Easy Should Be Easy

[Susan Arendt]

Easy Should Be Easy

Before we can increase the accessibility of games, we first have to admit how awesome we gamers are.

Read Full Article

 

[Rayjay06]

I think this a very friendly and nurturing way of handling the casual gamer crowd. However, every one of these ideas have been implemented before and, more often than not, are either completely worthless or unable to be turned off. This trend towards reward for not doing anything is not going to help gamers as a whole. Sure, more people will be able to finish the game, but there is no sense of accomplishment. We're past the age of "Godmode." Let people succeed or fail by their own merits.

 

[Low Key]

Those are some decent ideas, but how would the game know if the player is a first-timer? There were times in games where I got stuck for hours, but I would have been pissed if the game just let me waltz by undaunted. It would be hard to implement intermittent invincibility without ruining it for those who actually do know what they are doing.

I know this seems silly and possibly elementary, but a lot of the game play mechanics can be learned simply by reading the manual. Health bars and all that jazz are explained in painfully drawn out detail. Not to say that will solve all the problems a first-timer may face, but it's definately a start.

 

[hansari]

I'm glad this article wasn't about just making things even easier, but also about addressing the other side to it.

I remember picking up a ball and looking at the hoop stuck on my garage. It took effort and practice to get the ball in there, but I thought I had the gist of it down till someone elaborated on some things I didn't know about basketball. (dribbling?)

A new player is almost instantly overwhelmed by what he or she doesn't know. It's a daunting and sometimes humiliating experience. Nobody enjoys feeling stupid or inadequate and all too often, that's exactly how games make new players feel, even on the supposedly Easy setting.

I've seen the blushing that some newcomers do at times, but in many of the different circles I've been to, with all their different consoles, gamers are a tolerant and welcoming bunch for the most part. So I don't really see this being too big of a problem, unless a newcomer is one of those people who are naturally the shy type...

Why just last week I watched some gamers who thrive on "expert" in Rock Band put up with the considerably slower speed that the introduction of a single "easy" player brought to them. Its understandable that you gotta walk before you can run, and if that comes at the expense of their own gameplay, plenty of gamers are willing to do just that to bring another member into their fold...

in fact...a good addition to this article would be...

4) Play With A Pro - It's tough learning the ropes, so why not have an experienced veteran help you along the way.

A lot of gamers have no problem doing just that. And its not uncommon either. If you know someone who plays video games, ask to play sometime. A lot of newcomers on WoW find plenty of people willing to give tips when they start out...I've seen forums where people ask for a help in a particularly difficult level...and people reply back, sometimes offering co-op assistance...

(I know I would have had an easier time learning basketball...of course, I was six or seven when I first started learning, and no one around my age really knew the finer rules of things then....)

 

[Susan Arendt]

Those are some decent ideas, but how would the game know if the player is a first-timer? There were times in games where I got stuck for hours, but I would have been pissed if the game just let me waltz by undaunted. It would be hard to implement intermittent invincibility without ruining it for those who actually do know what they are doing.

I know this seems silly and possibly elementary, but a lot of the game play mechanics can be learned simply by reading the manual. Health bars and all that jazz are explained in painfully drawn out detail. Not to say that will solve all the problems a first-timer may face, but it's definately a start.

A good manual is a big help, of course, but let's be honest -- people hate reading manuals.

It would also be assumed that these settings are optional. Perhaps there's a setting called "First Timers" or maybe we just actually make Easy easy. The goal isn't to detract from a skilled player's experience, it's to help a less skilled player experience the game.

As for people succeeding or failing on their own merits, I'm not trying to take away challenge or accomplishment, I'm merely trying to alleviate the astronomical amount of information a new player has to deal with.

It's kind of like reading the book versus watching the movie. Should people read the book? Yeah, ideally, that would be great, but if we're being honest, we have to admit that not everyone is going to be willing or able to do that. Should they never have access to those stories, then? Of course not. So they get to see the movie.

To address the Play With a Pro -- absolutely, having a guide right there helping you is, without doubt, one of the best ways new players can acclimate. But that's just not always an option. Even if you're fortunate enough to have gamer friends, schedules don't always permit someone to be at your side at all times when you're getting your feet wet.

 

[brewbeard]

I do appreciate games that have recap logs, they tend to make your objectives much clearer and generally throw in some back story fluff alongside it. The old infinity engine games were exceedingly good at this, but so are the Tales games and several other series. Being lost isn't generally fun, and the way out of the forest doesn't have to be a hand-holding affair.

 

[Pigeon_Grenade]

1,2,3 And Hansari's 4th rule all seem like good ideas to me, even if they have been done, refine them

or in some cases, dont fix what aint Broken

the 4th rule there is Really something i try and do once i have the hang of a game, instead of say, insulting a New player for not knowing what there doing or the layouts of maps

 

[BlindTom]

The original Spiderman game for the playstation 1 had a "kid mode" option underneath its easy.

I always chose it when I was young because I was both afraid of failure, and a kid. (although I would never choose easy for fear of looking like a pussy.)

Eventually, after watching my brother play on normal, I noticed that entire rooms were structured differently in Kid Mode, The electric pit, guarded by laserz that you need to swing across in a zig zag pattern? In Kid Mode there was a walkway there, turning one of the most frustrating challenges into a situation where it's almost impossible to die.

To this day I have only played that game all the way through in Kid Mode (several times might I add) and it was fun, effortless, but fun for pretty much that reason.

Super Easy mode definitely shouldn't be called easy though, it should be called something more relaxing and less humiliating. Words like rookie fit the bill pretty well.

 

[hansari]

To address the Play With a Pro -- absolutely, having a guide right there helping you is, without doubt, one of the best ways new players can acclimate. But that's just not always an option. Even if you're fortunate enough to have gamer friends, schedules don't always permit someone to be at your side at all times when you're getting your feet wet.

Ah, yeah...I've realized that just now.

Plus the stuff you suggested corresponds to things developers can do to make there games easier...its not like developers can throw in an experienced gamer with every pre-order...

...if only...

(I could finally finish a cut-scene laden MGS game...)

I'd settle for some competent A.I. teammates though...

 

[Mr. Fister]

I agree with this article. Gamers who complain that a game is too easy don't understand that difficulty is relative. It might be easy to you, but if someone who has little or no experience in gaming were to play it, would it be easy to them? Think of it this way: Let's say you were born and raised in China for your whole life. Obviously, you'd have a very clear understanding of Kanji, and whichever Chinese dialect you use comes natural to you because you've had a very long time to learn it. But if someone else who wasn't raised in a country that primarily uses Kanji were to try and learn your dialect, they're not going to just start speaking it like a native. Kanji is a very complicated writing system to learn, and since the same character can be spoken in a dozen different ways, it can be very frustrating to anyone who wants to understand it.

The same principle applies to gaming. You might think a certain game is easy, but that's because you've likely been playing games for a long time and you have a clear understanding of certain game mechanics. However, if you were to hand said game to someone who didn't have a basic understanding of said mechanics, they're all but guaranteed to be confused and frustrated, and may not want to pick up a controller ever again. I'm not saying that all games need to be easy so that everyone can play them - I enjoy playing games that offer a challenge as much as the next guy - but gaming will never expand if all of the games are made with only the veteran gamer's idea of difficulty in mind.

And on the article, perhaps you should have given Nintendo's Demo Play feature, which allows players to either skip a difficult sequence or at least be shown how to complete it, a mention? I feel like it would've helped a little.

 

[syndicated44]

I never really thought about it like this but its strange considering I grew up while the gaming industry grew up. I remember dos games and text adventures to a handful of arcade games (although I grew up in a really small town so arcades were pretty rare). I remember my first nes and playing Super mario bros and the tons of random nes games I have accumulated over the years. I then remember growing into the N64 then into the gamecube and ps2, then the xbox. I feel like an old man.

The problem that I see with the gaming industry as there is a huge brick wall between casual games and mainstream games. Casual games dont really follow the same formula that most mainstream games follow in the sense that they usually are puzzle games or simple flash game concepts that have better graphics and slightly more depth. There needs to be a solid bridge between the two instead. Nintendo used to do this well but the Wii seems to just make this gapper bigger.

As more gimmicks are placed into consoles there is more and more of a gap. The DS is a touchscreen and I havnt played many games for it that really dont use the touchscreen almost exclusively (I know they are out there but I just really havnt played it much). You have the xbox and the playstation but microsoft seems to be going to natal to bat down nintendo once and for all and then that really leaves us with the playstation. You also have pc games but pc games havnt really changed over they years you have the ports, you have the graphically delicious games made for the pc, and then you have the varied (rpg's usually) that are extremely complex.

Entering this is hard for any new gamer and I dont really see any way you can have a mainstream game be gracious to all audiances. It really takes determination on a new gamers side to enter the world with an open mind and be prepared to be frusterated and pissed that they died 20 million times. In the end though when they beat the game they will go back to it later and it will be that much easier. Being better at games doesnt really mean anything in the end other then that we can take advantage of the fact that it is a game i.e. hit a spawnpoint before enemies show up or exploit ai. Being new just means they dont have these abilities but games are about repitition if you have fought one group of enemies in an fps you have fought them all.

 

[Lord_Ascendant]

mmm good points Susan

I would use a What Should I Be Doing Now?" in Elder Scrolls III or IV. I got lost so very easily in those games. Especially Fable.

 

[Monshroud]

I think this has something to do with the stigma that video games are 'mindless entertainment.' Where we are right now that is just not the case. It takes years of playing various games to learn all the ins and outs, which is why I am a god to my niece who can bang her head against a wall for an hour trying to get past something in Spyro and I can walk up and in most cases on the first or second try get her past some 'hard' part.

I experienced this recently with my GF who had wanted to try playing Portal. She had seen me play it and heard how much fun of a puzzle game it can be. She was completely lost in the 3D gamespace and gave up after a bit. She said to me 'You make it look so easy.'

People forget that someone like myself starting gaming on an Atari 2600 with a joystick and a single button, then playing in Arcades, then the NES, to the Genesis, the PS, etc. I can handle a 20 button controller with ease because I grew up with the technology. The learning curve was different. Each new iteration added a button or two. I didn't start with 20 buttons.

It's one of the reasons that Nintendo has been so successful. They have a main controller that has a D-Pad and 7 buttons. In many games you only use 2 of the buttons, if that. They also have a huge back-catalog of games that allow you to play early titles that don't require a diagram for controling. Press 1 to Jump, Press 2 Fire. Granted this is also the reason many people have an issue with Nintendo right now. Countless games that are deemed 'too-simple' or 'not hardcore' because they don't pose a challenge to average 360/PS3 level gamer.

 

[Dusty Donuts]

It certainly seems that if this kind of system was implemented into most games, it would attract a greater audience and therefore more profit. I particularly like the "Buy-Out" method, and if i could possibly extend on that, you could buy lock-on options, buy more skips, buy portable check-points or even portable save points in games like that. Of course, there would be a library of things that you could buy that I won't mention here to make the game easier. (buy in-game partners, buy health boosts) On the topic of buying in-game partners, i'm talking solo games really here, you could ask the partner to attack a trouble enemy, fetch a treasure which you just can't reach or defend a certain point (for an extra fee of course, we don't want it doing EVERYTHING for them)

 

[Michael826]

I know this seems silly and possibly elementary, but a lot of the game play mechanics can be learned simply by reading the manual. Health bars and all that jazz are explained in painfully drawn out detail. Not to say that will solve all the problems a first-timer may face, but it's definately a start.

exactly. they are there for a reason.

 

[Mr.Pandah]

You made mention of it, but more often then not, it really is the controller that turns many prospective gamers off from bothering. I know a bunch of non-gamers, and for the most part, they understand what needs to be done in the game, its just getting there that is the problem.

This is why the Wii has been a big hit, people pick up the controller and go "Ooo this is easy! All I have to do is turn this way!" Or whatever it is. When I handed my girlfriend the xbox 360 controller so she could play Call of Duty 4 for the first time, she looked at me like I had 3 heads. "This stick is to turn the camera, this stick is to move." But, on screen, she would just strafe and walk through doorways without turning the camera and inevitably die.

However, she got me Lego:Indiana Jones, and is an ace at that game. The camera is fixed for the most part, the character moves with one stick, he jumps with the A button, attacks with X, and uses an item (the off chance you get one) with B. Thats all there is to it. 4 buttons. Granted, it was co-op and I could finally play with her, but if left up to her, she is more then capable playing by herself.

I will always find the controller to be the biggest roadblock for many newcomers. The other stuff comes with time. Besides, what happens when that other stuff isn't there anymore to help them out?

 

[hansari]

However, she got me Lego:Indiana Jones, and is an ace at that game. The camera is fixed for the most part...

You should keep going off of that then...baby steps with games that have a fixed camera. Or go back to old school gaming with simple controls on the SNES (those games are still fun)

We all started somewhere...

The problem that I see with the gaming industry as there is a huge brick wall between casual games and mainstream games. Casual games dont really follow the same formula that most mainstream games follow in the sense that they usually are puzzle games or simple flash game concepts that have better graphics and slightly more depth. There needs to be a solid bridge between the two instead. Nintendo used to do this well but the Wii seems to just make this gapper bigger.

Precisely...people have hailed the Wii for making video games a cultural norm, but really, it caters to a different audience.

 

[Carnagath]

Developers could certainly be bothered to always include in-depth tutorials in their games, and I think that ought to be enough. We don't have to make all games a cakewalk. Anyone who wants to start gaming ought to at least understand that this is different than watching a movie in the sense that there are challenges here that you have to overcome, you are not just sitting idly and watching a story unfold. That and how the game works is all the info one needs. If their patience cannot handle a reload and their attention span is 5 seconds, there's plenty of other hobbies out there for them. Hell, my first game on my very first computer was a submarine simulator with a 200 page manual, which I read twice and always kept next to the PC, things are waaaaay easier today compared to back then, today we just complain more. (Oh God, I'm turning into my dad, please help.)

 

[Mr.Pandah]

However, she got me Lego:Indiana Jones, and is an ace at that game. The camera is fixed for the most part...

You should keep going off of that then...baby steps with games that have a fixed camera. Or go back to old school gaming with simple controls on the SNES (those games are still fun)

We all started somewhere...

The problem that I see with the gaming industry as there is a huge brick wall between casual games and mainstream games. Casual games dont really follow the same formula that most mainstream games follow in the sense that they usually are puzzle games or simple flash game concepts that have better graphics and slightly more depth. There needs to be a solid bridge between the two instead. Nintendo used to do this well but the Wii seems to just make this gapper bigger.

Precisely...people have hailed the Wii for making video games a cultural norm, but really, it caters to a different audience.

Hehe, I don't need advice on the subject. If she wants to play, I'll play. If not, I won't force her. Our relationship hardly revolves around gaming anyways. Besides, I've already given her my SNES and PS2. =P

 

[Susan Arendt]

Fixed camera is also a very good suggestion. And I do like calling this mode that we're creating "Rookie." Implies inexperience without making someone feel unskilled.

As for why I didn't mention Nintendo's Demo Play feature, I was really thinking of non-Nintendo platforms and games - ones that are still the bastion of the hardcore. I know plenty of non-gamers who would really enjoy, say, Mass Effect or Resident Evil, but are completely shut out because of the difficulty.