Support NeoGAF

[pj]

This is sweet. I'm gonna play this game in reverse order starting at the last chapter so it'll be like that movie "Memento".

Or that one episode of seinfeld

YOU CAN STUFF YOUR SORRY'S IN A SACK, MISTER

 

[crowphoenix]

Personally, I think it's lame. I think it's silly to assume you have to beat every game you play. I play up to the point I am no longer having fun and then I put the game down. Rarely is the difficulty of the game the cause of that. And generally, a bad section of the game will tarnish the experiance and not make me want to continue, skipable or not.

My fear, and stick with me for a moment, is that the ability to skip a section seems counter intuitive to playing a game. We were granted the ability to skip cutscenes in order to get back to the game quicker. But skipping gameplay sections? That just seems off to me, but whatever. When the game comes out, we'll know.

 

[Shito]

Scenario 1: Casual player gets stuck, no option to skip past, player stops playing and sells game.
Scenario 2: Casual player gets stuck, skips hard part, plays more, maybe gets stuck again, skips, sees end, sells game

Who exactly is losing out here?

The correct question is: who is winning something there?
Since when did we start thinking so much about "casuals", since when the fact that they, "casuals" players, might play a game up to its end while they're not that much into gaming is a good thing to begin with?
If I make an horror movie, will the fact that I'm putting some pink unicorns everywhere in it a good thing because I'm also cattering to the little girls audience, that might have not watched my movie in the first place? Do you care so much that your grandma will be able to play the next Alone In The Dark?

I'm sorry but I can't for the life of me understand this point that making everything possible to make the people that don't like games in the first place play them through the end is a good thing for the medium, especially when the methods used are nothing but dumbing down the thing for them, because they might not care or be any good at it.
Should *everyone* enjoy *every* game?
This casual fever is starting to get crazy... I see the marketing advantage of it, but I fail to see why gamers would want their hobby to spread by dumbing itself down.

Are you saying that no game that has ever had cheats has had tension, simply because the cheats exist? It's ridiculous. If you want the tension, you don't use the skip levels thing, the end.

Cheats aren't usually features. That's what makes them cheats. Like they're secrets. And not features.

 

[Dachande]

Personally, I think it's lame. I think it's silly to assume you have to beat every game you play. I play up to the point I am no longer having fun and then I put the game down. Rarely is the difficulty of the game the cause of that. And generally, a bad section of the game will tarnish the experiance and not make me want to continue, skipable or not.

But why does that mean that it's a lame idea? If you stop playing because the game is no longer fun, what's that got to do with this feature to skip to various chapters? It has nothing to do with that.

My fear, and stick with me for a moment, is that the ability to skip a section seems counter intuitive to playing a game. We were granted the ability to skip cutscenes in order to get back to the game quicker. But skipping gameplay sections? That just seems off to me, but whatever. When the game comes out, we'll know.

Why does your feeling about it being unnatural mean that it's going to be a bad idea? Because it 'feels wrong' it shouldn't be done, even if there are good reasons for it? That doesn't make any sense.

 

[Tain]

Did the existence of 1 star difficulty affect your abillity to enjoy the home versions of Street Fighter II? I mean, you don't have to play it, but you're making it seem like its inclusion is some abomination that stains the entire game.

I'm not, actually. That's an option you set before you start playing that applies throughout the course of the entire game. Hell, furthermore, the developers clearly don't think it's ideal. Pretty different from a game stopping and saying "Hey, you're taking an awfully long time with this puzzle. You wanna skip it?"

And no, I'm not assuming that's what Alone in the Dark will do. It's a worst case scenario, and the kind I'd have a problem with, but it's not what I'm expecting.

More options is always a better thing. Asking some players to exercise self control is much better than asking many players to overcome possibly questionable game design. If someone ever puts down your game, never to touch it again, because of ONE part of your otherwise great game, you have failed them as a game designer.

I don't want to be allowed to quicksave at every turn with a conveniently bound key, nor do I want to be allowed to shoot the shit out of everything if I've been caught sneaking, nor do I want access to an item combination that lets me easily kill bosses. I don't want a prompt encouraging me to skip a puzzle or room or boss I'm having a problem with. These things are options that taint the rest of their respective games. Sometimes they're relatively hidden and pretty minor. Sometimes they're glaringly obvious and obnoxious.

Granted, none of that has a whole lot to do with this most likely inoffensive option in Alone in the Dark, but if you wanna assume I'm as reactionary about something I don't even know the implementation of as you are about this thread, go nuts and continue with the gafspeak quotations.

 

[PantherLotus]

^ I think you're fighting for a lack of features, honestly. Can't imagine how that would fly in any crowd. If you don't have self control, don't play the game.

 

[Nuclear Muffin]

That's an interesting idea, but I think there should be a limited number of skips (Think Jugem's Cloud in SMB3, Yes Nintendo came up with the same idea 18 years ago GAF!)

 

[pj]

The correct question is: who is winning something there?
Since when did we start thinking so much about "casuals", since when the fact that they, "casuals" players, might play a game up to its end while they're not that much into gaming is a good thing to begin with?
If I make an horror movie, will the fact that I'm putting some pink unicorns everywhere in it a good thing because I'm also cattering to the little girls audience, that might have not watched my movie in the first place? Do you care so much that your grandma will be able to play the next Alone In The Dark?

I'm sorry but I can't for the life of me understand this point that making everything possible to make the people that don't like games in the first place play them through the end is a good thing for the medium, especially when the methods used are nothing but dumbing down the thing for them, because they might not care or be any good at it.
Should *everyone* enjoy *every* game?
This casual fever is starting to get crazy... I see the marketing advantage of it, but I fail to see why gamers would want their hobby to spread by dumbing itself down.

More people playing = more games. The hardcore hardcore who see this as a bad thing are a very small minority. I think a better question is why would gamers want to exclude people just because they're less tolerant of bullshit? Almost every game has a bullshit level or a bullshit cutscene or a bullshit puzzle or a bullshit boss that people should be able to skip if they want.

Catering to casuals is great if it doesn't affect my experience with the game. Easy modes in games don't piss me off. Somehow I manage the superhuman levels of willpower it takes to play games on normal and hard, even though that disgusting easy FEATURE is staring me right in the face, with its seductive promises of a stress free gaming experience.

Cheats aren't usually features. That what makes them cheats. Like they're secret. And not features.

That's a stretch and a half. Everyone knows what cheats are and where to get them. Even the most casual 360 owner knows how to google "alone in the dark cheats"

 

[Monsterland]

Can we have all the achievements unlocked at the press of a few buttons too.

 

[Tain]

^ I think you're fighting for a lack of features, honestly. Can't imagine how that would fly in any crowd. If you don't have self control, don't play the game.

Nah, I'm just fighting for developers that pick and choose features that make sense with a game. I just can't agree with the black and white idea that more options can always make a game better.

Limitless quicksaving doesn't make sense in many of my absolute favorite FPSes that include it. I have enough self control to save roughly "between fights," sure, but the game has a better idea of things than I do. Doom is still one of the greatest games of all time, but if it had checkpoints that were as intelligently paced as Halo's instead of a quicksave option? No question I'd like it just a little bit more. Hell, even in conjunction with quicksave, it would at least diminish quicksave's value.

And with the whole stealth game thing, I'd rather feel naturally punished by the game than by making my own rules. Again, it's rarely something stopping me from playing a game, but it is an annoyance.

 

[crowphoenix]

But why does that mean that it's a lame idea? If you stop playing because the game is no longer fun, what's that got to do with this feature to skip to various chapters? It has nothing to do with that.



Why does your feeling about it being unnatural mean that it's going to be a bad idea? Because it 'feels wrong' it shouldn't be done, even if there are good reasons for it? That doesn't make any sense.

Perhaps, it's because I feel that every bit of the game needs to be experianced if you want to say you beat the game. I won't say I beat a game unless, I've beaten everything necassary to do so. I don't skip sections of movies or of books, because I believe they are put there for a reason.

Telling me, it's ok to skip sections of your work is almost saying you don't have faith in that section. If it's ok to be skipped, then why is it in there in the first place. Most things are made better by trimming away the unnecassary bits until you have what is essential.

I understand this helps those people that are low on time, and I can appreciate that as I have little time myself. And I guess, it will help casuals enjoy the game.

I'm sure I in no way answered your questions, but what can you do. It's a rather complex conundrum as we are arguing from different spots.

 

[Kittonwy]

Taken from a Q&A with the producer Nour Polloni, not sure if this info old or not. I did search but if it's old, feel free to roll out teh funny gifz.



Obviously the actual cost besides missing out on achievements isn't mentioned but I think this is a good idea, interesting if this does mean you can skip tough parts of the game at a whim or 'dead ends' if you get stuck at a puzzle. Don't know what the hardcore will think of it but at least between this and the Dead Space's not-being-able-to-pause thing, as bad an idea as that sounds, at least devs are trying something new.

Source:
http://www.oxm.co.uk/article.php?id=3049

I would have thought tuning the game to make sure it's relatively assessible to most people would be better than people just outright skipping an entire section of the game, it's basically worse than having an easy button where the game plays itself. Don't get me wrong, I'm all for appealing to a wider audience but the ability to skip GAMEPLAY is a bit extreme, that's the whole point of PLAYING A GAME.

 

[Shito]

Almost every game has a bullshit level or a bullshit cutscene or a bullshit puzzle or a bullshit boss that people should be able to skip if they want.

Shouldn't a game aim at removing those (some manage to do just that, so it *is* possible) instead of trying to hide them or damage control them?

That's a stretch and a half. Everyone knows what cheats are and where to get them. Even the most casual 360 owner knows how to google "alone in the dark cheats"

That's not "a stretch and a half". You don't understand this is not just an option, or a secret cheat *hardcore people* will google, but a feature that will pop on the screen, somewhere along the path. This is what will remove the stress and the build up.

Anyway, I'm off this dicussion, I've stated my point and we're turning in a circle there.
And for the records I don't think things are as easy as "More people playing = more games". And I don't think that trying to "leverage down" to casual players will make them play more (while I have no problem with games aiming at casuals from the start).

EDIT: and I agree with everything Tain is saying! ^^
Way better than me.

 

[Kittonwy]

More people playing = more games. The hardcore hardcore who see this as a bad thing are a very small minority. I think a better question is why would gamers want to exclude people just because they're less tolerant of bullshit? Almost every game has a bullshit level or a bullshit cutscene or a bullshit puzzle or a bullshit boss that people should be able to skip if they want.

Catering to casuals is great if it doesn't affect my experience with the game. Easy modes in games don't piss me off. Somehow I manage the superhuman levels of willpower it takes to play games on normal and hard, even though that disgusting easy FEATURE is staring me right in the face, with its seductive promises of a stress free gaming experience.



That's a stretch and a half. Everyone knows what cheats are and where to get them. Even the most casual 360 owner knows how to google "alone in the dark cheats"

There's a difference between setting up assessible gameplay scenarios in a normal or easy mode and allowing the player to NOT PLAY SECTIONS OF A GAME. If a game on normal is too hard, it's just bad tuning, gameplay scenarios that are unmanageable shouldn't be there in the first place, what we are looking at here is essentially a win button.

 

[Alphahawk]

Yeah this is dumb. hopefully this doesn't become a trend.

Also it's a bad precident when the developers state that the reward for not game skipping will be an achievement. Earth to developers: Not everyone is an achievement whore.

 

[Dave Long]

There's a difference between setting up accessible gameplay scenarios in a normal or easy mode and allowing the player to NOT PLAY SECTIONS OF A GAME. If a game on normal is too hard, it's just bad tuning, gameplay scenarios that are unmanageable shouldn't be there in the first place, what we are looking at here is essentially a win button.

Mark your calendars people because today I agree with Kittonwy.

 

[pj]

Shouldn't a game aim at removing those (some manage to do just that, so it *is* possible) instead of trying to hide them or damage control them?

I'm sure all games cut stuff, but they can't cut everything that's bad. If they did, all games would be great, and that sure as shit isn't the case. This feature isn't a quick fix for shitty games, it's dealing with a reality that not everyone cares about all parts of a game.

That's not "a stretch and a half". You don't understand this is not just an option, or a secret cheat *hardcore people* will google, but a feature that will pop on the screen, somewhere along the path. This is what will remove the stress and the build up.

Who says it will just pop up on its own? The interview doesn't. Besides, if it did just pop up and say "hey, you suck, you wanna skip past this?" It might encourage people to be like "no f u" and stick with it. When I played DMC 1, after dying a bunch of times, a menu came up and said "maybe you should be playing on easy, loser," I tried even harder to beat it, still failed, and then played through on easy..

 

[PantherLotus]

Nah, I'm just fighting for developers that pick and choose features that make sense with a game. I just can't agree with the black and white idea that more options can always make a game better.

Limitless quicksaving doesn't make sense in many of my absolute favorite FPSes that include it. I have enough self control to save roughly "between fights," sure, but the game has a better idea of things than I do. Doom is still one of the greatest games of all time, but if it had checkpoints that were as intelligently paced as Halo's instead of a quicksave option? No question I'd like it just a little bit more. Hell, even in conjunction with quicksave, it would at least diminish quicksave's value.

And with the whole stealth game thing, I'd rather feel naturally punished by the game than by making my own rules. Again, it's rarely something stopping me from playing a game, but it is an annoyance.

I agree with you but think the basis of your argument is that you think additional features meant for the masses will detract from your gameplay. I think you're just saying that you don't want the option because you're afraid that you'll use it. (konami code?). I know how you feel but I would have never had a chance to beat Contra w/o it, nor see all the beauty of SMB2 or SMB3 without warp whistles. (i sucksauce).

I see the point of the people that are complaining but can't imagine how it could ruin your own gameplay. Tomorrow you guys would be bitching about how a game was too easy. How about let them jack up the difficulty and let people jump around?

Or maybe this feature hasn't been fully explained?

 

[Dachande]

Perhaps, it's because I feel that every bit of the game needs to be experianced if you want to say you beat the game. I won't say I beat a game unless, I've beaten everything necassary to do so. I don't skip sections of movies or of books, because I believe they are put there for a reason.

Telling me, it's ok to skip sections of your work is almost saying you don't have faith in that section. If it's ok to be skipped, then why is it in there in the first place. Most things are made better by trimming away the unnecassary bits until you have what is essential.

I understand this helps those people that are low on time, and I can appreciate that as I have little time myself. And I guess, it will help casuals enjoy the game.

I'm sure I in no way answered your questions, but what can you do. It's a rather complex conundrum as we are arguing from different spots.

But this is the thing: I don't understand why people are upset about it ruining the beating of the game. There are two points to make here.

The first: I reckon games are to be experienced. If I'm playing the game, I'm not playing it to beat a challenge. I'm playing it to experience what a team of talented people have made for me to, well, experience. Their intention is for me to play it from the start to the finish just like a filmmaker's intention is for their audience to watch a film from start to finish, but the option to quickly and easily skip to a particular section of the game that I found really cool and wish to experience again is a convenience thing. This is not a skill thing as far as I'm concerned.

I see absolutely no problem with that and welcome it. I hate this mindset of the game being played to be "beaten". Play it to experience what's been made, not to get the credits. I don't see how you get any real enjoyment from reading a bunch of names that scroll up on a screen other than vague satisfaction, but that's not the reason you bought it, surely?

The second point is, how does it affect you? You won't use it to skip to a certain section. So why does it matter?

These aren't just addressed to you, but to everyone complaining in this thread.

 

[Ragnarok]

The correct question is: who is winning something there?
Since when did we start thinking so much about "casuals", since when the fact that they, "casuals" players, might play a game up to its end while they're not that much into gaming is a good thing to begin with?
If I make an horror movie, will the fact that I'm putting some pink unicorns everywhere in it a good thing because I'm also cattering to the little girls audience, that might have not watched my movie in the first place? Do you care so much that your grandma will be able to play the next Alone In The Dark?

This is probably the worst analogy i've ever....EVER seen :lol

 

[BobJustBob]

I'd rather feel naturally punished by the game than by making my own rules.

You want games to punish you?

 

[pj]

There's a difference between setting up assessible gameplay scenarios in a normal or easy mode and allowing the player to NOT PLAY SECTIONS OF A GAME. If a game on normal is too hard, it's just bad tuning, gameplay scenarios that are unmanageable shouldn't be there in the first place, what we are looking at here is essentially a win button.

I don't know why everyone is jumping to the conclusion that the ability to skip sections means that the developer knows huge portions of their game is shit (not specifically you, Kittonwy). They're just dealing with the REALITY that every game has parts that not everyone likes, or is able to beat. Making a game that's manageble for everyone is catering to the lowest common denominator, and it affects the game for me, while the skip button doesn't change my experience at all.

 

[{Mike}]

Wait, the skip feature is available right off the bat? I thought it was an unlockable, would make way more sense, so you can replay your favorite moments instead of having to speed run through everything.

 

[Wark]

But you aren't a pussy are you?

You can still play the game LIKE A REAL MAN.

-smashes a beer can against his head and burps- YEAHHHHH!!!!! TOUCHDOWNN!!!

 

[Oldschoolgamer]

I think its slightly weaksauce, but, wtf is wrong with you all saying this is a bad feature? Its not like its going to make you hit chpt skip. You can just keep playing, while the person that wants to try a different section can move along, and miss the stuff like achievements and what not for failing. Some of you act like options are going to kill the fun. wtf.

And, I'm one to bitch about certain designs and games, but how could you honestly say "if there weren't any tedious parts, they wouldn't need this" when, one mans trash is another mans' treasure? Not everyone likes the same shit as you do. There are people on this planet that dislike Resident Evil 4, and, some that would rather skip the parts they dislike, to get to the parts that they do.

Bravo for the devs behind this. Not only do we have real time item organization via a jacket, but you've got all of the cool shit with sticky tape, and chpt skip. I hope its fun.

 

[Tain]

I agree with you but think the basis of your argument is that you think additional features meant for the masses will detract from your gameplay. I think you're just saying that you don't want the option because you're afraid that you'll use it. (konami code?). I know how you feel but I would have never had a chance to beat Contra w/o it, nor see all the beauty of SMB2 or SMB3 without warp whistles. (i sucksauce).

I see the point of the people that are complaining but can't imagine how it could ruin your own gameplay. Tomorrow you guys would be bitching about how a game was too easy. How about let them jack up the difficulty and let people jump around?

Or maybe this feature hasn't been fully explained?

The more out of the way options like this are, the better. And those are pretty good examples. The Mario whistles are reasonably hidden, and the Konami code in Contra is as out of the way as it gets.

It seems trivial, but a big part of it is when the option comes into play. If it's a clear, defined switch on the title screen before I hop into the actual act of playing, I'm not going to have an issue with it. Automatic mode in DMC4, easy difficulty levels, and NES Contra's implementation of the Konami code are just fine for me.

When it comes into the actual act of playing, though, it has a chance of being annoying. At this point, the more hidden away they are, the less likely I am to care. Mario's whistles aren't a big deal. Agent 47's capability in a firefight, though, is another story.

If you get stuck in SMB3, you can ask around or otherwise hunt down their locations and then enjoy the later stages. It's not a prominently displayed option.

And yes, it's entirely possible for the AitD developers to explain this feature a bit more and I might be completely fine with it. I'm expecting that, if anything.

You want games to punish you?

No, I don't. In an action game, I don't want to lose health for getting hit, and I want absolutely no incentive for taking advantage of the options given to me in order to survive. Why would I want to do that?

Are you serious? Some games have to in order to be remotely interesting.

 

[crowphoenix]

But this is the thing: I don't understand why people are upset about it ruining the beating of the game. There are two points to make here.

The first: I reckon games are to be experienced. If I'm playing the game, I'm not playing it to beat a challenge. I'm playing it to experience what a team of talented people have made for me to, well, experience. Their intention is for me to play it from the start to the finish just like a filmmaker's intention is for their audience to watch a film from start to finish, but the option to quickly and easily skip to a particular section of the game that I found really cool and wish to experience again is a convenience thing. This is not a skill thing as far as I'm concerned.

I see absolutely no problem with that and welcome it. I hate this mindset of the game being played to be "beaten". Play it to experience what's been made, not to get the credits. I don't see how you get any real enjoyment from reading a bunch of names that scroll up on a screen other than vague satisfaction, but that's not the reason you bought it, surely?

The second point is, how does it affect you? You won't use it to skip to a certain section. So why does it matter?

These aren't just addressed to you, but to everyone complaining in this thread.

I'm not saying the option to skip is bad, per se. There are several games I would play countless times, if I could skip past section X. However, my concern is that it may say something bad about the quality of the game.

This is something entirely new. And it's not as if this is a game where the developer is so good that questions of whether the game is good are not seems stupid. Does this inclusion foreshadow bad gameplay? Is it merely convinience? If it's merely convience, then fine. I'll buy the game, have a great time, and more than likely use it later.

This next part is a bit off topic, so bear with me as I just want to ramble.

But, one of the things, I think we differ in, and I'm not knocking you for this, is that I often enjoy a game much more greatly if it's challenging. I enjoy to fail at sections and then come back and overcome them. The struggle deepens the gameplay experiance and adds to the level of tension and fear. And the feeling of finally over coming that tense section, is a very rewarding experiance. And I'm sure you feel this way too. But I also like to experiance everything, and the experiance of everything, includes the good with the bad. The challenge is an integral part of the experiance, and if the game keeps asking if I want to skip, that would be annoying, and deminish the game's quality.

So, does it matter? No, probably not. But like all new features, I'm going to wonder the why. Why was it included? And ask if it hints at anything. Will it's inclusion affect my purchase? No, not at all. Do I reserve my right to bitch? Yes, I do.

I think this might be a bad sign for the game. From my own stance, I think it adds a level of ease to the game that I do not think is neccassary if the game is as good as I hope. However, should I be wrong, and the game be good, this feature be used in a truly interesting way, then It will have been well done. And I, thankfully, will have been wrong.