View Single Post

Default 

April 16th, 2010, 16:41
Originally Posted by holeraw View Post
OK consider this: You've got a game were there is a fight with a monster that the developer has 'envisioned' to be hard enough to take you half an hour, about four or five reloads and a dozen or so curses towards him and him family to beat it. Now say that I'm pretty bad at it but I am heavily invested, as you said, so I persist. Eventually it takes me two hours, twenty reloads and two broken keyboards to beat it - 3 times more than the dev intended - the intended pacing is ruined and therefore the vision is compromised…

Allowing me to reduce difficulty at that point is as I see it the best way to maintain that vision. To generalize: games are by definition an interactive medium, and as such, for a creator's vision to be successfully communicated, it is essential to take the particularities of his potential audience into account, more so than in any other non-interactive medium (otherwise the result will be what the art connoisseurs very colorfully refer to as 'masturbation')

Of course one could argue that if I'm so bad at it I should simply stop playing… but why? does that game has something to offer that I shouldn't (or wouldn't be able) to receive unless I was skilled enough to play through it? There might be such games - Wizardry 4 comes to mind, which I have not played, among other reasons because it was obviously a game intended exclusively for the series' most dedicated fans and noone else was going to 'get it' even if they somehow cheated their way through.
Yeah, you got my point with that last paragraph.

But it helps if you don't think in rigid terms trying to make what I'm saying impossible.

It's not about fights taking an exact amount of time - but more about the overall challenge level of the game.

If the game requires a certain pacing - which I don't really think is needed in so rigid terms, then they need to have tools available if they want to please those without "skill".

But again, you need to stop playing if the game isn't "for you" - and that's what I think is exactly the right approach from the point of view of the developers. FAR too much effort is spent trying to make everyone happy - and that's EXACTLY the problem.

Though, once again, it's not going to happen - because they WANT to please people so they can maximise profit.
DArtagnan is offline

DArtagnan

DArtagnan's Avatar
Waste of potential

#24

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Denmark
Posts: 13,047