In Defense of Hepler Mode

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 NEXT
 

FredTheUndead:

mjc0961:

FredTheUndead:
As for Hepler herself, while the community at the time certainly didn't handle things correctly, she IS nothing less than a living tumor, one of many Bioware developed and rotted down to nothing because of.

And this is your idea of handling things correctly?! You are a horrible person.

My idea of handling an incompetent IS for people to tell them that they are incompetent yes.

Except that's not what you said at all, and if you can't tell the difference between what you originally said and what you said just now, I truly pity you.

Hmm.

On one hand, I kind've appreciate the idea that once you buy a game, it's yours, and you should be able to play it more or less any way you wish. God knows, if the ME3 ending controversy has done one thing, it's been to deepen my skepticism of anyone whose argument more or less starts from "you plebians are destroying the art...! *shake shake shake*"

On the other hand, I can't help but think about the recent Final Fantasy games, about which a common criticism I hear is "these people would clearly rather be making movies, and pushed against that desire, their audience can apparently go hang."

I entirely appreciate games like the Deus Ex series that at their best work very hard to make non-combat choices a real option for progression. I love good conversation systems, and writers who work hard to make characters who are worth talking to. And I'll admit that, much as I enjoyed much of Mass Effect 2, I very much got to the point where every new plot development had me musing "Hmm, I wonder how I'll use gunplay to resolve this issue...?" I totally agree that game designers should work harder to make sure that every aspect of their game is well integrated into a solid and fulfilling whole, ideally such that players feel little or no desire to skip over "onerous" aspects of game-play or so that they can minimize aspects that they're less enthusiastic about (either, for example, talking their way out of fights... Or, conversely, using brute force to resolve what at face value appears to be a social conflict.)

But we shouldn't pretend that if a "Hepler mode" actually became something of an industry standard it would have no effect beyond allowing players to play the game in a way they found more enjoyable. Even a relatively shallow examination of games in the twenty-first century ought to suggest that that's simply not true. Game company executives hate putting production hours into material that players aren't going to experience; they see it as a waste of time and money. Their response to finding that 51% of gamers are skipping over combat or dialogue, frequently, is not going to be to say, "Hmm, how can we make this [combat/dialogue] more fulfilling to the player", it's going to be, "In the sequel, cut out the [combat/dialogue] altogether."

Look at the way planet exploration in Mass Effect [e-/de-]volved.

I also hesitate to give gamers more reasons to claim that a game is too short when they simply skipped over large sections of gameplay, even with the designers' half-hearted blessing.

I'd love to see dynamic, non-violent/non-action gameplay continue to evolve and designers continue to find new ways to incorporate elements of conflict and challenge that involve more than reflexes and basic tactics. But I have real concerns if something like a "Hepler mode" was how we tried to go about it.

mjc0961:

FredTheUndead:

mjc0961:

And this is your idea of handling things correctly?! You are a horrible person.

My idea of handling an incompetent IS for people to tell them that they are incompetent yes.

Except that's not what you said at all, and if you can't tell the difference between what you originally said and what you said just now, I truly pity you.

OH GOD SOMEONE ON THE INTERNET USED HYPERBOLE

She's bad for the company. She just is. Even if you like what she writes for some reason, nobody who draws so much bad press is good for a company that already has an utter assload of public relations problems. Maybe she's a nice person in real life, I don't know. I DOUBT it, given her typically arrogant responses to criticism, and that whole "we wanted to write a fantasy story that was different from the typical one written by some old white man" nonsense, but I don't really know. What I DO know is that she brings nothing good to the table for Bioware, she just sits there, festering ill feelings in the community and clogging up the works. That's what a tumor is. If Bioware knows what's good for them, they'll cut her. Which is pretty likely anyway, since Old Republic and ME3 both reek of "Ea is going to bring down the goddamn executioner's axe" for Bioware.

So do I hate her for some bigoted reason, or wish death on her? No. Do I think she's good for Bioware or gaming in general? No. Do I think a skip combat button is a good idea? Absolutely not.

Maybe instead of adding Hepler Mode, developers should make games where the story and gameplay are in harmony instead of competition. But if Hepler Mode is possible - if combat is nothing more than an obstacle between cutscenes and nothing you do in a fight will have consequences later on - then I don't see any reason not to give players the option.

This is exactly my line of reasoning.

I don't like Bioware very much for both game and meta-game reasons. Mostly because I despise the method of "drop player in level, player kills all enemies/walks to end, then interactive cutscene" that seems to infest their games so deeply. I hate having to wait for "Ambush" dialogue options to pop up in order to kill people I don't like (Miranda), I hate how the different classes are just different flavors of combat and I hate having to kill just as many people in a "Paragon" playthrough as a "Renegade" playthrough.

If I were to implement some sort of combat skip option, I would rather accomplish it by offering variety in problem solving that may appeal to a more story minded gamer. Things like coercion or stealth. Variety is always more appealing to me than just offering a cut down experience, and really, if the combat isn't contributing to the experience, then why is the combat even there?

Dexter111:

Shamanic Rhythm:
I just don't understand why you'd bother defending anyone from that little Reddit hate circle. Dragon Age II was a piece of crap, but if you or anyone else got so invested in it that you can't help but burst with misogynistic rage when a female writer expresses her ineptness at playing games, I think it says more about you than it does about them.

I'm not defending anyone, it was rather shitty what they did and especially in which tone, but reactionary putting it off as some sort of "misogynistic/homophobic outburst" or whatever gaming media tried to "paint" it as won't help anyone but EAs PR.

She isn't the only female in the industry and it's not like everyone else got the same treatment. It's easy to put it off as "stupid gamers", it's harder to try to analyze and find reason as to why it actually happened and maybe try to prevent it the next time.

And that's not going to happen unless either the press start being more critical and asking questions, similar to what Forbes is doing right now or if that certain part of the industry changes its ways. Hell, people are literally throwing millions of dollars at this Kickstarter thing mainly because they are frustrated of the state the industry is in and some critical commentary in regards to that and the obvious business practices instead of the PR puff pieces and glowing reviews every now and then as well as some basic respect for your audience and their thinking ability would go a long way.

I see what you're saying, but two wrongs don't make a right.

Irridium:
...

However, for, say, Bioware games (or RPG's in general), they could just give us a way to skip combat through dialog. Like, say, you get ambushed, leader starts gloating, you use your super-awesome speech skills to persuade him/her to back off.

Bam, combat section skipped.

...

Personally if I want a story, I read a book. If I want a game I play a freakin' game. This suggestion by Irridium here I like. Given the RPG style of gaming involves a lot of conversation It would make sense to have a means of using that to skip through combat sequenses as a reward for your character being a good diplomat, bully, sneaky git, whatever.

At the same time that should reciprocate and give us a way to skip dialog with combat. If you want to skip the conversation and just get stuck into the combat an option should be there for your character to say 'fuck it!' and just start blowing people away.

FredTheUndead:
we wanted to write a fantasy story that was different from the typical one written by some old white man" nonsense

That is nonsense, because she did not say that, I have already pointed that out in this thread, and you could have figured this out yourself had you looked into the matter, or thought about it for one moment.
She works under an old white guy. Old enough anyway.

FredTheUndead:
her typically arrogant responses to criticism,

Typically we hear nothing from her, so that is a dishonest statement. It's a bit of a theme from you.

If watching a sibling play a videogame is a close equivalent to Hepler mode, then so is watching a Let's Play on YouTube. Which I've done at least a couple of times for games that are short and more about spectacle than gameplay.

So you don't really need to buy the game for Hepler mode.

But, I guess you mentioned if we do that we can't explore or pick dialog options. Okay, maybe the price you have to pay to save $60.

This is a roundabout way of saying that in story driven games, there is no harm in it.

Maybe instead of adding Hepler Mode, developers should make games where the story and gameplay are in harmony instead of competition. But if Hepler Mode is possible - if combat is nothing more than an obstacle between cutscenes and nothing you do in a fight will have consequences later on - then I don't see any reason not to give players the option.

Wasn't this basically how Portal worked? The entire game was essentially tutorial just through the level design, yet it never really seemed like it was holding your hand, despite the design of the levels doing just that.

In some cases, it would be hard to have a helper mode. In some cases, it would work well. I wouldn't mind it myself in the few games where the story and gameplay are horribly separated and the gameplay is a boring repetitive task. But I'm not sure it should be in some games that do use their combat well and reinforce the story through combat. At that point, the fights become a part of the story, and I think skipping those will end up with you missing out on a lot of what is going on.

Then again, you don't need to skip it. It would be an option.

Yeah, I may not use it, but I don't really see the huge issue. Although, if they do have a ode like that, they may want to re-work the cutscenes to better flow, because t will be more movie than game at that point.

Hmmm. the gamer in me doesn't like the idea much. I already feel much of the challenge and reward lost in Bioshock's "revive with all your weapons" vita chambers, Final Fantasy XIII's quick retry, health regen, and games autosaving every 5 minutes. On the other hand, what old school gamer can't sympathasize. The endless hours replaying Ninja Gaiden to get the next cut sceene. The fighting game endings we never got because we couldn't get a handle on the character. That RPG that needed hours upon hours of grinding. Not everyone has the time to get good enough to progress in a game, and if there's a story attached, that can be a little cruel. Even as a gamer, I'll admit, I like reliving cut scenes but taking the time to replay 10 - 20 hours into a final Fantasy isnt' in the cards anymore, let alone the multiple playthroughs a bioware game can ask. Back to the other hand, we have more than a few companies that seem more interested in movie making than video games, and I don't wish to encourage them to just into interactive film.

Maybe there's something in having the feature but attaching a penality to it. Say making of video unlockables if you beat the game naturally, or discounts on upcoming story based DLC. Depending on the game you could just cut out the game entirely and sell the cutscenes on DVD. It woulddn't work with Bioware titles, but Metal Gear Solid could make a kiling.

DrVornoff:

snip

I could make a drinking game out of this.

Don't, it's a one way ticket to alcohol poisoning.

Original topic: I actually played a mission in Mass Effect 3 on story mode. Ended up just meleeing everything to death because it was so easy. Except for the Cerberus turrets, those things can fuck your shit up fast even on story mode.

Irridium:
Pretty much all Bioware games would be improved if you could skip the combat. Since combat in most Bioware games is pretty bad.

However, for, say, Bioware games (or RPG's in general), they could just give us a way to skip combat through dialog. Like, say, you get ambushed, leader starts gloating, you use your super-awesome speech skills to persuade him/her to back off.

Bam, combat section skipped.

Really wish Bioware, and more developers for that matter, let you do that. Let you really exercise that speechcraft and charisma score. Of course some people you may have to fight no matter what, but you could still talk to them first, and whittle down their confidence and moral to make them easier to fight. Maybe have a button that let you throw combat taunts of your own. Or something.

KOTOR 2 played with this idea. Only with Sion, but still. HK-47 tells you the best way to kill a jedi (or sith) is to mess with his/her mind. Erode their confidence. You could do this with Sion, and his skills would decrease, and you'd eventually talk him into dying (or "letting go").

The problem with how they did it with Sion, IMO IIRC, is that you HAD to talk him down. If you only fought, he would never die because that was his whole sctick. I do love how it (and the entire game sans the non-story parts of Malachor) was done, but I don't feel that's a good example of what you were talking about.

As for the actual argument, I don't get the people who are saying "If I want a story, I'll read a book." This completely misses how amazing games are as a storytelling medium. Even if you skip the combat, you're still controlling the conversations, which means you get invested in a way I've yet to see done by another medium.

Besides, even if that were not true, there are some very good stories that I can only experience in games. Yes, there are Mass Effect books (for example), but Shepard's story is only available as a game. If I didn't like the combat (I do- finished all 3 games on Insanity, but let's just suppose), why not let me just skip to the story?

Avatar Roku:

Irridium:
Pretty much all Bioware games would be improved if you could skip the combat. Since combat in most Bioware games is pretty bad.

However, for, say, Bioware games (or RPG's in general), they could just give us a way to skip combat through dialog. Like, say, you get ambushed, leader starts gloating, you use your super-awesome speech skills to persuade him/her to back off.

Bam, combat section skipped.

Really wish Bioware, and more developers for that matter, let you do that. Let you really exercise that speechcraft and charisma score. Of course some people you may have to fight no matter what, but you could still talk to them first, and whittle down their confidence and moral to make them easier to fight. Maybe have a button that let you throw combat taunts of your own. Or something.

KOTOR 2 played with this idea. Only with Sion, but still. HK-47 tells you the best way to kill a jedi (or sith) is to mess with his/her mind. Erode their confidence. You could do this with Sion, and his skills would decrease, and you'd eventually talk him into dying (or "letting go").

The problem with how they did it with Sion, IMO IIRC, is that you HAD to talk him down. If you only fought, he would never die because that was his whole sctick. I do love how it (and the entire game sans the non-story parts of Malachor) was done, but I don't feel that's a good example of what you were talking about.

I agree, but I couldn't think of any other game that let you weaken an enemy between fights by talking to him/her. He's pretty much the only example I can think of...

Veterinari:
I love the idea of a Helper Mode. In a story-driven game I'm there for the story, and unless the gameplay is really, really good it's really just something I put up with. I'm not saying I'd never play the gameplay. I'm guessing I'd play with it a lot. But whenever I stop playing games because I didn't finish it it's always, always because I got sick of the gameplay. Even if I've been really into the story up to that point.

Darkmantle:
This idea would make the achievement system essentially worthless, wouldn't it? Like, I could skip the combat and cinematic sections, couldn't I just achievement whore every game?

Uh, I'm not really sure what the achievement system has to do with this? If you mean "You unlocked this chapter!" achivements, this could be solved very, very easily. Just tie the achievement to the last boss or door or something. Problem solved.

Yeah, I was taking about the end of chapter achievements, there are probably solutions.

I think the best way to do this is a "story" mode that seriously beefs up your character (even makes them invulnerable) and makes your enemies pathetically weak. That way the player can still get a feel for the fight and still enjoy the victory, then hurry to the next story segment.

Yeah, I'm down with the idea of every single encounter being 'skippable', through dialogue skills. Have the game save at each one, and if you mess up, it lets you know you failed, and then you can battle anyway (If you're a hybrid fighter/talker) or restart the conversation.

Not necessarily as an alternative to Hepler Mode, but rather because I seriously want to play a true pacifist in more games (ie NOT just waiting for my allies to win for me.)

On HM itself... I have no problems with it? Just include a "Pacifist mode" available at the start, lock the character into all dialogue/passive skills (if applicable) and let them play normally, removing any enemies. Write the story so it accomodates a passive player anyway, so you don't get any "Congrats for vanquishing the goblin queen" when you really just walked to her house and back.

Instead, you'll pop in for a chat, tell her to fuck off, and if you fail the dialogue? Bam, restart that section. Gameplay, that lets you fail. (Obviously, when playing normal mode, failing the dialogue will just make her really cross.)

If the gameplay in a game doesn't add something tangible to the experience what good is the game? Haven't played these games... and with people left and right saying the combat's a chore that add little to the overall experience... I have to say I feel justified in skipping em.

I did not enjoy every moment in combat in SMT: Nocturne but the payoff at the end felt like a culmination of my efforts and brought greater meaning to every battle I grinded.

If the combat doesn't add some greater catharsis to completion than I don't really know what to say...

It's an interesting concept, however it might take the challenge out of some games...
I mean, if you can simply click skip to bypass boss fights etc
Imagine FF7, you go fight one of the weapons, then just skip and get their loot XD
But if the boss fights were forced, and a player had skipped all prior combat, they would likely be ill prepared to defeat the boss (in terms of knowing tactics).

also yeah.. hepler... I can't not read that as helper.

Dexter111:
Dragon Age 2 ... "The best RPG of this decade" with "The best RPG combat ever." "A pinnacle of role-playing games with well-designed mechanics and excellent story-telling, Dragon Age II is what videogames are meant to be."

Personally I found the DA2 combat to be rather enjoyable, especially when compared to DA:O,
The nonsensical forced actions were it's downfall in my eyes,
example - Act 3, some Mages with the help of sympathetic Templars are organizing some resistance thingy,
choose either psycho templar lady - destroy them, or mage dude - assist them...
but even if you pick to assist the mages, when you go say hi to them, it just initiates combat and you have to kill them XD

-Torchedini-:
Hepler Mode is fine by me but is it still a game then. If you are skipping the combat then it simply becomes an interactive movie or the stories that appear on here sometimes.

There are no such things as interactive movies, no one sells anything labelled that. However, technically most video games would fall into the category of an entertainment that you watch (movie) and that you interact with (interactive). Its not like you interact with a video game with different senses than a movie, as you would with books or music, other than making choices with a controller.
The choose-your-own adventure book is a book, and a choose-your-own adventure video game (or interactive movie if you prefer) is a video game.

What's the problem with trying? How will a game that experiments with a new structure be as cataclysmic as everyone seems to think it'd be. Does the existence of Dear Esther, a game with essentially no direct input from the player other then walking, somehow destroy Gears of War? Did the simplified leveling in Mass Effect prevent Wasteland 2 from entering development?

As gamers, we constantly complain about sequel farming and stagnant design philosophy, yet when someone starts proposing a new idea for how things could be done it's the end of the world. So what's the harm in giving it a go? Chances are it'll work great in some games, be terrible in others, and most will never use it at all. Options are never a bad thing, because the whole point of them being optional is that we don't have to pay attention if we don't want to.

What is and isn't acceptable design changes constantly. For example, I'm sure that 12 or so years ago the idea of giving the player the option go off and ignore most of the actual content you had planned over the course of the game was unthinkable to a lot of developers. Then GTA 3 came out, and just look where we are now.

I need a Hepler mode at work.
I think there's an ancient Turkey Tv skit about that. Like 4 people reading this will remember that show.

I know some people are like "well then it is just a movie so go watch a movie" but there isn't a mass effect movie. There isn't a Halo movie, there isn't a skyrim movie. So the whole "well just watch a movie" thing falls flat because I can't watch one with the story of the game I want to skip through.

Also Theater mode already exists in most games, and it has brought us some wonderful things:

My main problem with the idea of Hepler Mode, is that the few games were I would have liked it, it would only make sense because the gameplay was too tedious or too boring to play. In that case the good solution would have been to put more effort into designing the gameplay.

Some games actually have Hepler Mode, and have it for a very good reason. Total War has a Hepler Mode, it's called skip tactical combat. And it makes perfect sense because due to how battles happen, some of them will be boring or unimportant. It also adds the option to play it in pure strategic mode, although that will water down the game a bit.
Games with several types of gameplay can sometimes benefit from the option to skip certain parts of it.

If one were to add Hepler Mode to a game like ME2 on the other hand there wouldn't be any gameplay left.

The discussion reminds me about how I feel when I watch an opera or a musical in the TV. I sometimes wish they would add a button to skip the singing and get on with the story. But thats not really because I would like to watch an opera without the music, thats because I would rather have watched a play or a movie. Some of the proponents of Hepler Mode reminds me of that feeling, they are watching the wrong thing and would have been better off with interactive fiction or a normal movie.

Finally I think one reason Hepler received some hate, was due to her statement that she doesn't like playing games. How can a game writer make stories for a medium she doesn't like and doesn't understand? Games are a completely different medium and require a very different type of storytelling. Thats like letting a writer who dislikes music write a song. That simply wont work.

maxben:

-Torchedini-:
Hepler Mode is fine by me but is it still a game then. If you are skipping the combat then it simply becomes an interactive movie or the stories that appear on here sometimes.

There are no such things as interactive movies, no one sells anything labelled that. However, technically most video games would fall into the category of an entertainment that you watch (movie) and that you interact with (interactive). Its not like you interact with a video game with different senses than a movie, as you would with books or music, other than making choices with a controller.
The choose-your-own adventure book is a book, and a choose-your-own adventure video game (or interactive movie if you prefer) is a video game.

Never say never.

Also, I think people are really generalizing/oversimplifying things here - obviously this is not a mode that can or should be in every game, or even in every genre. However, there are games that it would definitely be a good fit for, and that shouldn't be overlooked in a lump statement.

Seems pretty legitimate to me. My girlfriend is trying to get into gaming, and she enjoys games such as Dragon Age: Origins, but sometimes has trouble with the more difficult fights. She doesn't want to give up on the game, but she's not as skilled as those of us who have been into the medium for all of our lives. I think something like Hepler Mode would really help burgeoning gamers with a taste for story get started.

Captcha: Count on Corolla - So car companies are going to utilize Hepler mode? Skip the driving and just get to your destination? Color me impressed.

Shamus Young:
In Defense of Hepler Mode

Shamus offers support for a "Hepler Mode" in games.

Read Full Article

'Hepler Mode' is all about making games into interactive movies, to appeal to a wider audience. I don't like this idea. Just look at what happened to television when the industry realised what a cash cow it was. Now there's virtually nothing on TV worth watching. Games should be games, not movies. Games should be more like Mario, and less like Myst. People like Hepler that want a well-told story and not a game, should, guess what - go see a movie. Or read a book.

That One Six:
Seems pretty legitimate to me. My girlfriend is trying to get into gaming, and she enjoys games such as Dragon Age: Origins, but sometimes has trouble with the more difficult fights. She doesn't want to give up on the game, but she's not as skilled as those of us who have been into the medium for all of our lives. I think something like Hepler Mode would really help burgeoning gamers with a taste for story get started.

It's called 'easy' mode, but regardless this is entirely my point. People like your girlfriend, for want of a better phrase, need to 'man up' and realise that games require a bit of work to be good at. So she can't complete a particular boss fight. Tell her to take a break and come back to it later. Or ask you for advice. Or have a think about the spells at her disposal and how she could use them. In other words, learn how to play a game. It's symbolic of this 'ME ME NOW NOW' culture we've become where everyone wants everything without any effort at all.

I mean shit, I saw a good book the other day and really wanted to read it, but the words were too hard. Why can't they make books easier to read? Then people like me could read these books and enjoy them. What was the name of the book? Oh, I think it was Great Expectations.

Shamus Young:
In Defense of Hepler Mode

Shamus offers support for a "Hepler Mode" in games.

Read Full Article

Considering how bad the combat was in Dragon Age 2, I can't blame her.

At the same time, Hepler, go buy the book of the game instead? It's an interactive medium that requires more than shunting your character from hotspot to hotspot.

"Helper mode" only works in mass effect because of the jarring switches between story and gameplay, with little of one in the other. In a game that mixes story and gameplay (which is really what game should do), this wouldn't be possible. As Shamus said. It's really quite odd how common the cutscene/gameplay/cutscene/gameplay layout has gotten, considering how long the medium has been going for by now. It's like a film where you scroll through the script for the dialogue and only see the action sequences.

As for Hepler herself, while the community at the time certainly didn't handle things correctly, she IS nothing less than a living tumor

Thanks for proving that gaming fandom is still festering with ugly, ugly sexism.

Because she is a writer and absolutely abominable at her job? I'd say the same about David Gaider, her awful, terrible, partner in crime

She isn't abominable at her job, though. Neither is Gaidar. You'll have to deal with other players being able to play their characters as gay. It doesn't hurt you.

why tortur yourself with having to play through it

Hence such a mode, to avoid said torture, no?

It's called 'easy' mode, but regardless this is entirely my point. People like your girlfriend, for want of a better phrase, need to 'man up' and realise that games require a bit of work to be good at.

Nope. You need to 'man up' and realise that games can be played in ways you don't. You will have to learn to deal with this. Different options are not a problem unless you have pretty severe issues that you need to work with. That someone beats a boss in easymode or skips him that you fought hard to beat does not affect your gameplay in any way. Stop whining about how others choose to play.

Care for your own gameplay. Not that of others.

At what point does a game stop being a game then?

I have no problem with people playing the game the way it they want to but if someone wants to just watch cutscenes, why don't they just look them up on Youtube? Games are more than just choose your own adventure movies and if companies start treating them as such, does gameplay suffer for the story?

Sagacious Zhu:
At what point does a game stop being a game then?

I have no problem with people playing the game the way it they want to but if someone wants to just watch cutscenes, why don't they just look them up on Youtube? Games are more than just choose your own adventure movies and if companies start treating them as such, does gameplay suffer for the story?

It's an interesting question. I imagine it's possible to create a game where all the gameplay consists of moving around and talking to people. It can still be more gamey than 'choose your own adventure' style. But I think it takes more than an option to skip the combat of an existing game.

A game needs to be designed with both the gameplay and the narrative in mind.

What makes a game a game? Conditions for success and failure, and those conditions must be an effect of player actions.
Just a broad attempt at a definition, there are many others.

---

captcha
jetBlue Airways
describe the brand with any words

I have no idea who you are and I don't give a shit, because this topic is about gaming.

When people are calling out for the option to skip large portions of your game, then I'd say the justified response is to have a long, hard look at your game. Maybe it's time to ditch the ancient approach of gameplay/cutscene/gameplay in favour of something smoother?

But regardless of the actual issue: anyone who thinks "having a different opinion" is enough cause to spout abuse on this scale is a total fuckwad. No exceptions.

OH GOD someone get this idiot a movie to watch, i will say this once and only once. GAMES ARE GAMEPLAY

game/gām/
Noun:
A form of play or sport, esp. a competitive one played according to rules and decided by skill, strength, or luck.

Adjective:
Eager and willing to do something new or challenging: "they were game for anything".

its a game its something you play if you skipped the gameplay in a game you have an interactive story at best and a movie at worst and if you want those things you can go online there will be a lets play for any choice you would make. the last thing the industry needs is another gimmick to mess around with and take focus away from the people who actually like games as a whole not just one part of it!

zefiris:

As for Hepler herself, while the community at the time certainly didn't handle things correctly, she IS nothing less than a living tumor

Thanks for proving that gaming fandom is still festering with ugly, ugly sexism.

Its impossible to judge whether or not that particular poster would have been abusive and rude to either gender.... I know if I felt passionately on the subject I would/have. Leveling a charge of sexism just because the one being lambasted is a woman is stupid.

Besides she was the one who brought up her gender anyways. Once you bring your sexuality to the forefront how it gets skewered is your fault. I imagine if she were a rotund male people would have still being making fun of her appearance. Once again in part because I would have if I gave a shit.

Interesting thread. Some compelling arguments on both sides, also a whole legion of people who are incapable of respecting eachother's opinions. The important thing is that I feel superior to both of them.

I did want to address this though.

Dexter111:
If someone wants to skip parts of your games (which extends to movies too really) or if parts of your game can be skipped you did it wrong and fail abhorrently as a game designer

Assuming
a) "you can never please absolutely everyone" is true, and
b) what you said is also true
Then this is a catch-22. If someone doesn't like your gameplay, then you haven't pleased everyone, and you fail as a game designer. But you can't please everyone. So every game designer that ever lived is an "abhorrent failure".

You should think about that for a bit. I'm not saying your logic is flawed, but you clearly didn't word it correctly. Which also brings up this point: as long as there are people who will not like your gameplay no matter how good you make it (because subjective tastes and all that), but would however want to experience the story which they really happen to like, if you can implement this mode with little to no detriment, why not do it? "Because they can watch a let's play" is not an answer.

"Hepler mode" works in some games. Because it EXISTS in some games. Anyone ever played Heroes of Might and Magic? Remember how that game had an auto-combat mode that, to my knowledge, no one ever whined about? It's the same thing.

Grey Carter:
Thing is we kind of used to have a hepler mode, they were called cheat codes. I didn't see any "hardcore gamers" whining about those.

I don't remember any cheat code ever letting you skip the combat. You either went god mode, with which you still had to experience the combat (just a lot less of the challenge), or you skipped the level entirely. On that note, I want cheat codes back too.

EDIT: oh, and my take on the whole argument: I can see where this would be a point of worry, with the way the industry is going there's no guarrantee we won't begin to have mainstream games where the gameplay is merely an unsatisfying afterthought in the devs effort to please the soccer moms and accountants with more money than time. There is empirical evidence for it, after all. So far, the combat being unskippable is a large barrier in front of developer laziness on the issue.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Registered for a free account here