Quote:Also, super guides aren't lazy, it requires additional coding

what? this isn't even remotely a point
you clearly don't get what i mean. i'm saying its lazy because its an easy way out on the developers end - if they wanted to make a way for the game to "hand-hold" the player through a tough part of the game, then they should devise a better system to do that that flows with the game as designed. progressive difficulty and whatever that entails (alterable level design; hints - maybe a slightly less cryptic version of what shadow of the colossus does*) or whatever, it doesn't particularly matter. Within seconds of thinking about the matter you can come up with a better way of fixing the problem that a super guide is often turned too to fix (games being inaccessible).

*after a little bit of fighting a colossus, if no real progress is made, the voice of dormin will boom overhead and give you a hint as to what you must do. it flows with the game as previously defined and makes sense within the context.

Quote:And like I said, if you think a super guide will automatically make a game badly designed (which is what everybody continues to imply blindly)

not actually what i said! i said it represents a failing of the developer to come up with something better, in the cases that it isnt just a bandaid for other broken mechanics.

(06-06-2011, 11:44 PM)Gnostic WetFart Wrote: if they wanted to make a way for the game to "hand-hold" the player through a tough part of the game, then they should devise a better system to do that that flows with the game as designed.

Why is the Super Guide "bad?" You keep saying there should be a better system, but what's wrong with the Super Guide? You get stuck, you get the game to guide you to what you're actually supposed to do. Then you do it! You don't have to watch the guide play the level for you, you can stop the guide at any time. It's still the basic system of getting hints-- you just get however many hints you need, or want. If you don't want hints? Don't use the Super Guide. Need a tiny hint? Use the Super Guide until you see the part that you were stuck at. Then stop using it.

What is the big deal? It's practically the same thing as a hint system/progressive difficulty system, it just allows you to explore as much help as you need for the level before you try it yourself.

And there's nothing stopping a developer from adding some sort of penalty system for using a Super Guide-esque feature.

If developers use it as an easy way out, that is, once again, the developer's fault, not the mechanic. The Super Guide is not flawed-- it is the execution that is flawed if the developer doesn't use it in a "proper" way.

Quote:If developers use it as an easy way out, that is, once again, the developer's fault, not the mechanic.

i think there has been some kind of miscommunication here. i've been saying just as much: in the context of the developer willingly using it as an easy way, it is indicative of the developer being a bad developer. what you're missing is the broader point i'm addressing.

Quote:Why is the Super Guide "bad?"

i said alluded to this already: because it doesn't flow with the game as designed. even its simple presence as an option (this can be seen in dkcr) breaks this flow. feasibly, it could, but if one were to put in the effort to do that then it just stands to reason they should just go all the way and devise a system that doesn't awkwardly exist to promote laziness, to promote an experience so utterly passive it becomes totally meaningless. it isn't a good way to achieve the intended result.

Quote:And there's nothing stopping a developer from adding some sort of penalty system for using a Super Guide-esque feature.

no, there isn't, but at a certain point doesn't that start defeating the intended point to begin with? if the point of a super guide is to make a game more accessible, adding a penalty is just going to make that feature less accessible to those who genuinely need the help - and in turn, decrease the accessibility of the game as a whole.

Well it's probably because it's not just telling/ showing you what to do, it's doing it for you.

Some Super Guides take control of your guy and beat a level for you, that's a bit different from looking up the answer or watching someone do it. Its more like asking your older sibling to help you beat it. Which I was always against anyway.

(06-07-2011, 12:00 AM)Koopaul Wrote: Some Super Guides take control of your guy and beat a level for you, that's a bit different from looking up the answer or watching someone do it.

Then don't use it. God forbid. It's an optional feature.

The only difference between physically guided hints and text hints is that physical hints actually show you the action that you have to perform, whereas hints tell you. And that's barely enough of a difference to turn this into an argument. In the case of a game literally "playing a level for you," it depends on the game and its theme.

Quote:no, there isn't, but at a certain point doesn't that start defeating the intended point to begin with? if the point of a super guide is to make a game more accessible, adding a penalty is just going to make that feature less accessible to those who genuinely need the help - and in turn, decrease the accessibility of the game.

Not if the penalty is properly done. A point removal, or even a system that gives you bonus points for not using the guide feature. Or hell, if it's a life-based game, just use up a life. Chances are if it's a life-based game, you're probably going to lose more lives trying to figure out your way across than you are using one life to get a guide.


Or just not use it if you don't like the completely optional and unrequired mechanic.


"Super guides" are not going to infect video games, and chances are the game is probably more geared towards children, anyway. And games that use super guides are so far and few in between that I don't see any sort of reason for this to be argued as some sort of cancerous feature.

See what I said before:

Quote:The problem I see there is that the Super Guide could be used by the developers as an acceptable excuse for lazy design in the future; "if you think this is completely counterintuitive then, well, we put a guide in." And of course the critics and journalists will all be using the Super Guide whenever they get stuck anyway (they have dozens of games to go through, and they need to "finish" as much of each as possible in a very limited timespan to write a review), so they probably won't tell us anything. (Not that they would anyway, in an industry where paid critics are expected to give fair reviews of the same games that are advertised on their websites, from the same publishers the websites keep hounding for exclusive scoops, but still.)

To elaborate more: yes, people who use the Super Guide as an excuse to be lazy are bad designers. No one is disputing that now. No one is disputing that people can play games whichever way they want to either. What's at stake is whether or not a new batch of gamers will notice any lazy design the developers of Super Guide games put in if they themselves are raised on a generation of said Super Guide games. (The Super Guide and features like it will most likely become more and more popular as time goes on, thanks to the increased revenue games with the feature will recieve due to "accessibility," so this discussion is not just limited in scope to just OoT3D and NSMBWii.) The next batch of gamers will be the ones who grow up to be future game critics and designers as well. In the worst case game criticism becomes even worse since the job of professional critics right now is to basically go through a huge amount of games in a very limited timespan and write necessarily basic reviews about them. With a Super Guide they now don't even have to play the games, they can just watch them and pretend to comment about the mechanics. Game design also suffers since a generation raised on Super Guide games might not know any better than to put extremely unfair or unbalanced sections and excuse it with the guide feature. Yes this is all worst case but I still see it is a possibility.

A lesser thing also at stake is how a new batch of gamers raised on Super Guide games will view past generations. Suddenly Super Mario 64 becomes a game for hardened veterans of the next age.

Quote: Or hell, if it's a life-based game, just use up a life.

this is probably one of the worst ways they could possibly implement a punishment
geez, tyvon

Quote:Or just not use it if you don't like the completely optional and unrequired mechanic.

the fact that its optional doesn't in any way "fix" the problem it still represents
by all means, it should be a given that any comparable systems would be optional or not automatically a part of the games intended path

so thats kind of a meaningless statement

Three games in 3 years by the same company on 2 different consoles = a generation?

Okay.

Quote:Three games in 3 years by the same company on 3 different consoles = a generation?

it is kind of an amusing exaggeration
i mean, the effects he's describing if that were the case are kind of accurate, its just a matter of his argument requiring quite the leap of faith to be applicable as-is.

i don't think the point people are making (caruso anyway) has anything to do with him or any of us using it personally, but rather the idea that a super guide will likely be seen as a necessary feature in the future and therefore people who grow up with it won't be accustomed to games without it

imagine a future where people can't play a game like donkey kong country anymore because it was too difficult to beat a certain level and there was no super guide to do it for them when they lost a hundred times; this is obviously worst case scenario, and it likely won't be to this extreme, but i could see a LOT of games from older eras be considered unplayable by the new audience who simply have too much trouble with a certain part and won't bother to try to beat it due to the impatience possibly caused by the super guide

i mean shit, we're all talking about how it's optional and we won't use it, but in the future people who don't use it could be seen as a minority if the practice really catches on


now obviously we're looking ahead here, and the immediate effects of super guide aren't nearly as severe. the only effect i was complaining about is that navi bombards you with requests to watch a hint movie every ten seconds apparently, which takes you out of the atmosphere of the game AND is annoying for people who are trying to figure it out for themselves - it has nothing to do with how optional it is, it has to do with the game requesting that you use it over and over (which admittedly, is NOT a problem in most games with super guide, but from the early shit about oot3d ive heard, it is a problem here)

(06-07-2011, 12:24 AM)Glukom Wrote: a super guide will likely be seen as a necessary feature in the future

Because 3 games by the same company in the span of 3 years used it, one of them being a remake of a 10+ year old game?

Good joke.

(06-07-2011, 12:22 AM)Alpha Six Wrote: Three games in 3 years by the same company on 2 different consoles = a generation?

Okay.

Not talking in the short term. A "generation" was probably the wrong term to use, it will likely take longer than that. Obviously we aren't seeing a huge deluge of Super Guide games or games with similar features right now. I believe we probably will be in the future though, to the point where it becomes widespread practice. The reason is that more "accessibility" = more revenue. This has been recognized by the industry for years by now.

It's probably a slippery slope argument but it's not like I or anyone else can establish the chain of events leading to the future without actually being there -- all we can do is make predictions and then see if those predictions turn out to be valid. If we're not going to talk about how it might affect games in the future and it might become widespread because it's a slippery slope then there's no real point in having this discussion since I already conceded that it doesn't matter so much for OoT3D, NSMBWii, or L.A. Noire.

EDIT:

Quote:imagine a future where people can't play a game like donkey kong country anymore because it was too difficult to beat a certain level and there was no super guide to do it for them when they lost a hundred times; this is obviously worst case scenario, and it likely won't be to this extreme, but i could see a LOT of games from older eras be considered unplayable by the new audience who simply have too much trouble with a certain part and won't bother to try to beat it due to the impatience possibly caused by the super guide

This really make me wonder if the guys on BBSes in the 90s were having similar discussions about arcade games or early console games or whatever. Hm.

Quote:Because 3 games by the same company in the span of 3 years used it, one of them being a remake of a 10+ year old game?

Good joke.

way to post the same thing you already posted

you're ignoring the fact that its speculative, that its probably; possibly; likely. they are not saying this will absolutely be the case

Quote:It's probably a slippery slope argument but it's not like I or anyone else can establish the chain of events leading to the future without actually being there --

well i don't think that's necessarily true
i think sufficient knowledge of the present is adequate for determining the inevitable future outcome
but i'm a determinist and thats totally off topic

(06-07-2011, 12:10 AM)Alpha Six Wrote:

(06-07-2011, 12:00 AM)Koopaul Wrote: Some Super Guides take control of your guy and beat a level for you, that's a bit different from looking up the answer or watching someone do it.

Then don't use it. God forbid. It's an optional feature.

The only difference between physically guided hints and text hints is that physical hints actually show you the action that you have to perform, whereas hints tell you. And that's barely enough of a difference to turn this into an argument. In the case of a game literally "playing a level for you," it depends on the game and its theme.

This isn't about me, or what i am going to do! This is about future gamers.

I don't mind players being SHOWN what to do, its when the game plays it for you, that's different because they don't make you go back and do it yourself!

Yes in NSMBW they have that, the actual level can be beaten for you if you die enough. Same in DKCR and Galaxy 2. There's no learning that way.

This is not about the gamers who won't use the feature, this is about future gamers. When I was just starting out playing games, I used to die a lot, it's natural. But I got better because I knew there was no other way! However if the game ITSELF offered to beat that spot I couldn't, I would have probably used it... Wouldn't you have when you were new?

We wouldn't do that NOW of course, but back then when we were young we would have. And you know what? We wouldn't be the same gamers we are today. We would be lousy because we would be used to having help the whole way.

New gamers will never become self dependent if there's an option to have it beaten for you.

It's like this, if you're a parent you want your kids to learn to do stuff on their own when they grow up right? Well what if your mother just did everything for you? Dressed you, bathed you, fed you, but never TOLD you how to do it on your own. We would never learn how, nor would we want to. See that's the difference between being SHOWN what to do, and have it done for you.

My father showed me how to ride a bike, guided me, and gave me training wheels. But he never rode the bike for me.

(06-07-2011, 12:31 AM)Gnostic WetFart Wrote:

Quote:Because 3 games by the same company in the span of 3 years used it, one of them being a remake of a 10+ year old game?

Good joke.

way to post the same thing you already posted

Oh sorry, I didn't realize I could go back in time and quote a post that didn't happen. My fault!

Quote:you're ignoring the fact that its speculative, that its probably; possibly; likely. they are not saying this will absolutely be the case

How does a 1 year gap inbetween games made by one company suddenly mean there's any possibility of the Super Guide making a giant boom in the industry?

If super guides were such a cash cow, why didn't more games start using them in 2010? And why aren't there any third party super guide games in 2011?