar of pointless "discussion" alongside religion and politics.

Back in my day... (2, Interesting)

midifarm (666278) | more than 5 years ago | (#28387751)

I don't want to come across as an old codger, but cheat codes and the like have ruined gaming. Easter eggs and hidden levels are fun and add some dimension to the games. Cheat codes, continues and even the prospect of getting unlimited extra lives have taken game skill levels to a new low. If you have to cheat you obviously aren't good enough to win. Most of us who played years ago, beat the super hard levels, by A) having great skill at the game or B) got really lucky. Either one is fine with me, but entering in a cheat proves that you don't have either. I say remove the cheats, keep the Easter eggs and hidden stuff, increase the gameplay and quit making games disposable. It's cheaper to rent the game for 2 weeks from the video store, solve it and give it back than buying it. You're going to find the sales figures plummet for marginal games. There needs to be a change in the industry.

Re:Back in my day... (1)

ammit (1485755) | more than 5 years ago | (#28387947)

I agree entirely, but once I've completed a game on all modes I love to EARN the cheats - it kind of gives the game a new lease of life. Dont' get rid of them entirely, just don't make them public. That may have been what you were trying to say anyway.

Re:Back in my day... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28388105)

I don't want to come across as an old codger, but cheat codes and the like have ruined online gaming.

There, fixed that for you.

(or are you really saying that the fact that a game comes with cheat codes would ruin your entire gaming experience? If so, I think you could benefit from a bit of introspection).

Re:Back in my day... (3, Insightful)

bigstrat2003 (1058574) | more than 5 years ago | (#28388121)

If it ruins the game to use it, then don't use it. Problem solved. A cheat simply being there doesn't affect you in any way at all.

Re:Back in my day... (1)

midifarm (666278) | more than 5 years ago | (#28388361)

It minimizes the necessity for skill. "I beat that game" becomes a lie. You simply entered in a phrase or bunch of numbers which made you invincible or pass the level. How much fun is that?

Re:Back in my day... (1)

bigstrat2003 (1058574) | more than 5 years ago | (#28388521)

That's their problem, not yours. It's a single-player game: there's absolutely no reason to not let them play the game their way, while you play the game yours. Again, the cheat simply being there doesn't affect you if you choose not to use it.

Re:Back in my day... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28388229)

Only one thing to say to this:

Up Up Down Down Left Right Left Right B A Select (I had friends) Start

Don't tell me you never used that. You act like cheat codes are new, this one is over 20 years old. The fun part of these games was going through all the levels, not playing the same ones over and over again. And the fun of not dieing turned out to be more about keeping your power-ups as opposed to "can I do it with one life?"

Re:Back in my day... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28388329)

Cheat codes have been around for a long time. They are sometimes the only way to beat the more difficlt games. If you will recall games like Icari Warriors or Contra, you will remember that using the "abba" code or the 30 lives code was virtually the only way that the games could be enjoyed because of their difficulty level.

Game sales are not and have never been affected by the inclusion of cheat codes. I defy you to find a non-RPG game on the shelf that you can't rent for 2 weeks and solve.

How about the Jazz Jackrabbit approach? (1)

rickthewizkid (536429) | more than 5 years ago | (#28388511)

The first Jazz Jackrabbit had cheat codes, but, if you use them and complete the game, the game displayed picture of the main character playing poker with some of his enemies, one of them saying "I see yer cheatin!" or something like that... Kinda a cool when I saw it

Re:Back in my day... (1)

srothroc (733160) | more than 5 years ago | (#28388735)

The decline in difficulty is probably inversely proportional with the popularity of video games. Can you imagine a game like King's Quest V, renowned for its dead ends and incredibly hard puzzles, taking off in today's market? No, because people who play games aren't just fixated on mastering and beating a game, they just want something to do in their free time. Sure, there's a NICHE MARKET that enjoys that kind of thing, but it's just that -- a niche. If you don't like the "cheat" mode, then don't use it.

How about... (1)

midifarm (666278) | more than 5 years ago | (#28387791)

Separate endings for those that cheat and those that don't? So if a cheat is entered, a standard ending sequence is shown, but if you make it to the end without cheating a super fantastic ending sequence is granted.

Yes and No... mostly No. (1)

ammit (1485755) | more than 5 years ago | (#28387881)

As someone who takes gaming pretty seriously I'd say NO on a massive scale because hours of frustration and then finally achieving your goal is what I play for!! Unfortunately there are too many "easy" games out there - as soon as the PS2 came out Tomb Raider went downhill in favour of graphics. No also because games aren't entirely a waste of time, they develop hand eye co-ordination and logic skills (at least this is how I justify hours and hours of button bashing), taking challenges away will MAKE it a waste of time (just my view). Yes ONLY for small children and maybe people with learning disabilities - this kind of function could help them to develop by doing the easy things first and then introducing harder parts of the game in later..... Just my two pence.

Umm, what about prior art? (1)

Biswalt (1273170) | more than 5 years ago | (#28387989)

No way this can stand up, it's actually in other games all ready. You can play a whole game of Blitz II: The League and never call a play yourself, never snap that ball, etc. and the computer will take care of everything for you, but you still have the ability to jump in and actually take control over a guy at anytime. In Madden all you have to do is call plays and snap the ball, and the game plays itself. Space Channel 5 has the same thing, as does I'm guessing a host of other games. And then there's the whole issue of what it means for the computer to play a game. If I create a gang in San Andreas I could then just march over to another gangs real estate and my CPU controlled gangbangers will take care of the fighting and I can sit around, so while my CJ doesn't do anything all of the CPU controlled gang members will fight so that's an example of a game playing itself. To me Nintendo should lose the ability to patent this based ona prior art argument. This is like when microsoft patented the page up and page down buttons, even though there's verifiable proof that other companies had this tech b4 micrsoft.

whatever it is ... (1)

Bobtree (105901) | more than 5 years ago | (#28388009)

It isn't gameplay (or otherwise useful to the gameplay). Thus I'm not interested in paying for it.

Developers should remember that their audience is game buyers. I don't know about you, but I buy games to PLAY them.

Cheats should just be a proper menu item anyway. And sections of games should be openly accessible, so stuck players can just skip to them.

I belive the correct answer is... (1)

Warshadow (132109) | more than 5 years ago | (#28388093)

who cares? If you don't want to use it then don't. It's not like the fact that some 10 year old kid next door or 3000 miles away uses "demo mode" actually impacts you in any way.

Logical Progression (1)

tezza (539307) | more than 5 years ago | (#28388169)

* Lives

* Power Pills

* Health Points

* Stealth Suits

* Respawn Points

* Save Games

* Freeze / Rewind Time

All of these give an edge to the poor slob on the couch who only has reflexes in tens of milliseconds. I cannot see how making an actual explicit mode is dissimilar to any of these.

What about an SDK (1)

Demonantis (1340557) | more than 5 years ago | (#28388175)

I like PC games that release an SDK since that allows you modify the game heavily to your liking. They should really get something going with the console games to do this. It makes games way more enjoyable for a longer time. The "demo mod" is like a patch on this issue. People could easily do the same kind of thing with an SDK.

They're copying Braid (1)

bluefoxlucid (723572) | more than 5 years ago | (#28388287)

and poorly. Braid lets you rewind time, and correct your mistakes. Sometimes you have to think about what you're doing to actually utilize this (for example, some things don't rewind). There's a level of thought put into it; I think this is correct, giving an easy way around if you can solve a small problem that requires some insight. Like sequence breaking in Metroid.

eXplore mode in Nethack (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28388413)

Nethack has an eXplore mode for less experienced players to see what is available in the game.

It does have downsides, giving an easy god-mode. You miss out on essential experiences that give you the knowledge and skill required to win at a game.

Because of the eXplore mode, it took me a long time to figure out just how essential a ring of free action was for ascending in Nethack. It also took a long time before I found out how useful the Oracle was in the game.

The Game Genie (2, Interesting)

Dusthead Jr. (937949) | more than 5 years ago | (#28388445)

When we first got the NES SMB was the only game we played for it for a while. So with all the frustration of playing the damned game we did eventually beat it. And that was that. The we got a Game Genie and played it again but we kicked the games ass. In a game where getting touched once or twice by any enemy kills you It felt good to get a permanent invincibility and plow through the game. That's how I uses cheating now days, beat the game at least once, then cheat. I extends the life of the game IMHO.

I don't know...Eg: Street Fighter 4 (read) (2, Interesting)

emanem (1356033) | more than 5 years ago | (#28388455)

Hi all...

I don't know if it's ok or not...but I think if it's needed then a game is not well balanced (against CPU I mean, not the game itself).
For example, if you play in the easiest mode at SF4 the final boss is able to destroy you anyway, while in all the other enounters the opponents are really...easy.
Now, I think that SF4 is a great game, well balanced etc etc. Really I stopped WoW to play SF4 PvP.
But as a single player game the fact the last boss is very hard even in easiest mode is a bit depressing, considering the quality of the game itself.
But to be 100% honest there could be a reason for that...in order to unlock all the characters you have to defeat the final boss some times straight without losing a game...so CAPCOM knew that everyone would play the game at easiest mode just to unlock all 25 characters...so basically this could be seen as a possible motivation to implement this hard boss as the fact everyone will face him at easiest mode...but still I don't like this.

I'm against demo mode but in favour of balanced games.
Cheers,

Er, what? (1)

brunes69 (86786) | more than 5 years ago | (#28388637)

They patented the Konami Code ?

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>