Easy Should Be Easy

Clashero

New member
Aug 15, 2008
2,143
0
0
Here are some games that you might enjoy, based on this article:
Max Payne: This game had adaptive difficulty. By looking at the code, this was calculated with 3 factors: your hit-miss rate, your number of deaths/reloads, and how often you saved. Saving often, missing a lot, and getting killed would make the enemies easier and easier. However, if you breezed through the last three rooms, the fourth one was going to have you on your knees. It also had a What Should I Be Doing Now? button.

Tomb Raider: Underworld. This game two kinds of WSIBDN? buttons. One let you read a hint, and the other would have Lara tell you what to do. For instance:
READ: "Those two fire pits look promising."
LISTEN: "I should remove all the blocks blocking the flame's path, and line up the symbols to make the mechanism work."
 
Apr 28, 2008
14,634
0
0
hansari said:
4) Play With A Pro - It's tough learning the ropes, so why not have an experienced veteran help you along the way.
That doesn't always work out.

My friend is a pro at WoW, and he's been trying to get me to play it for the longest time.
I eventually cave, and buy a 2 month card. He let me use his disks to install the game.

Sadly, he was a jackass nonstop.

I have never played an MMO before, ever, and everytime I had a question, or made a mistake, all he would do was comment on how stupid I was.

I know he meant well, but I needed some time to get a feel for the game, he didn't give me time, and tried to rush me to a high level through account linking.

So there I was, a noob, getting levels like crazy, and not knowing what the hell to do with all the spells/powers/skill/weapons I got, and getting called out for being a high level and not knowing shit.

Man that was frustrating... Although I could just be a special case, not all people are like that. But still, it was a pain in the ass for me, a noob, to play with a hardcore badass.
 

Mr. Fister

New member
Jun 21, 2008
1,335
0
0
syndicated44 said:
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.
Quite the contrary, I feel that Nintendo is helping bridge the gap between new gamers and veterans more than anyone else. Some of the major titles that Nintendo recently released (Phantom Hourglass, WiiSports Resort, Mario Kart Wii, The Legendary Starfy) do a good job of keeping things simple enough for practically anyone to pick up and play while having enough depth and enjoyment for the more traditional gamers. New Super Mario Bros. Wii also looks like it could be enjoyed by both traditional and new gamers at the same time.

I'd elaborate more, but this is a particularly touchy subject and I'm afraid I'll open up a rather unpleasant can of worms.
 

Low Key

New member
May 7, 2009
2,503
0
0
Susan Arendt said:
paypuh said:
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.
Okay, I can work with that. I started a brand new game the other week and for the first 15 minutes, the game had an overlay with basic instructions on how to play. Perhaps instead of impeding my progress with boring game mechanics I probably could figure out on my own, if someone were to choose a "first-timer" option or whatever it might be called, it could give those who have no idea how to play at least the basic idea. And rather than muck up my screen with information I more or less already know, I can just jump right in and figure out the majority of the controls with trial and error and any special techniques with a help screen. Or scale the help up or down depending on the level of difficulty chosen.

I suppose that's why the Wii has been getting people who wouldn't normally play video games into gaming. Almost everyone already knows how to swing a baseball bat or tennis racket so the mechanics are no mystery. It's all about timing rather than memorizing buttons.
 

The Rogue Wolf

Stealthy Carnivore
Legacy
Nov 25, 2007
16,908
9,600
118
Stalking the Digital Tundra
Gender
✅
For gamers who are up in arms because "omg teh cazuelz r comming & tehy want 2 ruin our gaemz!", let me provide an analogy.

Suppose you and your buds/mates/fellow cyborg warriors have decided to head out to the local bowling alley to play a few games. You're just having fun, loosening up, and using the score for bragging rights rather than anything serious. Then the retired pro bowler in the lane next to you starts giving you dirty looks and begins muttering to himself. After a full game where nobody's score went over 140, the retired pro bowler storms over and starts bawling you out for "not taking the game seriously" and "making bowling look bad". He insists that you should learn how to put a spin on the ball and how to judge lane waxing, and declares that nobody should be allowed to bowl in public until they can reliably pick up a 7-10 split.

Sounds pretty asinine, doesn't it? Well, that's how the "old school" gamers come across when they declare that gaming should only cater to them. "We learned it the hard way, so should everyone else!" But really, a lot of us DIDN'T "learn it the hard way". We came in on the ground floor, when a controller with more than one button was a thing of wonder, and 16 colors on the screen at once was amazing. The hobby grew along with us, and we adapted to its growing complexity by growing along with it. Expecting a neophyte gamer to immediately know things like circle-strafing, elemental strengths/weaknesses and complex controller schemes is like expecting someone who's never seen a bowling ball before to immediately know how to score a spare followed by a strike.

And the younger generation isn't excused from this either. Some people were lucky growing up to have an early exposure to games. They cut their teeth- sometimes literally, in cases of chewing on controllers- on some of the more complex, relatively modern games. That's great- it's like being the Tiger Woods of gaming, talent plus early exposure and honing of skills. But you don't see Tiger Woods going out onto a community golf course and bawling out the 40-year-old office worker who's only been playing for three weeks and has a 12 handicap.

My only concern over providing "easy modes" is that some developers may focus entirely upon that, and not deliver a more balanced and difficult experience for more seasoned gamers. Playtesting and balancing a game is a tedious process, after all, and doing so for an entire range of difficulty levels may prove more daunting than some devs may wish to endure. And I can admit that it's something of a piddling complaint, seeing as how many games already simply treat Hard mode as "enemy takes X + 3 shots to die", but still.

Now, if I might be so brash as to add my own submission to this growing list of recommendations:

5. Incentive to improve. If a new gamer finishes a game on Easy mode, and believes that that's all there is to the game, where's the incentive to play Normal mode? None of us started out as the Ubergamer, besting all challenges set before us on the first try- we pushed ourselves, learning to play better, think faster, react quicker. But with many would-be gamers these days facing "entertainment overload" with all the various things they can spend their time on, there needs to be more incentive to keep playing.

One solution: Make Easy mode sort of a guided tour. Let the player know, once they finish the game, that there's more awesome nooks and crannies, more story, better weapons and harder enemies to be faced if they pick up the gauntlet and head for that next difficulty level. Easy mode should be Basic Training for gaming- and once the newbie gamer comes out, in the ideal situation, he/she should be psyched to take on a more difficult challenge.
 

Almathea Toes

New member
Sep 24, 2009
11
0
0
My suggestion would be to go to the source of ideas for this, Learning theory and the philosophies of education.

As a final year Bachelors of education student I can tell you these issues are ones that are dealt with in extreme detail in the field of education. For instance, all of the suggestions so far have predominately fallen into the categories of scaffolding, where you provide additional structure and framework new learners. This is very educationally sound, and one of the basis' for differentiating learning in the classroom.

Plus, I feel required to respond to all the people who say to read the manual, one I always read the manual, but think back to your school days. Did you always do the assigned reading? Do you feel that reading is the best way to learn? Do you think everyone learns as effectively from reading? All of these have to be considered before blithely saying people should "just read the manual".

Also, no help ever? I can only ask do you feel we should simply give students textbooks and tell them that if they succeed they can feel they made a real achievement because teachers and help are for sissies?
 

Twilight_guy

Sight, Sound, and Mind
Nov 24, 2008
7,131
0
0
I like the general ideas here. Making the transitions from casual games that easily picked up/mastered like a browser or popcap game to a more complex game with 20 button options, 200 combos and three glowing primary color bars can be a bit of a quantum leap. I see this as becoming a big issue in the gaming industry. Nintendo patented there game playing for you idea as something to help bridge this gap as well. Having the game demonstrate proper form would be a big help in certain circumstances. I think it would probably be better for learning then just plan invincibility as well. I don't know about buy-outs as they seem to just encourage newbies to grind away at making money to beat the game. Grind is fun to some but boring to others, and inevitable doesn't help anyone learn or get comfortable with playing. "what should I be doing now" is generally in most well designed games I've ever played. It could be made more obvious(A big glowing arrow on screen) but most games have a map marker to tell you where to go or a journal(more so in RPGs). Games where the player gets lost seems to be more a function of bad game design rather then player inability. Even the most "hardcore" can get lost in a poorly designed game.

I think one of the best ways to bridge the gap is to create games aimed at the middle group. In most other activities in the world, there is always a gradual progression from simple introduction things to hardcore. When you learn to read you start with "The dog sat" and then you move up to "Ben and Jen get ice cream" and on to short books and then longer books and so on. There isn't just "green eggs and ham" and "Hamlet" with a big nothing in between. Now, I'm not sure what the game equivalent of "the Hardy Boys" is but I'm sure it's out there. I think what the industry needs may just be a list of gaming levels and adequate games to fill the ranks. Then gaming can be a stair step up from "Bejewled" to Final Fantasy or Halo. Maybe it's a bit to much to ask publishers and developers to work together, perhaps there needs to be an independent group to rate games or a website(nudge, nudge) or something, but I think if this caught on it would be pretty useful.
 

squid5580

Elite Member
Feb 20, 2008
5,106
0
41
Irridium said:
hansari said:
4) Play With A Pro - It's tough learning the ropes, so why not have an experienced veteran help you along the way.
That doesn't always work out.

My friend is a pro at WoW, and he's been trying to get me to play it for the longest time.
I eventually cave, and buy a 2 month card. He let me use his disks to install the game.

Sadly, he was a jackass nonstop.

I have never played an MMO before, ever, and everytime I had a question, or made a mistake, all he would do was comment on how stupid I was.

I know he meant well, but I needed some time to get a feel for the game, he didn't give me time, and tried to rush me to a high level through account linking.

So there I was, a noob, getting levels like crazy, and not knowing what the hell to do with all the spells/powers/skill/weapons I got, and getting called out for being a high level and not knowing shit.

Man that was frustrating... Although I could just be a special case, not all people are like that. But still, it was a pain in the ass for me, a noob, to play with a hardcore badass.
Not only that just read the responses in this thread (not to mention any SP game). You get the impression that they are just not wanted. We are far to quick to call out "NOOB" while laughing and pointing at the greenhorn so even finding a "helpful pro" amongst the elitists asses is not going to help the problem. Even suggesting that the game be newb friendly by incorporating these options that a person wouldn't have to use if they didn't want to gets people frothing at the mouth. Hopefully developers are intelligent enough to realize it is these people who will doom the industry and start incorporating some of these ideas (or reasonable facimiles) to make gaming more inviting to more people.
 

BehattedWanderer

Fell off the Alligator.
Jun 24, 2009
5,237
0
0
The Rogue Wolf said:
5. Incentive to improve.
That sounds like a valuable contribution to the list. How many times have we played a game on one mode, only to have the entire experience played our for us while missing on the aspects of challenge or difficulty that should be accompanying. When these new, aspiring gamers play into it, they get the whole deal, but don't come to understand part of the complication, the power, the captivation that beating the harder modes offers. Your idea would have a deep impact on that aspect, whereby leaving pieces out of the story or plot that are found in the harder modes, if they're so sought.

But I am wary of seeing these implemented, for the reasons that devs will get carried away with it, enabling you to skip whole segments of the game because it's a bit too challenging. Part of me thinks that that challenge is there for a reason, and that a lot of design went into making it that difficult. Some parts shouldn't allow skipping, or assistance, but should be more of a test of what you've learned. Midterms and finals are hard because they require effort to get through, to learn the material, as a proof of knowledge and skill, sort of thing. While hints should by all means be available, solving those portions is part of what makes those games as great as they are. Sometimes it's much better for the new gamers to overcome the problem on their own, so that they can do it at the next challenge, and the one after that, and so on--some of these devices would mean that the player who has trouble doing a multiple-bounce wall jump to get up to the next ledge would not learn to do the jump, but rely on the auto-gamer to do it for them. Part of what might get left behind in this rush to make the new crowd of gamers into ready-made gamers might be those important parts that each gamer needs to learn--our circle strafes, our specialized jumps and wall-hopping, our interactive interface points (grapple spots, information zones, radio checks, phone calls, etc). And let's not forget, part of what makes us better gamers after dying in the lava so many times is that when we finally master the timing of the jumps, spins, leaps, and platform physics and get to the objective without ending up a pile of burning carbon--and that's been our reward, that we have improved through necessity.

Remember Pitfall? How agonizing it was, falling into pits, being eaten by crocodiles, or jumping over a snake or scorpion only to realize that a tenth of your pixel was too close, and you died your pixelated death? And then, the next time--well, you probably died then, too, because it's a lot harder to jump over than you thought. But some point after that, you made it over the scorpion, past the snakes, jumped the logs, grabbed the vine without falling in the pit, and, whew, you made it to the end. You felt proud, and better than all of your previous other selves of moments passed, those swearing at a reptile made of a few black squares, those yelling "Jump, damn you, jump!" with all the ferocity of a tyrannosaur, those with eye-twitching frustrated nerves, those grasping the controller so hard they probably left an imprint. You had done it! You! Even after those despairing moments when things were darkest, and you wondered if it was even physically possible to jump on cue anymore, you had beaten it!

It's that feeling that is needed for us to become better gamers, and I'm afraid that while in trying to make gaming more accommodating to the new audience one of the causalities seen will be the challenge to make the effort necessary. Sometimes we need to sit there, get up on our own, and loudly proclaim "This shit will not beat me!". It's a matter of mixing that right amount of challenge, pride, arrogance, stubbornness, and curiosity to make sure that the game gets played as it should, and not just watched over as if they were scenes posted to youtube that you had to push a few buttons to watch. The pwn-ready gamers of today needed a swift kick in the pants and to be pushed down in the mud a few times before they could stand up and push back--and some of these options seem inclined to remove not only the pushing, but also the mud.
 

BloodSquirrel

New member
Jun 23, 2008
1,263
0
0
I don't see this working very well- if somebody is truly and completely unable to play a shooter, giving them a "get past this boss free card" isn't going to help very much.

The basic problem is that it takes a lot of effort to create a game with a truly wide range of adjustable difficult. Part of the problem with modern games, from the standpoint of newcomers, is the sheer complexity- and complexity isn't something you can easily strip away from a game, especially not if you want it to still be fun (remember: they probably still want to be challenged, just on their level, so just making it impossible to lose doesn't make it fun).
 

pantsoffdanceoff

New member
Jun 14, 2008
2,751
0
0
I like the idea. I really do suck at videogames and I still get the concepts. (Well... I'm actually rather decent at RPGS and I was really good at GW PvP (which was a bit sad IMO).) But I always try and get new people to play and they just can't comprehend it at all. I think things would be really help full.
 

iamthehorde

New member
Mar 2, 2009
244
0
0
some of that suggestions have actually already been tried out one way, or another. the what to do/where to go?-button was used in shadow of the colossus or dead space, due to the fact it had not to tell you what to do in these games(s.o.c. get to the next beast, dead space basically just get from a to b, b to c, so on).

mirrors edge marked the way the whole game with bright colours and had a really easy easymode, i mean really easy.

the skipping thing has been done by the latest alone in the dark. this idea should be handled with care in my opinion. it would be cool if you could skip between checkpoints if you get stuck because you are not well enough prepared. skipping whole chapters seems pointless though, it would disrupt a game too much.

alternatively there could be an option to trade exp/money/points for supplies or a temporary special effect like double damage or -defense. or some kind of balanced difficulty adjustment. the world ends with you had a very cool system. now a game should somehow know by itself what kind of setting you need right now.

one reason because so many people play wow that don´t play videogames that reguarly may be that it has a very good pacing at throwing items and stuff and whatnots at you. at least that´s what i heard from friends that play it. i stay far away from this stuff! but to trick the hunter gatherer mentality in us all is also a good motivator. in easy mode much better stuff could be available right at the beginning. you could start an rpg for example with higher stats than in normal mode. okay, that already sounds old, but how about giving unexperienced players something like a big advantage in the beginning and then the game could track down through stats how good or bad the player is doing and adjusts the advantage. in an fps, if the player has developed a hi hit- and/or dodge/cover rate(basically determined by the loss of total energy up to this point), the game could phase out the advantage letting the player go into gaming-adolescence.

i´m baked so don´t wonder if all this above reads like half-thought nonsense.

cheers
 
Jan 3, 2009
1,171
0
0
Reading this I just cant understand who this article is for?

Safe assumption: Your on the escapist, you play some video games. amirite or amirite. I think this article makes sense but were is the accomplishment? I have never played gh until a couple months ago, I worked from easy to medium to hard and now after months of dedication I can play on expert. If I had god mode to get me thru raining blood or the Battle with Lou I wouldnt feel like I accomplished something.

I think we call it a tutorial to help out newcomers and after a while if we implament this easiness then its just machinama that you have to walk thru.
 

Dottie

New member
May 6, 2009
227
0
0
This is bullshit,I gave my best chick friend a copy of the orange box so she can start off her collection of video games. This was the first time she ever touched a video game let alone a shooter. I was like she's probably gonna take months to beat the whole half-life saga let alone the whole orange box. Not only did she quickly adapt and play the game on the normal difficulty setting but she beat it in less time than I did when the first half-life2 versions were released on PC. I noticed she really liked it she would be up until 2 am playing half-life and not even notice. also if they added those mechanics it would make it nearly impossible to die and make the whole thing lackluster and give you no since of achievement. I hate to ramble on about this but you guys should have seen how happy she was when she beat the whole thing. It's her favorite game series of all time now. And that is the kind of person that gets into video games not just anyone. people who actually enjoy a challenge cause I know she had LOTS of trouble at first.
 

Nutcase

New member
Dec 3, 2008
1,177
0
0
If the good, old, simple and easy games taught and entertained us so well, why don't the new players play them and reap the same benefits, then join us in playing complex and highly challenging games?

Why must newly made complex and challenging games be watered down to give new players - who will, if they like games at all, become seasoned gamers in no time and then suffer from the diluted and dumbed down games like we do now - a piss-weak sense of accomplishment?
 

Altorin

Jack of No Trades
May 16, 2008
6,976
0
0
you're right, on the whole, but I think Bioshock was a great stepping stone into hardcore gaming as it was...

maybe if the map has been clearer, but the vitachambers in Bioshock made dying not a real problem.. You weren't forced to reload any progress you made, and there's nowhere in the game with an unlimited number of bad guys, so if you kept working at it, you could fight your way through eventually, even if you died a bunch

On the easiest setting, the Big Daddies were decent challenges for newer gamers.. maybe a little tough, but again, victory was only a few vita chamber visits away.

I wasn't interested in shooters at all, but then I decided to play Bioshock, now I love them.. but I do agree - most gamers know the basic rules of how games are made and played.. and easy mode could stand to be a little easier in most cases.
 

sneakypenguin

Elite Member
Legacy
Jul 31, 2008
2,804
0
41
Country
usa
Mr.Pandah said:
You hit the nail on the head controls are one major sticking point with new people. I can play any fps and the dual analog controls are just like breathing, I can jump circle strafe and track any target without thinking. My GF plays halo and its a chore for her just to walk straight. She wants to learn to play COD cause she thinks it looks fun but even on easy its to hard, because she has to stop adjust her aim shakily and finally hit a guy only to be murdered by the other 3 shooting her not to mention trying to add picking up weapons use melee and reloading in the mix. She can do racing games cause its L1 R1 and left stick, easy concept easy execution. Same with Sims and things like spyro. But things we as gamers take for granted are nigh impossible. Many FPS's need an invincible mode because anyone whos never played is at a complete loss as far as ability, I mean how do you get someone interested in a game when it has 12 buttons and differing actions for each depending on context, most just end up putting it down, and I can't say I blame them.
 

Echolocating

New member
Jul 13, 2006
617
0
0
I play quite a few games with my 4-year-old and would love to see an optional "little tyke" mode. It would be kind of like invincibility, but it would have jumping that automatically leaps you to the other side and when you get hit, you simply get knocked back or stunned temporarily and never hurt.
 

Mr.Pandah

Pandah Extremist
Jul 20, 2008
3,967
0
0
sneakypenguin said:
Mr.Pandah said:
You hit the nail on the head controls are one major sticking point with new people. I can play any fps and the dual analog controls are just like breathing, I can jump circle strafe and track any target without thinking. My GF plays halo and its a chore for her just to walk straight. She wants to learn to play COD cause she thinks it looks fun but even on easy its to hard, because she has to stop adjust her aim shakily and finally hit a guy only to be murdered by the other 3 shooting her not to mention trying to add picking up weapons use melee and reloading in the mix. She can do racing games cause its L1 R1 and left stick, easy concept easy execution. Same with Sims and things like spyro. But things we as gamers take for granted are nigh impossible. Many FPS's need an invincible mode because anyone whos never played is at a complete loss as far as ability, I mean how do you get someone interested in a game when it has 12 buttons and differing actions for each depending on context, most just end up putting it down, and I can't say I blame them.
Exactly.