Miyamoto Tries To Bridge The Gap Between Gamers.

[Hero-of-Time]

In a recent interview he states...

 

“The fact is, I don’t think there is such a wall between both audiences (casual and core). While there are indeed games designed for core and casual markets, core users are also enjoying casual gaming. It is very hard to tune the difficulty just for the core market. Even for us, we would still have difficulty finding the right balance. But I think the future is games that are not difficult and yet very fun to play. There is no point in making a difficulty level the fun factor of a game. What I mean is that there is no point in making a difficulty level the fun factor of a game. We are making Super Mario Galaxy as a new and fun experience which aims at providing a very appealing, convincing and—before all—fun experience. If we managed to do so, then I’m sure even the core gamers will find it appealing. We need to release more games which feel like games. It is important that people who are playing them feel that the games are indeed fun to play… Now there is this concept I always focus on, which is you have to feel the fun of a game by only trying it, and that concerns Super Mario Galaxy, of course. Should it be fun by only playing it a short time, this indicates already it has a big value as a product… It is very important that the full fun of the game is being felt in the first stage 1-1.†- Shigeru Miyamoto

 

Discuss.

[pedrocasilva]

I think he has a point and I think he's actually achieving that, also because he really believes in what he said.

 

We've know for years that Miyamoto developed games are not made to be extremely difficult, challenging at best; thing is... he's actually voicing it when others are too afraid of admitting just that, Metal Gear is easy as piss this day, hell... RE4 was easy, in my book, as well as a load of other games out there, 10 years ago we were lucky to finish a game, now and for certain genres... it's guaranteed as long as you want to finish them, this somewhat avoids frustrations and even leads to bigger scores with the media, so it's really what the mass market wants. In fact... that's precisely it, and a company can't hope to win the generation war just by providing and focusing on those games, it's not where the money is, and as a designer you really want as many people as possible to be able to enjoy your work.

 

Will Nintendo do the hardest game out there just so only a hardcore gamer can play? Not in this age, that said, neither is Sony or Microsoft. Whereas we could say Nintendo is broadening their appeal.

 

Looking at, say... Mario Galaxy, I'm not concerned; I believe things will just stay the same for us as they were on GC difficulty-wise, even if the controls are somewhat easier (that's actually always a advantage)

[seanraaron]

I think it's a question of what about the game is difficult and what the aim is. If the game is fun to play, then relative difficulty of achieving goals isn't necessarily that relevant. For example, I thought Ecco had the best control scheme possible for that game, I loved the sensation of making the dolphin swim fast; in the actual game I found it incredibly frustrating to get through the various counter currents and tunnels such that I eventually gave up on it and only played the beginning section in the lagoon _prior_ to the game starting. I still don't get what the point was of the actual game design there. I can see putting in some challenges but having someone go through twists and turns for ten to fifteen minutes, just to hit a dead end or get a complete reversal I cannot see being fun in _anyone's_ book.

 

On the other hand my favourite game of all time is Defender, which is an arcade game with some fairly challenging controls which, for me, result in a fairly immersive play experience. The game's structure is just repeating levels of bad guys in a limited world you can fly through, so the experience of controlling the ship and flying around is pretty much what the game is about. I can feel some sense of satisfaction by making it to wave six or getting a new high score, but if I only make it to wave four it's not like I'm missing out.

 

Clearly these are two totally different kinds of games, one being a platform game and one being an arcade shooter, but the point is the same: the design should reflect fun as the central aim. If the only purpose of the game is to be challenging to the point where it will only appeal to people who perservere, then you've limited the audience substantially and, I think, unnecessarily.

 

Compare Ecco to another Sega platform property, Sonic. Sonic is a game I can pick up and play quite readily. I may not get all the rings, but I can get from level to level without doing so. The point of the game is not to get every single ring in the game. You might get extra bonuses or special levels if you do, but it's not the "meat" of the game. I would say this goes a long way to explaining why Sonic was a much more successful game series than Ecco.

 

So, I don't think it's necessary that games are "dumbed down" on the Wii, but I do think that the design philosophy of games on the system needs to change to take advantage of the target audience of the system.

 

I mean, who wants a bunch of ports of X-box and Playstation games on the Wii anyway? If the control scheme is easy to adapt without sacrificing gameplay, fine, but it's rare that I've read of a PS2/Gamecube/X-box port that didn't have problems with the control implementation, in which case they might as well not have bothered.

[dannbrownn]

Why is it always left to Shigsy himself to say that games should be fun?!?!?!?

 

He is of course speaking perfect sense, why else would we play games otherwise!

 

It is good to see that the core of Nintendo is still about having fun, i think that there are some other companies who also make games that keep on saying stuff about the ultimate multi-media experience and so on...

 

When you have some free time do you say to yourself 'I think i will use this time to experience some interactive mulit-media digital entertainment'

 

or... do you think... 'I think i will play a game'

 

Exactly.

[Gaijin von Snikbah]

I dont think hardcore has anything to do with difficulty. It has to do with fun, and making the most out of a game.

[Dannyboy-the-Dane]

Of course, having fun is the core of any video game, but that doesn't mean the difficulty should stay fixed. For me, a large part of the enjoyment of games comes from improving my skills and gradually being challenged more and more. The feeling of achieving a goal that you didn't dream of achieving earlier is for me a central part of games, so difficulty is an important aspect of the gameplay. "The greatest opponent is yourself."

 

Of course, some games are only meant to be fun and time-passing and should not be difficult to play. And that's the whole point, I guess: Finding a balance between fun games and challenging games.

[Cube]

Regarding Galaxy, didn't he prevously say that getting enough stars for the final boss isn't too difficult, but the rest of them are challenging to get?

[DCK]

I haven't agreed much with Miyamoto lately, but now he's absolutely right. Some developers, most notably studios like Epic or the entire of SCE are forgetting that they're making games. Look at MGS, the entire series has pretended to be a freaking film with a controller; games have turned to having to be always 'epic' and 'hardcore' instead of fun.

[jammy2211]

I do think the industry has lost site of what it is, well except Nintendo. I mean, 360 and PS3 are trying to sell themselves as media centres as much as games console, and the games are marketed on their visuals and not what actually makes them a game, the gameplay.

 

It is all about balance at the end of the day, games arn't fun if you find them stupidly easy for the whole game. It does get boring playing through the whole game and not getting stuck, theres no sense of acheivement when you finally do it and no reward for actually playing the game. Find this balance is extremely difficult, and to be honest I think alot of series's are failing to do it.

 

I think Metroid and Mario Galaxy are very much going to be the big indicator on what Nintendo is trying to do. Twilight Princess was far far far too easy, and we havn't really seen many other adventure type games from Nintendo yet to judge. I think the best method is making a game which can be enjoyed by all, but with extra challenges for the more dedicated players, much like Goldeneye 64.

[Cube]

jammy, have you played Lego Star Wars? A lot of fun, even if there is no difficulty whatsoever.

[jammy2211]

jammy, have you played Lego Star Wars? A lot of fun, even if there is no difficulty whatsoever.

 

I've not played it, but I'd assume it's a short game? Easy game can be fun for so long I guess, but once you've been playing a game for 5 hours and the challenge is still mind-numbingly easy I stop caring.

 

It's what happend to me with Final Fantasy XII I guess, some games can keep their charm and remain fun but nothing like that will be remembered as a legendary game.

[tapedeck]

You could say that fun is only enjoyable in short bursts. (At least that's what my missus tells me!)

[Speedfreak]

Every current developer is doing this. No biggie.