In Defense of Hepler Mode

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 NEXT
 

Ah. This is why I think the gaming community is made up of cunts. Vile, bigotted cunts.

I have no problem with a story-mode if it doens't affect the game in any significant way.

But I fear that if the Hepler mode shows any kind of success and the possibility to make more money out of it, Bioware (and any other company) would immediately change the gameplay to fit that mode better.

Just look at how MP has changed the gameplay of ME3: yes, I am one of the few who prefers ME2 gallery shooting because it felt more rpg-ish and less of a proper shooter. Not to mention how MP actually affects the ending, no matter what the devs said on the argument.

What are we going to see then? More cinematics. More heavy handed "storytelling". Less exploration. Less depth in the gameplay. Less proper RPG elements.

My solution? Allow story mode if you finished the game once (even at the easier difficulty level). Accomodate the easy level to be more similar to a proper story mode, removing all filler combat and having very easy and short boss fights (no multi-phased boss at easy/casual level).

So basically gamers are getting angry that someone suggested taking out the game bit of games. What did anyone expect? It was a pretty stupid suggestion.

I see this "Hepler" mode as a capitulation to incompetence.

Basicly it amounts to "we agree our gameplay is bad and not fun, so instead of improving it and making it fun, we'll give you the option to skip gameplay entirely".

Seems like the writers at Bioware don't want to make games, or atleast not action-rpgs, or tactical rpgs, but rather movies, or adventure games at best. "Our game designers suck, but we writers so fabulously good we can carry the whole experience on our own."
Hepler mode is the new design by committee: every discipline stuck on their own little island, agreeing to be optional.

I prefer a good game instead. Bioware cutscenes cannot compete with movies.

Yosharian:

'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.

Actually, since I consider 3 of the shows that are ongoing as we speak to be 3 of the top 5 TV shows ever made, this is the best period in TV history since, well, ever. Talking about Breaking Bad, Game of Thrones and Walking Dead by the way. But hey, opinions.

I am actually playing through Mass effect 1 again in something you could call Hepler Mode.I've bound some keys with console commands that make encounters trivial and speeds up the game,so it takes less time to get around *cough* first Citadel visit *cough* so I can get to the dialog pies as quickly as possible which make this a much more enjoyable experience.

Revolutionaryloser:
Ah. This is why I think the gaming community is made up of cunts. Vile, bigotted cunts.

It's unfair to use that word to describe some of the vile bigots in the gaming community. I have a cunt, and it's quite nice. My go-to term is "anal polyp" - unnecessary, painful and best excised.

ms_sunlight:

Revolutionaryloser:
Ah. This is why I think the gaming community is made up of cunts. Vile, bigotted cunts.

It's unfair to use that word to describe some of the vile bigots in the gaming community. I have a cunt, and it's quite nice. My go-to term is "anal polyp" - unnecessary, painful and best excised.

I'm taking note.

Carnagath:

Yosharian:

'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.

Actually, since I consider 3 of the shows that are ongoing as we speak to be 3 of the top 5 TV shows ever made, this is the best period in TV history since, well, ever. Talking about Breaking Bad, Game of Thrones and Walking Dead by the way. But hey, opinions.

Now there's virtually nothing on TV worth watching.

veloper:
I see this "Hepler" mode as a capitulation to incompetence.

Basicly it amounts to "we agree our gameplay is bad and not fun, so instead of improving it and making it fun, we'll give you the option to skip gameplay entirely".

Oho, you're just begging to have the word "elitist" painted on you, aren't you?

Don't you get it? No-one's threatening to take your toys away. You can still be elite if you want to. The suggestion is that more options are open for those that want them, not that options be taken away from those that don't.

Now, I'm a gamer. Worse, I'm an "arrogant PC elitist" gamer. I consider myself to be competent at several game genres, but all I will say is, if you're not good at a game, and you see no way of getting better any time soon, it's not fun. I'm never going to be good at RTS, and my one attempt to get into League of Legends was miserable.

I gave a friend of mine (he's a guy in his 50s and a non-gamer) a copy of Vampire: The Masquerate Bloodlines, because I knew he'd enjoy the story and setting. He played it to completion because the world carried him along, but he's never been tempted to pick up another story-based RPG (even though I've recommended several) because he found several sections of the gameplay a real chore.

In some games, the conversations and choices are the most compelling part of the game. Deus Ex: Human Revolution is a very competent stealth game, and that's how I played it, but I know a lot of people found the most compelling part of the whole game to be the "conversation battles", where careful dialogue choices were needed to get the result you wanted. There are ways to do this that would actually bring interesting new options to existing gamers and new gamers alike.

There is absolutely room for games with a helper mode, as long as games are being made where all the story and the action is kept seperate, like Mass Effect. It's not what I prefer, but it isn't really about me either, but rather about keeping people playing the game. That feature in NSMB allowing you to skip levels? Would have done wonders for my 6-year old self who could never finish the original SMB, even if I breeze through NSMB these days.

I read some of the things people were saying about Hepler. That's some horrible stuff, and I don't think the situation calls for any of it.

A few things

1. Adding a feature that allows players to skip gameplay would force the game to place all exposition in cutscenes instead of the actual game part.

2. Even the best game can't stand up solely on its story.

Also, I think the reason people are so opposed to a skip gameplay function is because that idea goes hand in hand with "We want to appeal to a wider audience"

ms_sunlight:

veloper:
I see this "Hepler" mode as a capitulation to incompetence.

Basicly it amounts to "we agree our gameplay is bad and not fun, so instead of improving it and making it fun, we'll give you the option to skip gameplay entirely".

Oho, you're just begging to have the word "elitist" painted on you, aren't you?

Don't you get it? No-one's threatening to take your toys away. You can still be elite if you want to. The suggestion is that more options are open for those that want them, not that options be taken away from those that don't.

Now, I'm a gamer. Worse, I'm an "arrogant PC elitist" gamer. I consider myself to be competent at several game genres, but all I will say is, if you're not good at a game, and you see no way of getting better any time soon, it's not fun. I'm never going to be good at RTS, and my one attempt to get into League of Legends was miserable.

I gave a friend of mine (he's a guy in his 50s and a non-gamer) a copy of Vampire: The Masquerate Bloodlines, because I knew he'd enjoy the story and setting. He played it to completion because the world carried him along, but he's never been tempted to pick up another story-based RPG (even though I've recommended several) because he found several sections of the gameplay a real chore.

In some games, the conversations and choices are the most compelling part of the game. Deus Ex: Human Revolution is a very competent stealth game, and that's how I played it, but I know a lot of people found the most compelling part of the whole game to be the "conversation battles", where careful dialogue choices were needed to get the result you wanted. There are ways to do this that would actually bring interesting new options to existing gamers and new gamers alike.

I'm not sure why you are bringing difficulty into the discussion here. Hepler mode is not just an easy difficulty mode.

This is about standing by the product you bring out. Skipping additional mini-games I can get into, but skipping the meat of the game I cannot.
If a player doesn't like shooters, he should not be buying shooters. If a game developer doesn't like their own shooter, that's even worse than lying down and giving up.

veloper:

I'm not sure why you are bringing difficulty into the discussion here. Hepler mode is not just an easy difficulty mode.

This is about standing by the product you bring out. Skipping additional mini-games I can get into, but skipping the meat of the game I cannot.
If a player doesn't like shooters, he should not be buying shooters. If a game developer doesn't like their own shooter, that's even worse than lying down and giving up.

Many games nowadays don't have a single mechanic, though. Like the example I gave, DE:HR; it has stealth and combat, but it also has choice and dialogue. As long as the other mechanics are not nerfed (and that is critical) why can't games have modes that allow you to skip one mechanic and enjoy another? Or how about if you're sick of the combat sections having completed a game once, but just want to see different story paths or a different ending?

Also, it's not a question of difficulty. If you don't enjoy or can't grok a particular gameplay mechanic, the difficulty setting is irrelevant; being able to faceroll your way through a mechanic you hate is just as annoying as not being able to progress at all. (That's how I feel about Bastion. Hate the combat, even though it's piss-easy. Makes the whole game a chore.)

Like I said, I'm crap at RTS. You could release the most awesome story-based game in the world, with great dialogue and branching story paths, but if the way to get to those sections was by playing through RTS battles, I'd never play it. Even if I did plough through it once (like my friend did with V:TMB) I'd never get to see other branches of the story because the combat wouldn't be fun for me. That's how some people feel when they look at a great game with branching story paths and choice-based roleplaying like The Witcher 2, but know they're crap at action-RPG combat.

FredTheUndead:

And yeah no Hepler is awful. I don't dislike her because she's a woman or anything (that'd be an odd place to come from for a variety of reasons), I hate her because she's a bad writer who clearly dislikes games, and who when originally called out for her bad writing basically used "you just hate it because I'm a woman" as a defense.

But people *do* hate her for being a woman.
Did you see the sexist ad hominems thrown her way? It didn't start with her retort.

She suffered countless instances of people making derogatory remarks regarding her sex, appearance and ability, and when she chose to respond in kind (and quite wittily to boot) the bleeting horde cried out indignantly about "reverse sexism" and other such nonsense, escalating the abuse at the same time.

So yeah, you'll have to excuse me when I say you're a horrible person for referring to her as a "living tumour". I don't have any patience for your kind. You add absolutely nothing of value to the discourse.

OT: More options in terms of how to approach and experience a game is only a positive in my book. I think most attempts to make the medium more accessible is a good thing.

Are you implying a huge dose of hatred, sexism, homophobia, and general jackassery isn't the definition of gamers, at least online?

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?

I think if they did add a mode like this that it should disable achievements. Cause if people are skipping action just to hear/watch the story then they shouldn't care if they aren't getting achievements lol. :)

ms_sunlight:

veloper:

I'm not sure why you are bringing difficulty into the discussion here. Hepler mode is not just an easy difficulty mode.

This is about standing by the product you bring out. Skipping additional mini-games I can get into, but skipping the meat of the game I cannot.
If a player doesn't like shooters, he should not be buying shooters. If a game developer doesn't like their own shooter, that's even worse than lying down and giving up.

Many games nowadays don't have a single mechanic, though. Like the example I gave, DE:HR; it has stealth and combat, but it also has choice and dialogue. As long as the other mechanics are not nerfed (and that is critical) why can't games have modes that allow you to skip one mechanic and enjoy another? Or how about if you're sick of the combat sections having completed a game once, but just want to see different story paths or a different ending?

Also, it's not a question of difficulty. If you don't enjoy or can't grok a particular gameplay mechanic, the difficulty setting is irrelevant; being able to faceroll your way through a mechanic you hate is just as annoying as not being able to progress at all. (That's how I feel about Bastion. Hate the combat, even though it's piss-easy. Makes the whole game a chore.)

Like I said, I'm crap at RTS. You could release the most awesome story-based game in the world, with great dialogue and branching story paths, but if the way to get to those sections was by playing through RTS battles, I'd never play it. Even if I did plough through it once (like my friend did with V:TMB) I'd never get to see other branches of the story because the combat wouldn't be fun for me. That's how some people feel when they look at a great game with branching story paths and choice-based roleplaying like The Witcher 2, but know they're crap at action-RPG combat.

Can anyone release the most awesome story based game in the world though? Planescape Torment after 12+ years still holds the #1 place in these para-olympics of storytelling.
Maybe if storytelling in games much improved I can see a couple hours of just cutscenes and dialogues being worth my time.

Well, the Bioware writers seem to think they can, so let them try. Maybe the response of the gaming community will be amusing to watch atleast.

ms_sunlight:

Like I said, I'm crap at RTS. You could release the most awesome story-based game in the world, with great dialogue and branching story paths, but if the way to get to those sections was by playing through RTS battles, I'd never play it. Even if I did plough through it once (like my friend did with V:TMB) I'd never get to see other branches of the story because the combat wouldn't be fun for me. That's how some people feel when they look at a great game with branching story paths and choice-based roleplaying like The Witcher 2, but know they're crap at action-RPG combat.

__
Let's look at arguably the best story-driven RTS - Homeworld. In that game, story is generally delivered through gameplay. A "Hepler mode" Homeworld would be missing several of its most impactful moments. Hepler mode is fundamentally incompatible with the way many video games tell stories.

On the other hand, I think the need for this sort of game where the gameplay is the story could effectively be filled by high-budget iFiction and VNs. There's probably a market for that sort of thing.

Isn't what she's asking for just a visual novel?
Maybe she should stop complaining and just learn Japanese (it really isn't very hard to make it to that level). Except, no one calls those games, because they aren't. I still haven't heard anyone advance an argument to show that making gameplay skippable wouldn't just result in an inferior imitation of what's already being done in other mediums. If she had said "let's make a game with no combat and a strong emphasis on storytelling", that would make sense (although it's hardly something that's never been done), but she didn't say that.

Actually, if a game with combat and a focus on narrative allowed you to skip combat and didn't suffer tremendously for it, that would just show that designers had failed miserably to tell their story in a manner befitting the medium. Including a feature like the one suggested in any game would only encourage that kind of sloppiness and reinforce the misguided notion that story and gameplay are entirely separate entities.

>Q: What is your least favorite thing about working in the industry?

>A: Playing the games. This is probably a terrible thing to admit, but it has definitely been the single most difficult thing for me. I came into the job out of a love of writing, not a love of playing games... I'm really terrible at so many things which most games use incessantly -- I have awful hand-eye coordination, I don't like tactics, I don't like fighting, I don't like keeping track of inventory, and I can't read a game map to save my life.

>Q: If you could tell developers of games to make sure to put one thing in games to appeal to a broader audience which includes women, what would that one thing be?

>A: A fast-forward button. Games almost always include a way to "button through" dialogue without paying attention, because they understand that some players don't enjoy listening to dialogue and they don't want to stop their fun. Yet they persist in practically coming into your living room and forcing you to play through the combats even if you're a player who only enjoys the dialogue.

Just thought i'd throw in the whole post that got people annoyed.

It wasn't the "skip the action" that got peoples backs up it was the "disliking games" as a whole.

Now, as a writer she doesn't have to play the games or enjoy them but you have to admit it was a bit of a silly thing to say. That is one of those things you keep to your bloody self.

It's like working at a school and hating kids. Yes you can do the job still but you don't tell the little bastards you want them to burn in the fiery pits of hell.

What the gaming community doesn't know won't hurt them ... or cause them to hurl abuse all over the internet.

Personally I have nothing against the woman, it's not as if she's single handedly destroying BioWare.

As long as they don't start shifting the writers into gameplay development we'll all be okay.

Kahunaburger:

ms_sunlight:

Like I said, I'm crap at RTS. You could release the most awesome story-based game in the world, with great dialogue and branching story paths, but if the way to get to those sections was by playing through RTS battles, I'd never play it. Even if I did plough through it once (like my friend did with V:TMB) I'd never get to see other branches of the story because the combat wouldn't be fun for me. That's how some people feel when they look at a great game with branching story paths and choice-based roleplaying like The Witcher 2, but know they're crap at action-RPG combat.

__
Let's look at arguably the best story-driven RTS - Homeworld. In that game, story is generally delivered through gameplay. A "Hepler mode" Homeworld would be missing several of its most impactful moments. Hepler mode is fundamentally incompatible with the way many video games tell stories.

On the other hand, I think the need for this sort of game where the gameplay is the story could effectively be filled by high-budget iFiction and VNs. There's probably a market for that sort of thing.

The game would have to fit in for this type of mode, Bioware games are a good example of the type of game that would best be suited.

It wouldn't work with every game, it would be awful in a game like Bastion, for instance, but it would work for some games.

animehermit:

Kahunaburger:

ms_sunlight:

Like I said, I'm crap at RTS. You could release the most awesome story-based game in the world, with great dialogue and branching story paths, but if the way to get to those sections was by playing through RTS battles, I'd never play it. Even if I did plough through it once (like my friend did with V:TMB) I'd never get to see other branches of the story because the combat wouldn't be fun for me. That's how some people feel when they look at a great game with branching story paths and choice-based roleplaying like The Witcher 2, but know they're crap at action-RPG combat.

__
Let's look at arguably the best story-driven RTS - Homeworld. In that game, story is generally delivered through gameplay. A "Hepler mode" Homeworld would be missing several of its most impactful moments. Hepler mode is fundamentally incompatible with the way many video games tell stories.

On the other hand, I think the need for this sort of game where the gameplay is the story could effectively be filled by high-budget iFiction and VNs. There's probably a market for that sort of thing.

The game would have to fit in for this type of mode, Bioware games are a good example of the type of game that would best be suited.

I'm not convinced Bioware games could rest on their storytelling alone. The stories they tell are very "gamey," with an emphasis on quests and clearly delineated decision points over pure storytelling. They're also too linear and non-reactive to hold up without combat gameplay. They sort of work as context for the games, but I don't think they could hold up on their own merits.

animehermit:

It wouldn't work with every game, it would be awful in a game like Bastion, for instance, but it would work for some games.

Yeah, I'm very excited to see development on the Bastion/Crusader Kings II end of storytelling, where the story is more effectively incorporated into gameplay or told through game mechanics. There's this game called Cult that I'm keeping an eye on. It's probably over-ambitious but will help expand the medium if even 10% of the concept makes it into the final product.

LiquidGrape:

But people *do* hate her for being a woman.
Did you see the sexist ad hominems thrown her way? It didn't start with her retort.

She suffered countless instances of people making derogatory remarks regarding her sex, appearance and ability, and when she chose to respond in kind (and quite wittily to boot) the bleeting horde cried out indignantly about "reverse sexism" and other such nonsense, escalating the abuse at the same time.

So yeah, you'll have to excuse me when I say you're a horrible person for referring to her as a "living tumour". I don't have any patience for your kind. You add absolutely nothing of value to the discourse.

OT: More options in terms of how to approach and experience a game is only a positive in my book. I think most attempts to make the medium more accessible is a good thing.

Some people =/= all.

Disregarding all criticism because of a vocal minority of sexists is abhorrent, but pretty much the standard for Bioware recently.

'Living tumour' is an apt metaphor, because he sees her as behaving as a tumour does, killing the host from the inside.

Gaming does not need to be 'more accessible'. That leads to nothing but shovelware. Companies should be catering to their existing consumers, not potential ones. If your consumers are not happy with your product or staff, you're doing yourself no favours by defending them. Apparently believing that makes me 'entitled'.

OtherSideofSky:
Isn't what she's asking for just a visual novel?

No, visual novels generally have good writing.

Having the option to skip combat doesn't mean it needs to be employed all the time (regardless of what Helper may or may not have intended). I would assume that if one had literally no interest in gameplay games are an incredibly expensive way to consume stories.

So many people missing the point. Let's make it real clear, an optional "Hepler Mode" would not affect you. Do you really care that much that there is an [b]OPTION[/b} to do something you don't like? Just don't do it and stop giving a fuck about how other people play their fucking games.

FredTheUndead:
You accusations of not putting any thought into things certainly ring clear when you yourself are just acting like a condescending asshole and not making any actual defense.

Back atcha, kiddo.

So yes, much of the hate sent her way is 100% legitimate.

No it isn't and you're a horrible person for defending it. You are not justified. Get the fuck over yourself.

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

And by telling them you actually mean, "harass the shit out of them."

FredTheUndead:
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.

By the same logic you're using, I'm totally justified in writing you off as a hostile, immature, nasty little brat even though I can't know that with 100% certainty.

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.

I never went to pre-med, but I'm pretty sure that's not what tumor is.

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.

But you do support harassment and vitriol because she said something you didn't like. That's what makes you an asshole.

Yosharian:
People like Hepler that want a well-told story and not a game, should, guess what - go see a movie. Or read a book.

What if like me you don't like driving sections in an action game and would like the option to skip them and get back to the other gameplay mechanics that you like?

I've asked this multiple times and no one has provided me with an answer.

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

Didn't read the whole article.

SanguineSymphony:
Once again in part because I would have if I gave a shit.

It would still make you an asshole if you did.

Trippy Turtle:
So basically gamers are getting angry that someone suggested taking out the game bit of games. What did anyone expect? It was a pretty stupid suggestion.

Didn't read the whole article.

veloper:
I see this "Hepler" mode as a capitulation to incompetence.

Basicly it amounts to "we agree our gameplay is bad and not fun, so instead of improving it and making it fun, we'll give you the option to skip gameplay entirely".

Didn't read the whole article.

Kahunaburger:
Let's look at arguably the best story-driven RTS - Homeworld. In that game, story is generally delivered through gameplay. A "Hepler mode" Homeworld would be missing several of its most impactful moments. Hepler mode is fundamentally incompatible with the way many video games tell stories.

Shamus did specifically say that this idea wouldn't work on all games. For the same reason that not all games need a 1st person shooting element.

secretsantaone:
'Living tumour' is an apt metaphor, because he sees her as behaving as a tumour does, killing the host from the inside.

Please don't tell me you're defending this nonsense.

Gaming does not need to be 'more accessible'. That leads to nothing but shovelware. Companies should be catering to their existing consumers, not potential ones.

Unfounded claim. Movies are more accessible than they've ever been and even though we get a lot of crap, we still get solid gold every single year. Besides, even if games focused exclusively on people like you, 90% of them would still suck. That's just the way it goes. Stop pissing and moaning about how people other than you are getting into the medium.

Trippy Turtle:
So basically gamers are getting angry that someone suggested taking out the game bit of games. What did anyone expect? It was a pretty stupid suggestion.

No, christ how many times does it need to be said? Giving people the cunt gargling option to skip. If you don't want to skip don't. Then just ignore how everyone else is playing the game because it doesn't affect you.

Spot1990:
So many people missing the point. Let's make it real clear, an optional "Hepler Mode" would not affect you. Do you really care that much that there is an [b]OPTION[/b} to do something you don't like? Just don't do it and stop giving a fuck about how other people play their fucking games.

It would mean that story could not be told through gameplay. Not, that, you know, this is exactly rare in modern games.

Kahunaburger:

Spot1990:
So many people missing the point. Let's make it real clear, an optional "Hepler Mode" would not affect you. Do you really care that much that there is an [b]OPTION[/b} to do something you don't like? Just don't do it and stop giving a fuck about how other people play their fucking games.

It would mean that story could not be told through gameplay. Not, that, you know, this is exactly rare in modern games.

The article already covered that not every game would be able to have this system and that a game that integrates story into gameplay would be better. But for those games that are already gameplay > cutscene > gameplay, then why not? There's also the matter of different types of gameplay. Dialog, exploring and character building and customising are gameplay as well as combat. Half Life 2's driving sequences made me want to shove spikes through my eyes, Mass Effect 1's driving sections were the same. When I replay Dragon Age: Origins, which I've done about 9 times now, I do sometimes get fed up with the Deep Roads section. I love the writing but sometimes I'm in a battle and just wish I could skip it, not because it's bad but because it's a pretty long section and I've played it a lot already.

Kahunaburger:

Spot1990:
So many people missing the point. Let's make it real clear, an optional "Hepler Mode" would not affect you. Do you really care that much that there is an [b]OPTION[/b} to do something you don't like? Just don't do it and stop giving a fuck about how other people play their fucking games.

It would mean that story could not be told through gameplay. Not, that, you know, this is exactly rare in modern games.

Or worse, they'd have to make content specifically for the "storymode" that fills in the shooty/stabby parts of a game. Imagine how disjointed Mass Effect would be if all you did was watch cutscenes and dialog. Imagine going from dropping down on Eden Prime to Jenkins's death, to saving and talking to Ashley, then you're talking to scientists, cut to Nihilus's death, then talking to the farmers, then the dock worker, then you're suddenly at the beacon. There would need to be filler cutscenes where Shepard and Co. destroy the Geth drones, rescue Ashley, come across the dig site, meet the scientists and farmers, get to the dock, fight off the Geth(it's the reason shits going down, you can't just cut out the entire fight against the Geth, it'd have to be cutscene'd), and disarm the bombs. You can't just have Shepard walking around a deserted Eden Prime. The whole reason you're there is because it's become a combat zone, but you don't run into anyone? That would break immersion rather quickly. And even if you could, you would still need the cutscenes to fill in required combat scenes. The drones that kill Jenkins don't just fly off. The Geth that are attacking Ash don't just saunter off. And there are dozens of examples like this.

Combat is more important to the story than what most people seem to think. If you cut the combat, then you're cutting the entire point of the story most of the time. The plot for most games nowadays exists solely for a reason to commit acts of violence against the plots' enemies.

wintercoat:

Combat is more important to the story than what most people seem to think. If you cut the combat, then you're cutting the entire point of the story most of the time. The plot for most games nowadays exists solely for a reason to commit acts of violence against the plots' enemies.

Yeah, I agree with this about most modern games. I'm all for games that focus on non-combat storytelling, but I think a lot of people are severely overestimating the ability of most modern game narratives to stand on their own. How many people would actually give Mass Effect 3 the time of day if it didn't have combat segments?

And, as you pointed out, cutting out the combat just runs the cost of the game up even further haha.

DrVornoff:

secretsantaone:
'Living tumour' is an apt metaphor, because he sees her as behaving as a tumour does, killing the host from the inside.

Please don't tell me you're defending this nonsense.

Gaming does not need to be 'more accessible'. That leads to nothing but shovelware. Companies should be catering to their existing consumers, not potential ones.

Unfounded claim. Movies are more accessible than they've ever been and even though we get a lot of crap, we still get solid gold every single year. Besides, even if games focused exclusively on people like you, 90% of them would still suck. That's just the way it goes. Stop pissing and moaning about how people other than you are getting into the medium.

Of course I'm defending it, it's a perfectly reasonable metaphor which makes sense in the context. Give me a real argument why it isn't rather than 'it's so obvious I don't need to!'.

Comparing videogames to movies is probably the greatest pitfall anyone discussing games can fall into. Movies and videogames are fundamentally different. What do you even mean by 'movies are more accessible'? That they're catering to the lowest common denominator? Why is that a good thing?

With videogames, 'more accessible' means you have to simplify gameplay. There's no getting around that. If you want to expand your audience you have to make it so people who are unfamiliar to gaming can play it and not get frustrated. Gameplay is what makes the game, movies can afford to deal with more general ideas and less controversial concepts because they can make up for it with clever cinematic techniques and good acting. If you're dumbing-down gameplay, you're always going to get a poorer quality game.

Oh and to the people saying 'cheat codes are the same as skipping gameplay!', no they're not. They simply alter it. There are very few (if any) cheat codes that remove gameplay altogether.

secretsantaone:

Of course I'm defending it, it's a perfectly reasonable metaphor which makes sense in the context. Give me a real argument why it isn't rather than 'it's so obvious I don't need to!'.

Because he's talking about a real, live human being who's done nothing wrong other than write some parts of a game he didn't like?

As I've already said in this thread, I really wish people would be more civil on the internet. Call me unrealistic, I know, but I can dream. She's not a dictator, or a rapist, or a child-killer. She's a game writer. Not even a particularly powerful one. She doesn't need to be called a "tumour"

 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
Register for a free account here