Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

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!

Just Let Me Play!

Zonk posted more than 8 years ago | from the it's-not-that-hard dept.

633

Gamers with Jobs complains today about the thick layers of 'work' many games put between you and the fun nowadays. Instead of having 'secret areas' or 'unlockable modes,' he argues we should just be able to play the game we purchased. From the article: "I play games to escape. To go somewhere else. But our industry has so ingrained this concept of 'earning' our fun that the best is somehow always saved for last. Like modern day Puritans, we've convinced ourselves that we are not worthy of that for which we've already paid. Sinners in the hands of an angry god, we don't deserve our fun until we pay in blood."

cancel ×

633 comments

hmm (2, Insightful)

ezwip (974076) | more than 8 years ago | (#15483481)

I like that games have alot of things that can be unlocked but I don't like the secret codes and such that nobody in their right mind is going to stumble across by chance.

Yeah... (1)

revlayle (964221) | more than 8 years ago | (#15483485)

... because the without ALL the content unlocked immediately, games are just dull and boring and no fun to play *geeez*

Re:Yeah... (5, Insightful)

ackthpt (218170) | more than 8 years ago | (#15483628)

... because the without ALL the content unlocked immediately, games are just dull and boring and no fun to play *geeez*

Nah, that's when you've hacked into the code and disabled things or given yourself invulnerability or great wealth and then the whole thing gets dull.

The entertainment of a game is its challenge to achieve success. Too easy and it's dull, too hard and you give up, inexplicable (i.e. just when you thought you made it the rules change) and you beat your head against a table.

The ideal is to find a game you really like and stick with it, rather than whatever piece of crap is fashionable among the sheep these days. Amazing how many people I see playing board games, now. Check out the Empire Builder series from Mayfair, great stuff.

Re:Yeah... (2, Interesting)

revlayle (964221) | more than 8 years ago | (#15483658)

apparently, i TOTALLY suck with sarcasm on slashdot

i just hate using " ;) " all the time, however

I don't waste time complaining about games. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15483486)

I just play them and have fun.

But wait (5, Insightful)

iknowcss (937215) | more than 8 years ago | (#15483487)

Wouldn't the fact that you don't have it all make you crave that next level or secret area all the more? Then you would spend more and more time playing and playing, working to get that last bit of pleasure. Much more enjoyable that a game that's real cool that gets old a couple of days later. I think the work makes games worth more because then you really want to play it.

Re:But wait (5, Insightful)

SoCalChris (573049) | more than 8 years ago | (#15483534)

The problem is that once you get older, and start having more of a full life, you just don't have the time to play a game for several hours, trying to unlock certain things.

I've had several racing games that won't allow me to drive certain cars until I do something that requires more free time than I have. Every time I've played a game like that, I usually end up shelving it after a few days, because I just don't have the time to put into unlocking anything, and playing the game with just the basic level cars gets boring real fast.

When it comes down to spending time with the kids, working, spending time with the wife, and playing games, the playing games is always going to come in last.

At least give us the option of allowing things to be unlocked without having to spend hours doing it...

Re:But wait (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15483555)

When it comes down to spending time with the kids, working, spending time with the wife, and playing games, the playing games is always going to come in last.
Your wife reads Slashdot, huh? I feel for you man, I do.

Re:But wait (5, Funny)

zippthorne (748122) | more than 8 years ago | (#15483661)

Obviously not, look at the man's priorities again:

1) spending time with the kids
2) working
3) spending time with the wife
4) playing games

I suppose she should be happy she beat out "playing games."

Re:But wait (1)

spun (1352) | more than 8 years ago | (#15483537)

You beat me to the punch. It is the careful metering out of stimulus/reward that makes games addictive. But there are many kinds of players, some want that, others want to play in an open ended sandbox mode, others just want to win as quickly as possible.

Re:But wait (1)

Golias (176380) | more than 8 years ago | (#15483646)

You know what, instead of trying to carefully craft games which lock me into conditioned response patterns via addiction, how about if game designers focused on making games which are actually enjoyable to play? That would be awesome.

If I want to be trained via stimulus/reward, I can hire a dominatrix. Some of them are probably more affordable than the PS3 will be.

Re:But wait (1)

EEBaum (520514) | more than 8 years ago | (#15483728)

The problem is not with games that have cool stuff you have to unlock. Rather, it's with games that have cool stuff that takes a crapload of busywork before you can unlock it.

For example, I dropped Need for Speed: Hot Pursuit 2 after about two days, partially because the gameplay sucked, but also partially because there were only a small handful of tracks available. Further tracks had to be "bought" with a certain amount of points, points that could only be earned by playing a LOT of races on the tracks you already have.

If the game has a worthwhile journey, I don't have a problem with some held-back rewards. If the entire gameplay experience, though, is focused on "this is boring now but wait til later," it really sucks, and, unfortunately, there are a lot of games out there like that.

Games with no unlockables suck (2, Insightful)

Zarxrax (652423) | more than 8 years ago | (#15483490)

I personally love games that force you to work to unlock stuff. This adds replay value to the game, which makes me feel like I am getting my moneys worth. I mean what if you buy a new game for $50, and everything is right there on the table immediately, and you go through it all in 10 hours. I would certainly feel ripped off! However, that same game, if it requires me to meet certain requirements in order to unlock extra stuff, I'm going to keep playing, and get 20 or 30 hours of playtime out of it, if not more. I'm certainly not going to feel like the game was such a rip-off now.

Re:Games with no unlockables suck (4, Insightful)

Jason1729 (561790) | more than 8 years ago | (#15483525)

How about when you go back to the old game 5 years later and have lost all your save data for it? Still want to have to put in 500 hours to unlock your favorite part again?

Why should you be forced to play the same boring content over and over just to get to the content you do want?

Re:Games with no unlockables suck (1)

atarione (601740) | more than 8 years ago | (#15483717)

that's what "cheat codes" are for.

Re:Games with no unlockables suck (2, Insightful)

AceCaseOR (594637) | more than 8 years ago | (#15483536)

I enjoy unlocking stuff, providing the unlocking process is fun. Problably one of the games which I find is really good at this is the WWE Smackdown series (especially Smackdown vs. Raw 2006). You want to unlock Jimmy Hart as a manager? Just win 10 matches as a created guy. You want to unlock the Wrestlemania 21 arena, beat all the Easy challenges (which are, with the exception of eliminating 10 guys from the Royal Rumble, pretty easy), and it lets you carry out the challenges with a second player as well, to make some of the more difficult processes easier.

Complete disagreement (5, Insightful)

AuMatar (183847) | more than 8 years ago | (#15483541)

If a games replay value is based on making me do pointles shit to unlock special modes/levels/characters, I'm being ripped off. I'd rather the game honestly report it only has 10 hours of playtime, and have the devs work on the next game. I don't find going back through the levbels to collect all the coins, or visit every corner of the map fun. I find it mind numbing and tedious. And then I get annoyed that there's content I paid for that I can't access, not because my skill is too low but because the devs are making me do meaningless shit to reach it. I refuse to ever buy any game which features unlockables. They're a scourge on the industry and need to be destroyed.

Re:Complete disagreement (2, Insightful)

Zarxrax (652423) | more than 8 years ago | (#15483631)

There is a thing for people like you called a gameshark (they do still make those, dont they?). I don't buy a game just to unlock the big freakin gun and then watch the ending. I buy a game to PLAY the game.

Re:Complete disagreement (4, Interesting)

AuMatar (183847) | more than 8 years ago | (#15483694)

There's a difference between playing a game and being forced to do stuff over and over. Take a racing game- I shouldn't have to beat tracks 1-3 with a speed record to be able to use car X- I should be able to use it from the get go. There might be a reason to keep it locked until you beat level 3 in a career mode with a storyline, but not in any of the other modes. Unlockables aren't about playing the game, its about making it a Skinner box so they can claim they offer X hours of gameplay when they really offer 1/3 or 1/4 of that. I want games to be honest about it, and just go on to make another game I might buy. I have better things to do in my life than unlock things, and if I have to unlock something to enjoy it my money is going to a company that doesn't make me jump through hoops.

Re:Games with no unlockables suck (1)

Frogbert (589961) | more than 8 years ago | (#15483564)

That is exactly right. Take Mortal Kombat, those games are fun but I'd lose interest eventually if it wasn't for the massive amount of unlockable content and hidden areas. I love getting a mortal kombat game and knowing that what I can play now is just the tip of the iceburg.

Re:Games with no unlockables suck (3, Interesting)

Temsi (452609) | more than 8 years ago | (#15483637)

I disagree.
I buy a car game because they have screenshots and demos of a supercharged Camaro that sounds great and runs great. When I come home, I start the game, only to find out I have to spend the next 3 evenings working my way up, driving POS cars like a Ford Fiesta or a Honda, before I can touch the cars that made me want to get the game in the first place. By that time, the game has already gotten monotonous and in some cases outright boring.
I get car games to drive cool cars. I've had enough experience with POS cars in real life, thank you. I don't need to do it when I want to "escape".
Let me play the game with what sold me on the idea in the first place. Don't hold it over my head. Don't use it as a carrot to get me to stay playing something I don't really like that much, just to get to the part I want.
The good thing about car games, is that they have a much longer lifespan than games that have storylines. For example, I'm still playing an old PC game called 1nsane, but Indigo Prophecy I only played once and I have no desire to play it again. So the cheap game with lots of playability has gotten hundreds if not thousands of hours of playtime from me, while the story driven game that probably cost 100 times as much, only managed 20 or so hours of play... because it was linear.
I'll take a non-linear game over a linear one any day and twice on Sunday - because a non-linear actually CAN be played twice.

Re:Games with no unlockables suck (2, Insightful)

Zarxrax (652423) | more than 8 years ago | (#15483735)

I suppose we just play games for different reasons then. When I buy a racing game, I honestly don't give a damn whether it lets you drive a Camero or a cardbord box. I just want to race. Whatever they do to prolong my racing experience, that is what I consider value, because that is what I'm playing the game for.

Re:Games with no unlockables suck (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15483741)

Supercharged Camaro that runs great and sounds great? Snort! Ooh, look how fast I can go in a straight line.

But what about the 'games' we play at work? (3, Funny)

Flimzy (657419) | more than 8 years ago | (#15483491)

My biggest problem is that my boss makes me play too many games before I get to accomplish any real work. I'm trying to earn an honest day's pay for an honest day's work... But all I get to do is waste time playing games!

Re:But what about the 'games' we play at work? (1)

GrumblyStuff (870046) | more than 8 years ago | (#15483689)

I assume the difficulty or, perhaps, tediousness of these 'games' you speak of are related to your nickname?

Too true (1)

scythe000 (564836) | more than 8 years ago | (#15483492)

I certainly agree. I am a very busy guy, what with a wife, school and work. I want to be able to sit down and pla ywhat I payed for, not spend hours re-playing the same levels to be able to get bonus items and the such. Luckily, I have seen some games that will let you set 'unlockability' to off, and give you all the goods upfront. Stepmania comes to mind.

Don't forget to read the whole article. (4, Funny)

ScentCone (795499) | more than 8 years ago | (#15483498)

In a moment of weakness, I nearly caught myself enjoying the author's point right away, in the first couple of paragraphs. But I was raised to put that off and read the whole thing first. It builds character. Delayed gratification, people!

Bad attitude (2, Insightful)

Umbral Blot (737704) | more than 8 years ago | (#15483499)

Instead of obsessing about how unlockable features prevents you from having you your fun try thinking of them as spreading the fun over a longer period of time. If a game gave you everything at the start once you got bored with the game that would be it. However with unlockable content you still have new things to do even after you have begun to exhaust the possibilities of the game play provided at the beginning. So instead of buying a game that gives you 30 hours of fun you have bought a game that gives you 50 hours of fun. I would call that a good thing.

Re:Bad attitude (5, Insightful)

Abcd1234 (188840) | more than 8 years ago | (#15483524)

Or, put another way: our games are so crappy that they have no replay value, so instead, we'll add "unlockable content", so that you're forced through various hoops in order to get at additional material, thus artificially extending the life of the game. Great. Or not.

Re:Bad attitude (1)

Umbral Blot (737704) | more than 8 years ago | (#15483549)

It's better than nothing, so I'll take what I can get.

Re:Bad attitude (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15483569)

Great. Or not.

Especially when the content gets harder and harder to unlock. I think that if you're going to have cool shit, you should at least provide an alternate method to unlock the stuff. Take the dreamcast Soul Calibur game, I was decent at it, but not awesome. But I could still unlock all the artwork by playing the parts I was good at. If it had required that I beat every single mode on every single difficulty level, I'd have given up.

Gamecube Ikaruga's like that too, except that I just suck at the game, and the new modes opened by sucking at the game for hours and hours aren't all that much better ;)

Re:Bad attitude (2, Informative)

MarcoAtWork (28889) | more than 8 years ago | (#15483585)

you are contradicting yourself

If a game gave you everything at the start once you got bored with the game that would be it.

as opposed to a game with unlockables where I have to subject myself to doing things I don't like (and being bored) to access more of the content I already paid for? Hello? This is a game, it's supposed to be entertainment, I already have a day job, and the last thing I want is having to be made to "work" when all I want is sit on the couch and relax for a bit with some mindless entertainment: the developer already got my money out when I bought the game, if they make it hard for me to enjoy it, I for sure won't be buying any more games from them...

Re:Bad attitude (1)

Scrameustache (459504) | more than 8 years ago | (#15483644)

try thinking of them as spreading the fun over a longer period of time.

Yeah, that'll make the tediousness enjoyable!
Also, when it's cold out, don't put on a sweater, try to think about hawaii, that'll warm you up!

Re:Bad attitude (1)

Umbral Blot (737704) | more than 8 years ago | (#15483663)

Let me put it another way: would you rather have an RPG that started you out at max level with all your gear, or is it more fun to work for it?

Re:Bad attitude (1)

Guitarzan (57028) | more than 8 years ago | (#15483705)

If you're asking if I could create lvl 60 WoW characters instead of spending tons of time grinding them out, the answer is a resounding "Yes."

Granted, WoW is a timesink in and of itself, but I'd rather waste my time in the parts of the game I find fun.

Re:Bad attitude (1)

AuMatar (183847) | more than 8 years ago | (#15483730)

I'd LOVE an RPG like that. Especially an MMORPG. I actually designed one on paper- no levels, no skills, the best weapon in game was only about 5% better than the starter weapon (although it owuld have a coller graphic, for those who are into that). Take out the boring parts entirely. Unfortunately I don't have 5-6 years to spend writing it.

IAWTP (4, Interesting)

ankarbass (882629) | more than 8 years ago | (#15483500)

I would play more games if they had a "on screen megahints and never never die" mode for crappy gamers such as myself. Hardcore gamers could leave it turned off if they wanted the "fun" of finding that crap by themselves. I just want to shoot stuff.

*burp*

Play Defender! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15483502)

So you should forget the glitzy 3D graphics that have been plaguing our screens since the mid 1980s (in the arcade and more recently on the PC) and go back to the roots, the games that defined playability because all they could offer was good sound, OK graphics and great gameplay. Williams
had it in Defender, Stargate and Robotron. Mr Do's Castle also featured "intelligent" orcs that would chase you. Pacman was also awesome (and yes I could get to and complete the last maze). A few good games, not many, but very very good games. On the C64, Jeff Minter (a chap I once used to meet on a infrequent basis) wrote awesome games, Sheep in Space being the best in my opinion.

Such a shame that modern games are not like this.

Re:Play Defender! (1)

mgabrys_sf (951552) | more than 8 years ago | (#15483613)

And you walked 18 miles in the snow to get to school and liked it.

Boy - once these gamers get their AARP cards - they can get quite annoying.

I own 3 vintage arcade games but that doesn't preclude or deny the existance of fun games now.
Games with "tutorials" that I can't skip can be annoying, but Katamari's is fairly short thank goodness.

Go back to my roots? What am I - a plant? Do my fernlike appendages amuse you?

Replay value (1)

rramdin (857005) | more than 8 years ago | (#15483505)

I have found that the most long term addictive games are the extremely simple, hack-and-slash games (like Diablo II or Halo). Games that are overly complex often have very little replay value, and I hate learning lots of different games, so I prefer games that have a lot of playability in the long term (I usually like games that can be played online for the same reason).

Re:Replay value (2, Interesting)

mqduck (232646) | more than 8 years ago | (#15483712)

I have found that the most long term addictive games are the extremely simple, hack-and-slash games (like Diablo II or Halo). Games that are overly complex often have very little replay value, and I hate learning lots of different games, so I prefer games that have a lot of playability in the long term (I usually like games that can be played online for the same reason).

I find the opposite. Compex games make you want to replay from the beginning to try it a different way. It usually makes the story interesting enough to want to replay/watch it. I've played Deus Ex a million times.

Re:Replay value (1)

mrbcs (737902) | more than 8 years ago | (#15483734)

My fav games are BZFlag and Rise of Nations. Easy to learn, no hoops to jump through. I've been playing both of these for years. (Age of Empires, same thing as RON) I also only play those linear games once. Once is enough... cheat codes (I'm a lousy gamer) walkthrough manual.. I don't really like those that much. Age could be a factor too.. Mid 40's ... no patience or time anymore.

Re:Replay value (1)

AuMatar (183847) | more than 8 years ago | (#15483749)

I find the other type of game with huge replay value is turn based strategies. I play Civ 4 more than any other game right now. I can play at my own pace and at high difficulties its still challenging. ANd it didn't need to put unlockables in there for my replay value- I didn't have to beat it with Incans before moving on to Rome. Its just that simple- good gameplay=replay value. Unlockables=you failed to make a good game and try to hack something on it.

This is why the Wii will win (1)

WillAffleckUW (858324) | more than 8 years ago | (#15483508)

Because of the low barrier to entry in most of the games they've announced for it - most can be just played without tons of training.

xBox360 has gone the other way - most games mean you have to be a "real gamer" and focus hours.

Now, there are crossplatform games, but that's the short version.

I predict they'll change in a few years, once they see the vast untapped markets. Economics always wins.

Solution (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15483514)

1. Get a copy of Heroes of Might and Magic 2. It comes with a level editor.
2. Make a new map. Place gold on every square of the map (except the one where your hero starts of course).
3. Walk around and collect all the gold.
4. Feel good.

Re:Solution (1)

servognome (738846) | more than 8 years ago | (#15483685)

Too much work... just play Progress Quest [progressquest.com]

This guy is completely correct. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15483515)

This is what is destroying most modern games. Mindless repetitive exercize.

Ever play "Soul Calibur 3"? What about "Dynasty Warriors"? This syndrome makes these games horrible.

In Soul Calibur 3 I actually have to go out and battle for an hour so I can equip my custom character with a cloth cap or normal pants. This alone made me put down the game.

Re:This guy is completely correct. (1)

ackthpt (218170) | more than 8 years ago | (#15483652)

This is what is destroying most modern games. Mindless repetitive exercize.

I always loved the discovery of the unknown in games, like back when I played Empire on a PC (the game with little (a)rmies, (t)roop transports, etc.) and you didn't know what you were going to find as you explored. Another fun game was Seven Cities of Gold. When I was into mudding it was finding all the cool loot and exploring new areas. When it came to leveling for the sake of leveling it lost it's appeal.

zero to playing (1)

colmore (56499) | more than 8 years ago | (#15483522)

quick turn on your favorite game from 2006 and your favorite game from 1996 and your favorite game from 1986. how long does it take to get from power on to running around the first level and not being in a "tutorial" or cutscene. the giant and very profitable hardcore gaming fanbase is killing gaming for everyone else. for all the attention the growth of the gaming industry has gotten, the games themselves had more mass-market appeal 10 and 20 years ago.

Re:zero to playing (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15483699)

how long does it take to get from power on to running around the first level and not being in a "tutorial" or cutscene. the giant and very profitable hardcore gaming fanbase is killing gaming for everyone else.


I fail to see how either of these two sentences relate to one-another. The amount of time that it takes me to power on and start playing Oblivion is a few minutes (because Windows 2000 and the game itself take a bit of time to load). The amount of time that it took me to power on my Commodore 64 and load a game was a few minutes. But loadtimes are not at all related to whether or not there exists a "hardcore gaming fanbase", or whether such fans actually are "killing" the game for "everyone else", like you suggest. In fact, having a "tutorial" or a cutscene also aren't related to a game's "hardcore" nature, or whether the game has a "hardcore gaming fanbase". (Some very casually-oriented games, like KOTOR2, have cutscenes and tutorials.)

In short, I'm not at all sure what you're trying to argue. That's pretty impressive!

Damn right... (1)

MosesJones (55544) | more than 8 years ago | (#15483523)

This is why I play with the cheats on. I work hard for a living and I play to relax, the last thing I want is a game where I have to concentrate for hours and worry about tiny details and collecting millions of keys. In simple terms

1) If its a shoot-em-up I want heavy artillery
2) If its a military game I want to get to the fighting bits quickly
3) If its a strategy game I want to be able to decide that I want to skip a bit

Does this "ruin" the fun for me? Hell no, because I play games to relax not to demonstrate my intelligence or for a challenge, I have a full-time job and kids that are more than enough.

Best game ever is "State of Emergency" with all the cheats on, there is nothing more relaxing than running round a shopping mall beating people to death with someone elses bloody arm, then using rockets to see how many things you can blow up.

The only games where cheating doesn't matter is in the sports games, because if you want a challenge you put it on the hard level, if you want to destroy the computer team you put it on easy.

Re:Damn right... (2, Funny)

Anne_Nonymous (313852) | more than 8 years ago | (#15483601)

>> there is nothing more relaxing than running round a shopping mall beating people to death with someone elses bloody arm, then using rockets to see how many things you can blow up.

Jack? Jack Thompson? Is that you?

Yeesh... (1)

GrumblyStuff (870046) | more than 8 years ago | (#15483642)

Just watch a movie. For many games, the end is just a let down whereas the trip there is incredible and worth playing again and again (see Thief, System Shock, & Deus Ex among many, many others).

If all you want to do is run around in god mode with all the weapons, what's the point? You blow shit up, move along, skip cutscenes, move along, blow shit up, and BAM hope you enjoyed spending $40-60 for a new game that you breezed through.

All fun and no work... (5, Insightful)

XenoRyet (824514) | more than 8 years ago | (#15483529)

It's a fairly straightforward idea that a payoff with no work is not as compelling as a payoff that you've worked for. Anyone who's ever used a cheat code should know that.

If you don't have to "work" for the fun, the fun won't be as good.

Re:All fun and no work... (1)

Shadow Wrought (586631) | more than 8 years ago | (#15483570)

Which is true and there's a lot of fun to be had working through it. The point though is for a lot of gamers, there are only an hour or so a day that the games can actually be played. If you have to play 10 hours to get something "good" then its simply not worth it.

I think at least in part that that's why the EA sports line does so well. Put it in and you can play. If you want your own franchise, and cheats, and all that stuff you can get it, too, or you can just start playing.

Re:All fun and no work... (2, Insightful)

AuMatar (183847) | more than 8 years ago | (#15483609)

No its not. The amount of enjoyment I get from something isn't directly proportional to the amount of work I put into it. If anything, I find its inversely proportional- the more work I put into something, the less enjoyment I get out of it. If something takes a lot of effort to achieve, I find myself looking at the effort I took and realising there's so many better things I could have done with my time. Take WoW- I found more enjoyment hitting level 10 than 60. It was low effort, so it was still fun. WHen I hit 60, I wasn't enjoying it- I had better things to do with my time (I just needed that last level for PvP).

If I want to work, I'll go do something worthwhile- go to my real job, volunteer for a charity, etc. When I game I don't want to expend effort, and I sure as hell don't want a time sink.

Re:All fun and no work... (1)

raitchison (734047) | more than 8 years ago | (#15483614)

Eh, I tend to avoid cheats (codes, whatever) until I've beaten/completed the game, after that I turn on unlimited money, god mode, whatever and then replay it again.

There are of course some eceptions to this, such as Gran Turismo license tests, after unsuccessfully attempting to pass a single test (out of more than 50) for more than 5 hours I got a game shark. It was either that or chuck the game in the trash as I could pass no further without completing the next license.

my thoughts exactly! (2, Interesting)

MyDixieWrecked (548719) | more than 8 years ago | (#15483530)

That's why I'm such a big fan of Nintendo. They seem to follow that philosophy. They make games that you can just pick up and play. and play you do.

Although, I was a little disappointed when I just beat the New Super Mario Brothers for my DS. It took me 3 days of playing on the subways and trains and the only thing I really unlocked in the end was luigi.

I was kinda hoping to unlock something really spectacular. The minigames were the same as Mario64DS, and when I found a hut where there was something I could buy for a whopping 20 star coins, I was hoping it would be some new gamestyle or perhaps SMB1 in its entirety, but instead it was just new wallpapers for the touchscreen.

although I haven't managed to get to 3 of the worlds, so I"m working on that. perhaps I'll take a look at gameFAQs... no. scratch that. I wanna figure it out myself. it's more fun that way.

AMEN! (1)

Dios (83038) | more than 8 years ago | (#15483531)

Thank goodness someone said something! I'm tired of cames with 50 button combos, complex controls, blah blah blah. I want to be able to finish the game simply while having fun. If I enjoyed the game then I will learn all the extras. Don't waste my time, I want to have fun and not feel stressed/turned off by all the crap I have to learn just to play.

Catch 22 (4, Interesting)

Wind_Walker (83965) | more than 8 years ago | (#15483538)

Too many "unlockables" and it's work. No "unlockables" and it's 30 minutes of gameplay. There's a balance. I've recently bought Guitar Hero and Battlefield 2, and it's a nice contrast.

Guitar Hero does it pretty well, but they still make you play through the Career mode to open the basic playlist. So if I want to show a friend how cool Guitar Hero is and the full song list, I have to bring my memory card as well - otherwise he gets the first 5 songs and that's it. But the gameplay is fantastic and highly addictive.

Battlefield 2 is good with unlockables. All classes are available at the start and you can gradually unlock more weapons for those classes, which are generally minor upgrades over the stock weapons. The gameplay suffers from the same problems as other online-only games - namely cheaters and the "Internet Fuckwad" theory.

There's definately a balance, so hopefully there's not a new wave of games with no unlockables - they're fun and add a good deal of playtime to otherwise straightforward games.

Re:Catch 22 (1)

Amouth (879122) | more than 8 years ago | (#15483711)

I love playing bf2 but it has issues with the unlocks.. i am a good player but i am not the best.

sure all the basic weapons are available at the start and the first couple of unlocks are easy to get but then they jump from 8000 points to 20000 points.. i am sorry i have had the game almost a year now and i have just over 5000 points because well i have about 60 hours of play time total (between work and wife i don't have much time)

the fact that you can't test the weapons befor you use the unlock annoys me.. and the fact that for the people that have purchased BF2:SF they get extra unlock options that they can use aginst me - something i don't have the option for because i didn't pay for it.. the sad part is my game could do it because if i kill them and take their kit, there i am holding a gun that doesn't exist in my game - if i pay for the game and it has the content i should have the option to use it.. i should have to have 1000's of points and 100's of hours of play time of the same thing over and over to get access to it.. it is one thing if you get an unlock for getting a kill with each type of gun or something like that but the fact that to get all the normal weapons unlocked you need something like 50000 points and a bunch of badges (which they havn't officaly released what is required to get them - bf2s.com has some info) is well.. damn annoying

Re:Catch 22 (2, Interesting)

Threni (635302) | more than 8 years ago | (#15483723)

> Battlefield 2 is good with unlockables. All classes are available at the start and you can
> gradually unlock more weapons for those classes, which are generally minor upgrades over the stock
> weapons.

If you've just recently played it then you probably don't know that it was a patch released in the last few months which majorly increased the speed and ease with which you can unlock weapons. It was much harder before then.

> The gameplay suffers from the same problems as other online-only games - namely cheaters
> and the "Internet Fuckwad" theory.

Yeah, you're right there. There were three things that killed it for me (I was in a clan once and played daily, but haven't touched it for months now). One was the cheating, and the fact that Punkbuster is just a piece of shit that has plenty of downsides and no upside. One was the boring maps - after a few weeks you know which levels you like (in my case the city ones - a popular choice, apparantly, as I certainly never saw any `chinese/oil refinery only` servers). But finally was the shoddy way EA treats its customers. You're expected to pay for packs which add a few levels, and which should be free (in the opinion of most of the people I played with). They kept promising updates from BV and 1942, but all we got was some lame jap island which only satisfied jet pilots. After a while you get tired of subsidising (via paying for a server) cheats, idiots and teamkillers and hoping you'll have enough people playing to make it fun.

This Is SiN... (1)

creimer (824291) | more than 8 years ago | (#15483546)

The one feature I liked about SiN: Emergence when I went back to replay the game on the hardest difficulty setting was a feature to skip all cutscenes. Instead of being bored to death to get from the intro beginning into the game action, I was dropped right into the action. That was cool. Although the hardest difficulty makes it more easier to be killed by my own stupidity than by the AI. Anyone else noticed this SiNful behavior?

World of Warcraft (1)

DeadPrez (129998) | more than 8 years ago | (#15483547)

I belong to a guild that is linked in my post. They play World of Warcraft and I do not. I used to in the beta and early into release. Now however the only way to compete is to do these 40 person raids, which take hours and hours where one person can screw the entire raid up. The loot from each successful raid is bickered over. Every guild has their own system of loot distribution but there is no completely equitable solution. There isn't even an equitable way to determine who gets into a raid. People who are less active are often discriminated against in both of these areas.

In other words, you need to deal with 39 other idiots. You have to put in hours and hours worth of time in hopes a random item will drop that helps you, then you have to hope you recieve said item. Its totally ridiculous and lacks any element of fun.

No big deal I suppose, seeing how I don't play it or pay for it. But the problem is, this is the future of MMORPGs. You can't just login for arbitrary lengths of time and pickup right where you left off. Its a 2nd (or 3rd) job these days to play MMORPGs because it is much more profitable to design games these ways. /i'm going to go 'cry more, noob' now

Re:World of Warcraft (1)

Il128 (467312) | more than 8 years ago | (#15483625)

You need to try Guild Wars... Seriously, the put off with Guild Wars for most MMORPG people is their lack of understanding the punishement format in GW. The format is graded and you are not beaten like a dog for failure when you're level 10, that comes later on at level 20. ;^) No the game is not easy and it isn't over in a week... Most people think the "learn how play" part of the game is the entire game, it isn't. Plus you don't need to spend your life online to have fun. Guild Wars takes time to learn and time to understand, try it for a month and you'll see.

The games are Skinner Boxes. (1)

Il128 (467312) | more than 8 years ago | (#15483550)

Reward, reward, reward, punishment, reward, punishment, punishment, punishment, reward, reward, rinse repeat... People can't get enough of this stuff, they love it and some even get addicted to the constant rewards and end up destroying their lives over their precious Skinner Box. Precious, my precious! Smeagol needs his precious! Smeagol must have his precious! Middle Earth Online, why no it isn't addictive at all.

Silly Dog... (1)

ackthpt (218170) | more than 8 years ago | (#15483553)


When the bell rings do you salivate?

How many sites and magazines are there, all gushing at the wonders of the next treadmill you will:

  • Pay intial cost for (buy)
  • Possibly subscribe to (rent)
  • Never see one cent of return on (unless you sell something you acquired on eBay)
  • Spend large swathes of your life on, which you will never have back
  • Piss and moan to any authority (or even just vent on a blog somewhere) about how something is just not fair
All for what? Seriously, I thought gamblers were obsessed, but video game addicts take the cake.

Me? I play a simple shareware game and an online version of Settlers of Catan when I must, but both are there just to fill the cracks of time between more important things.

Sorry if I sound like your mom or dad, but that's how it really is.

Re:Silly Dog... (1)

tcc3 (958644) | more than 8 years ago | (#15483718)

I suppose you dont watch tv. Or go to the movies. Or spend time with friends. or play a board game with the kids.

What, every second of your life isnt consumed producing something useful?

I definitely agree with this... (1)

MarcoAtWork (28889) | more than 8 years ago | (#15483554)

I beat my controller against the wall for a few weeks in f-zero GX trying to unlock the "extra" AX cup (the one you have to beat every other cup on master for) and trying to pass the 3rd mission in story mode (the one after the boulders, which took me ages to pass as well) and ended just giving up and shelving the game, I mean, cmon, I want to have some fun and be able to see all of the content I paid for (esp. the AX cup).

If you're going to make the game that impossible at least put in some cheats to unlock things when the user gets stuck. As things stand now I for sure won't be buy any other game made by that developer... I even passed on buying the last super monkey ball because I heard you have to beat quite a bit of the single player to unlock the multiplayer party mini-games (main reason why I'd buy it).

Re:I definitely agree with this... (1)

zippthorne (748122) | more than 8 years ago | (#15483634)

Have hope. WoW, and maybe a couple games after it will be like that. But I bet the new paradigm will be fast on the uptake once people start to realize what's happening.

At least, I hope they will. Either that or that they forget to vote.

skills (2, Interesting)

hackwrench (573697) | more than 8 years ago | (#15483700)

In those cases it would also be nice for the game to assess your weakness and indicate a mini game to improve that skill. Maybe you're taking the corners too tightly or breaking or accelerating at the wrong times or your timing is off in some other way. Games don't do enough awareness of your strengths and weakness and help you work on your weaknesses.

Don't know about this... (2, Insightful)

mattwarden (699984) | more than 8 years ago | (#15483556)

Everyone's entitled to their opinion, but I think this is rubbish. Work is a four-letter word (especially around here), but the truth is that people don't enjoy things they don't have to work at. Entertainment is no exception. Even movies... anyone who truly enjoys movies would hate a movie that didn't require at least a little bit of thought. I personally don't enjoy a movie unless I have to see it a couple times in order to catch everything (you know, like Enough and Break Up).

Take the work out of games, and all you have is 10 minutes of running from start to finish. How's that supposed to stroke anyone's ego?

Spoken by someone who doesn't work for a living (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15483645)

Really now? Ten minutes till the end? You have to =work= for your entertainment?

WHY DO YOU THINK I HAVE A FREAKING JOB?? Man you're an idiot. I work 40 hours or more, I come home, I have a little free time for a change, I don't want to WORK at a GAME I just bought with the hard earned money from my full time job, no I want to have FUN! I want to relax! I already did my work and earned my fun time.

Sheesh

And saying the game will then be over in 10 minutes? Hey, here's an idea: MORE CONTENT!!

Double Sheesh

You obviously do not have enough stress in your life. Go get married, have some kids and get a second job.

WTF (2, Insightful)

Turn-X Alphonse (789240) | more than 8 years ago | (#15483560)

Is the author like 12?

I WANT EVERYTHING AND I WANT IT NOW! GIMME GIMME GIMME!!

Unlockables are ment to give you an extra way to enjoy the game. Something fun to extend it after you've already finished the main game. If you want everything handed to you on the plate right at the start of the game then you're not the type of person these features are aimed at.

Unlockables are aimed at people who want to get a perfect rank in every level, who wants to finish the game only using the basic weapon and who wants to try playing HL2 through with just a crowbar and a rocket launcher. If you're not this crowd then you have to accept that some parts of the games might not be to your taste.

It has its merits (1)

stpk4 (906462) | more than 8 years ago | (#15483572)

Games that have everything unlocked is kinda like coke, big rush at the start when u get overwhelemed with everything but then the crash when you realise thats all the games has to offer. Games with things locked have a constant stream of excitement, because you are never sure of when you have unlocked everything, how many times have u unlocked something and thought, cool, much more stuff is there and checked gamefaqs? Soul calibur 3 is a nice example, making players work for bonuses and hidden chars is a nice touch, forces players to master the game through repetition bringing up the overall level of gameplay in the market. A bad example would be, Capcom Vs SNK and anything that forces players to earn points to unlock things in a shop. The payout rate was WAAAAAY to low for that game, unlocking the 3 hidden chars and Ex modes for everyone took forever, I think capcom realised this and stopped using this formula, At least were making progress.

Maybe its just the author? (1)

Goronmon (652094) | more than 8 years ago | (#15483578)

Let's face it, a lot of games suck. I buy the game. I play it for an hour or two. I see the pretty. I hear the boom. I go "cool" at the twist or the plot or the theme that made me want to buy it in the first place. Then back it goes into the GameSpot "used" bin.

Maybe its more about the author's attitude toward gaming in general than the fact that there is something wrong with "unlocking" new content. If the game is good enough, then the unlockables are just bonuses that boost the game to an even higher status...if the game isn't that good, I doubt making the would-be unlockable content readily available is going to make it any better or more fun.

We NEED levels! (4, Interesting)

adamofgreyskull (640712) | more than 8 years ago | (#15483580)

I remember back when I were a wee nipper. I'd say, "Just one more level mum!" and she'd begrudgingly say..."Ohh, okay...". He cites GTA. How do you think she would have reacted had I said, "Awww...can't I just whack one more skank mum!?" or "Can't I just waste 10 more cacodemons??".

"Level" is a nice, conservative, bland word, it evokes no emotion. As soon as you start having to explain your progression through a game in terms of what you're actually doing...well then the ESRB win don't they, and your dirty little secret is out.

Heh. (2, Interesting)

ZorbaTHut (126196) | more than 8 years ago | (#15483588)

This demonstrates brilliantly that most people don't actually know what they want.

Games could include everything from step 1. But then there's no sense of accomplishment. There's no sense of "oh man, I'm about to unlock/progress/complete". It's just a bunch of puzzles that you can ignore if you like. I've seen games released like this. They're not fun. Nobody plays them.

Even the games he mentioned - Battlefield 2 and GTA - have a sense of progression. In Battlefield 2 you can get better at the game and better at defeating people - since it's competitive, this drive is a lot stronger than in singleplayer games. Not only that, but the game *does* let you unlock "new weapons" if you play enough. In GTA, completing missions occasionally unlocks new cars and abilities. In the latest GTA there's even "skill levels" that you gain through repeating actions!

If he wants everything to be accessible, he should look for cheat codes or trainers. They exist for practically every game out there. But he'll be bored.

New? (1)

smclean (521851) | more than 8 years ago | (#15483590)

Is this really so new? 'Super Mario Brothers' didn't have a skip-all-levels-and-go-straight-to-bowser option. 'Pitfall' didn't have a .... OK, nevermind 'Pitfall'. But seriously, games are all about challenges. If you want to cheat, that's what they make cheat codes for.

Re:Mario (1)

hackwrench (573697) | more than 8 years ago | (#15483739)

I seem to remember warp pipes. Also there was the Star Road in Super Mario World. Oh and Bowser's backdoor. In Mario 64 you have a choice of which stars to get in order to get to Koopa, though there is a small bonus of meeting Yoshi and getting a ton of lives that are absolutely pointless at that point.

see the end? (1)

icepick72 (834363) | more than 8 years ago | (#15483597)

The article is comparing video games to the knowns of a paper book for crying out loud. Umm..... different medium folks. Stick to books if that is more comfy, or maybe hit a hybrid mode with e-paper ... best (or worst) of both worlds depending on your comfort level.

Game is a piece of art (1)

Romwell (873455) | more than 8 years ago | (#15483602)

The author compares a game with a book, and I kind of agree with it. There's no reason to prevent you from 'skipping pages' in a game. But also often there's no reason to skip pages, in real books as well. I could never understand people who would read the ending of the detective story first; I always read the books linearly and consequtively because, in my opinion, this way was originally intended by the author and will allow me to appreciate the piece of art as a whole thing better. But even though I read a book linearly, I wouldn't like to buy a book that will actually block certain chapters unless I read certain pages. That sounds like "If you don't eat yer meat, you can't have any pudding. How can you have any pudding if you don't eat yer meat?" and I totally don't want that (even though I do eat meat before pudding :) ) (BTW, my parents NEVER told me that :) )

Deal with it/do something else (2, Insightful)

Draconnery (897781) | more than 8 years ago | (#15483611)

I have no pity for this poor overworked dude. You don't like the games you buy? Don't buy them. You don't have 5 whole hours for a game? Why didn't you rent it to begin with - that would have been much more reasonable, given the timeline your attention span allows.

Some people are really into hidden/locked content, medals, accolades, and the like. Some people like having visible goals and accomplishing something through their efforts - people who spend time and unlock stuff can really get a kick out of having more available than those who don't put in that same time.

If this guy has really run into this a lot of times, maybe his problem is that he doesn't have enough time for any given game; I know there are lots of games out there, so I can choose to get a few games a year and get really into those, or wear myself out on every game by playing every one that comes out. I'm not complaining that I don't have time to pick up those other games, I just find some that I actually like, and get what I want out of those.

I'll buy what I like, this guy should buy what he really likes, and the companies will probably make games in such a way that they get paid.

Jumpers For Goalposts (5, Funny)

pandrijeczko (588093) | more than 8 years ago | (#15483615)

Remember, as a kid, you used to go to the park with your mates for a game of football (soccer to you Yanks). The two best footballers in the group would be the team "captains" and the rest of you would stand in line as the two captains picked their players, one-by-one and alternately, from the lines of kids. Invariably, being slightly rotund and crap at football, I was one of the last kids to be picked, usually after the 4-stone one-legged kid with asthma. However, being crap at football, my true mates sometimes let me take a penalty, just so I could go home and boast to my parents how I'd scored a goal. And sometimes, if I missed the goal from the penalty, my mates would say "Never mind, have another go", put the ball back on the penalty spot and move one of the jumpers to make the goal a bit wider so there was no chance of me *not* scoring. (Of course, by this stage we were 15-0 down so my single goal had no effect on the overall game result).

Step forward a quarter of a century and I still play computer games but being middle-aged, my reflexes are much slower. My 14 year old nephew can sit in front of his Playstation for hours, trying and re-trying one tiny part of a particular game until he succeeds at it. But me, on my Gamecube, within 5 minutes I've lost patience re-trying a specific bit and have a need to empty my shrivelled bladder or polish my walking stick.

Therefore, rather than a full "cheat" of invulnerability or "every weapon with maximum clips", I've often thought how nice it would be just to have an option of switching in a "jumpers for goal-posts" mode. You start the game by inputting your age and then, at certain points, the game is able to "nudge" you through a difficult bit because it's seen you've had 59 goes at it and that your grip is tightening on the controller as you lose patience (and possibly bladder control).

For example, in Metroid Prime:

"Player 1, you have now had 324 attempts at rolling Samus Aran into a ball & trying to jump through that little hole that's 4 foot off the ground... here's a miraculous gust of wind that coincidentally lifts you off the ground and carries you gracefully through the hole. Now please save the game and re-dress those bunions on your feet."

Restrictions and constraints (1)

w33t (978574) | more than 8 years ago | (#15483616)

Games need to have less rules and more possibilities. This sounds simple to accomplish, but it seeminly is not.

An example: I began playing star wars galaxies when it was first released. It was lauded as having the most expansive character/class system of any mmo to date. I took this to mean that the advancement would be unique.

I began as a gunsmith, and I decided that I wanted to make the finest pistols in the empire - so that's what I spent my time doing; making pistols. I made pistol after pistol, but the pistols weren't getting any better.

I found out that I needed to make rifles and carbines as well if I wanted to advance in level, and that making rifles and carbines would make my pistols better???

I guess that makes sense, but as I climbed in level I realised that there was no way to become the bona-fide pistol expert in the game. Once you got to master level it was just about the materials you used to make your guns. Given identical materials all master gunsmiths would make the same weapons.

To me it always seemed that it would have been cooler that if I spent more time on a particular task that my character become better at that task. That I would be able to make the better item with lesser materials.

I enjoy Second Life for it's realm of possibilities - but it's still not really a pick-it-up-and-play kind of game.

If only there were a combination of the MMO universe and play style married to the sandbox type ideal of a Second Life type game.
--
Music should be free - mine is [w33t.com]

Yeah, right. (1)

advance512 (730411) | more than 8 years ago | (#15483627)

If all areas were easily accessible, then the game would've been deemed as "too easy" and "not worthy".

If no extra content is accessible by some sort of nutty action, like the stuff done in Final Fantasy to destroy the Ultima Weapons, then the real game freaks won't enjoy the game. Some people love immersing themselves in the game so much trying to play it "perfectly", that they'd be sorely disappointed if this "perfect game" is easily achieved.

This also makes games much more replayable. You almost never see all the content.

Plus, as a game developer, it sure is fun adding secret areas and easter eggs... almost as much fun as discovering them on your own.

Do compute value, multiply or divide by time? (2, Insightful)

kisrael (134664) | more than 8 years ago | (#15483629)

Here's a way of thinking about the question:
If a game takes more time, does that decrease the "dollar per hour" ratio, so it's a good thing?

Or does it raise the cost, because cost is a function of money AND time?

I'm in the latter camp. I buy a game mostly to use a new bit of interaction. Having additional time that isn't matched by additional novel interaction just cranks the cost up. Novel interaction can be control modes, missions, weapons, enemies, but it has to be something, and it has to be diverse enough that it feels novel, not "this mission the guard is around the SECOND corner"

And I have more free cash than free time in general. People the other way 'round, like students or the unemployed, probably have an opposite opinion.

not for you. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15483636)

Perhaps video games are NOT for the author -- I suspect that he'd be more content reading a book than playing a game.

The author, for example, suggests that he would like to "meet the Grey Fox" (in Oblivion) without investing "hours and hours of time". The problem, however, is that Oblivion, like many games, are fundamentally crafted around logical steps. You can't meet the Grey Fox because he won't reveal himself to you until you've proven your worth in the Thieve's guild -- this is not at all an unrealistic expectation, I think. In an FPS, you can't go and kill the "pretty monster of death" in level 13 because you are very likely trapped in a maze/tunnel/dungeon/etc., and have to work your way out first. Perhaps the author is suggesting that the story shouldn't place you in the maze in the first place, and rather plunk you in a gigantic room with all of the bad-guys ... but were that the case, I have a hard time imagining how fun it would be to play a game where all monsters are available from the get-go.

The author's suggestion (that these games give you the ability to fast-forward content) is already implemented in most games -- they're called "cheat codes". Such codes are usually posted on slimy websites that advertise bad porn and free virus-laden warez. And those websites usually are that way for a reason -- because most people think that they ruin the game. (Well, that, and they're run by pimply-faced teens with little sense of good UI design.)

I'd suggest the author go buy a book. I've heard that "Choose Your Own Adventures" are coming back, and may be more to his liking.

Fine line (4, Interesting)

Dark Paladin (116525) | more than 8 years ago | (#15483639)

I can understand his frustration - there have been games that I've never completed just because of the time and energy commitment to them.

On the other hand, no challenge is usually no fun (see the complaints about "Kingdom Hearts 2" being too easy).

So it's the balance that's the issue. Probably the best game that gets that "right" was "Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time". Challenging, but never felt impossible, plenty of side quests (mask trading, finding all of the golden spider-things, racing, etc) - but I never felt like I *had* to do the side quests to win - they were a truly added bonus.

Too often, though, these "side quests" becomes necessary to beat the game it seems. I don't want to spend hours level grinding - I want to *play*, so if you have "extras" that I can work for - fine. Just don't *make* me do them if I don't want to.

Kind of like watching "The Matrix". If I do my homework about mythology and the Bible, I'll get more out of it - but I shouldn't need a seminary degree just to enjoy the movie.

this is what children are for (2, Funny)

McDrewbie (530348) | more than 8 years ago | (#15483654)

This is what having children is for. By the time your life is too busy you don't have the time to play and unlock the hidden content yourself you should have a 7 year old that can do it for you. Or if you don't have children, there are probably some in the neighborhood that will do it on the cheap.

More skill, better stuff (1)

tcc3 (958644) | more than 8 years ago | (#15483671)

Often times unlockables are for your own good. Take Project Gotham 2. The last unlock is the TVR Speed 12 Cerbera. Its insanely fast, but difficult to drive. By the time you earn the Speed 12 you have the skill necessary to tame that automotive beast. Lots of modders cheated to get that car, any everyone knew it. How? They couldnt keep it on the track...

Damn Straight (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15483674)

GTA developers take heed: stupid fucking helicopter flying levels where you have to play for like 45 minutes without a single tiny mistake using the worlds suckiest controls to even make it sucks copious amounts of donkey balls.

I disagree with TFA (1)

mincognito (839071) | more than 8 years ago | (#15483681)

Good games always require work. To really escape from life you need to be entirely caught-up in a difficult challenge. The challenges need to as hard as those in life except in a game you know there is a definite solution. The game must actually involve suffering if it is to be compelling. The biological reason for the escape games provide is to build confidence that carries into 'real' life. Animals play for the same reason. If you want your escape from life to be easy and relaxing, just turn on your television. Just don't expect that to build you any character.

Marathon (1)

bidule (173941) | more than 8 years ago | (#15483684)


I played Marathon (and its sequels) for years. And my favorite weapon was the fist. If I had the instant gratification of having any übergun from the get-go. I'd never have gotten good enough to use my fists and would have stopped playing it. Lets face it: invincible is dull.

Progression (1)

C_Insano (888612) | more than 8 years ago | (#15483691)

With many games, this unlocking of content is the only way to "beat" the game.

For instance, with racing games, what do you do if all the tracks and cars are unlocked? The hidden content is the goal.

Now, the problem in this specific example, is if you buy the racing game only to play with your buddies. Yes, it'd be nice if all the tracks and cars are unlocked, as this provides more diversity in your matches.

However, with MMOs, yes, there can be a huge amount of "work" involved in these. The hard part (I can imagine) for developers, is judging of whether the player feels like they're just merely working, or that they've gained a sense of accomplishment (and hence had fun). There's a very fine line there, and some games get it right and some don't.

Say NO to save points! (1)

Spy der Mann (805235) | more than 8 years ago | (#15483692)

I absolutely hate the idea of having save points. A particular game that annoys me is DragonQuest VIII for the PS2. If by some reason someone in the family requires my help, or an unexpected appointment appears, I can't just leave the playstation turned on. I have to turn it off, throwing away those 30 minutes of hard work. No, I'd have to waste a precious item that costs me goldpoints, go to the nearest city, run for about a minute to find a church, get the priest, press OK...

Instead of just pressing start and "save". I liked the games that offered a "quick save".
People with jobs don't have time to go finding save points. I would like to play the game for about 10 or 15 minutes, save, and keep doing my stuff.

PLEASE, GAME PUBLISHERS, KILL THE SAVE POINTS!

Goal Setting and Goal Getting (1)

decipher_saint (72686) | more than 8 years ago | (#15483724)

If you have a game with unlockables that are fun to get you will spend the time to get them (I'm thinking of the Burnout series but there are others).

Zelda and Tiger (1)

eemerton (980318) | more than 8 years ago | (#15483742)

This is an issue I remember dealing with back when I bought Nintendo's "Zelda: Link's Awakening" for the Game Boy. I remember running around collecting those stupid shells because I was promised something special if I got them all. Well, I got them all... at the very end of the game. What was my prize? A sword that shoots when Link's power was full. You know, that cool "special" weapon you got the moment you picked up your first sword in the original Zelda? Also, my wife and I play Tiger Woods golf and I was excited to buy 2006 for the 360. We turned it on and could only play one course. I had to go to IGN to find stupid cheats so I could unlock the courses I paid for just so my wife and I could play the stupid game.

When real life gets in the way... (1)

Camaro (13996) | more than 8 years ago | (#15483744)

I have a family that needs my attention most of the time. I have a wife, a 3-1/2 year old boy and one-year-old twin boys so I rarely get a chance to play my games. Maybe I get to play once every week or two, usually not for more than an hour. I recently purchased GT Legends (a racing game) and found that most of it required unlocking. With my schedule of play by the time I unlocked all the cars and tracks...well, I actually probably would have given up before I got that far. If you don't get enough time to learn tracks and setups for the cars to be fast enough to place well, you won't unlock anything. So I found a cheat online and now I can race whatever car I want at whatever track I want. I still suck, but it's better than being stuck with the Mini Cooper on some dinky track forever.

Depends upon the genre (1)

ScrewMaster (602015) | more than 8 years ago | (#15483747)

In the past, I played a lot of Duke Nukem, Shadow Warrior, Redneck Rampage and Blood (all Build Engine games) because they were pure escapism. And the only way I found them interesting enough to continue playing was on a LAN against my friends. In that context, the game simply provides an alternate universe where it is perfectly acceptable to volatilize your fellow players and blow things to bits. Pure escapism, and if that's what you're looking for, the game's design should effortlessly support that without requiring the players to solve too many puzzles or "earn points".

Ultimate, it comes down to what kind of reward you are looking to get from a video game. If a fragfest is your idea of a good time, a game that expects you to spend days or weeks building up your "online presence" will not suit you. Fortunately, there are enough different types of game products out there that there is something for everyone. Some people (actually, a lot of people) are into the types of games that the submitter was complaining about. I'm not one of them (I much prefer a rousing game of Duke or Half-Life on my network, hearing someone across the room go "Ahhhhhhhhhhhh SHIT!!!" when that long-range RPG shot takes him out) but, you know, different strokes for different folks.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

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>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...