WhiteTigerShiro said:
Smokescreen said:
WhiteTigerShiro said:
Again, I think you're taking the article a little too literally if you think the writer honestly thinks we'd be going back to Atari controllers. It's more an example than a serious idea.
Really? Because he spent a page and a half of a 3 page article describing the idea. So if it's more an example then a whole lot of time was invested in it.
I've seen people right longer explanations on even more pointless endeavors. No matter how long or how short, the point remains that the example in the article was simply that: An example. Not an honestly expected suggestion.
An example that got way too much attention instead of working out more practical solutions and expanding on the proper objections. Who cares if you've seen people spend more time on things of less worth-that doesn't validate the time and energy spent on this example. Especially since you go on to agree with me that both articles are underdeveloped in their approaches to a solution.
Basically, I saw mostly just elitism. Perhaps there was some informed post that you're referring to which I didn't see. If that's the case, then feel free to tell me all about it.
You saw elitism because that's all you wanted to see. There were reasonable objections to Susan's article, many of them bringing up the point that developers had implemented (to varying degrees of success) most of the things she'd suggested. Again, the problem is in the development of solutions; instead of getting people excited about brainstorming new ideas there was just a rehash of old ones that weren't working.
Yes, there were those who gave the 'who cares they aren't leet' argument-just as there are here- but if you weren't willing to read through to find the reasonable posts (and I don't entirely blame you for that) then it's harder to sustain your objections. As a side note; I didn't make any sort of leap that said; amateur basketball fans shouldn't have hoops b/c they wouldn't be playing the game the way professionals do. Please don't attribute such insanity to me.
Games-any game, all games-require a learning curve of some kind. Learning something new is going to be the case for anyone and everyone who picks one out to play. Some are going to be more complicated than others, but if it was so easy to give us a controller that anyone could pick up and intuitively know how it worked then why isn't it already done? Unless we want to stop and just all play Bejeweled and nothing else, I don't see how you can take away things like ergonomically designed controllers with an array of buttons.
My argument in Susan's thread-and here-is that there is a lack of mid-step games that allow people to go from the a card game like War to one like Magic the Gathering. Or for videogames, say Tetris to Final Fantasy. The problem isn't the controller; the problem is in the lack of games that fall into that middle space so a learning curve could exist. The controller could have thirty buttons and it wouldn't matter if you were playing a game that only needed you to use 5. Someone upthread pointed out that car dashboards have something like 150 different interfaces, but nobody complains about that interface for a myriad of reasons.
Maybe you agree with that maybe not but regardless of that, I feel that this article spent too much time on a single, not extremely well thought out, proposal instead of looking in the right directions for solutions.