View Single Post

Default 

December 27th, 2012, 18:35
Originally Posted by zahratustra View Post
Insight? This guy quite obviously doesn't understand what Fluent and Mr Smiley are saying. I will type in upper case so you guys can read it better: THEY DON'T ASK FOR A GAME TO BE MADE EASIER BUT THEY DO ASK FOR AN EASY MODE. YOUR EXPERIENCE OF THE GAME WILL NOT BE AFFECTED BUT THEIR WILL BE ENCHANCED. Capisci?
I'll tell you what zahratustra, you go back and read the thread. Catch yourself up. Make sure you know what the discussion is about. Then you can come back and dazzle us with your wisdom, m'kay?


As for the ongoing discussion between people who know what the discussion is actually about, I think there are really two divergent points here:

1. Whether or not a game should be tightly designed for a core experience.

2. Whether or not you can add a half-ass easy mode while maintaining the design for the normal (challenge-seeking) audience.

It doesn't seem like the central argument is about 1 anymore. You guys seem to accept the fact that this is a difficult game made for those who want that.

The problem is that 2 is actually a less coherent argument than 1.

See, once you add an Easy mode you can do one of two things: a. Maintain your tight design philosophy, but just double the workload by doing twice over with two different targets of difficulty. b. Half-ass either the new Easy mode or the original Difficult approach.

You all seem to be mixing together these two -very- different outcomes. In outcome a., you're asking for a game developer to create two games, which is nearly insane but which is at least coherent. In outcome b., you're saying you want the developer to open up its game.. by creating a half-assed experience? I mean, how does that open up the game to anyone? How does it do anything except shit all over the tight, core design that we all supposedly want?

On top of this, how would this expand the market? You seem to be saying that, if they only make an Easy mode, it will double the market over night. However, when the mode designed to double the market is half-assed, I'm not exactly sure how that's supposed to work. I love multiplayer, but that doesn't mean I love half-assed multiplayer shoved in a game in the last minute to check a box on the cover.

Of course, b. could just as easily mean that the original challenging experience is the one that gets half-assed. Which is the reasonable result of trying to change or expand your audience. It's also what the people who LOVE these games are so terribly afraid of.

I mean, you can't have your cake and eat it too. Either the developer has to use double the resources, which won't happen, or they have to half-ass one of the two core experiences. You all argue they'd half-ass the Easy experience, but that makes absolutely no sense if you're also arguing that they need to embrace an expanded or different audience. It also makes no sense from an economic standpoint, as why chase an audience just to give them a half-assed game experience?

I guess they could also 3/4ths ass both game experiences, but that still does damage to the original fans while offering the "new" audience a less-than-stellar experience. Lose lose lose.
killias2 is offline

killias2

killias2's Avatar
Sentinel

#93

Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 356