Emasher Posted January 10, 2009 Posted January 10, 2009 Right. So while developers are continuing to make linear games for the casuals, hardcore gamers are still shunned. It makes no difference. But there will always be linear games. They have their place. Its not like all of a sudden all games are going to become non-linear.
canand Posted January 10, 2009 Posted January 10, 2009 WTF Canand! Didnt you read the OP? Yeah I did but the one I put is more info about it.
jammy2211 Posted January 10, 2009 Posted January 10, 2009 Quite opposite. The important aspect of this patent is that the developer doesn't need to compromise difficulty anymore to gain accessibility. I guess that Miyamoto himself noticed that Twilight Princess and Phantom Hourglass were too easy, and practically gave no challenge for more seasoned player. With this, overall difficulty can be left high and puzzles made more complex, but the game still stays accessible for less seasoned players. Basically meaning those who don't have neither time or desire bang their head on same location for three hours. They can skip hard parts, gradually learn play better from videos, while still progressing further, and not feeling frustrated. More seasoned players can play game normally. Furthermore, developers have often complained that it is pointless to do big game with lots of secrets, as only fraction of players will ever see them. With this, more players will see whole game, encouraging also this kind of development. It's a win-win scenario really, if implemented correctly. But it will be very challenging to do so, as it can be overdone, and it requires lots of testing to get it correctly. The puzzles can be harder. That's about it. They can't inplement this crazy patent thing into making boss battles more complex, making enemies harder etc. Just harder puzzles. It feels to me like it reduces the scope of puzzles, making them more singular single rooms, as opposed to say the Water Temple from OoT. After all, they can't do this patent thingy for something on that scale, right? :/. And arn't these developers who complained not able to use it, as Nintendo hold the patent on it :P. I'm sure it'll make more accessible games but I think it only further shows where Nintendo are going, where the next Zelda is going and where my monies is going.
Diageo Posted January 10, 2009 Posted January 10, 2009 Sure they can make the game harder, but all this info on extra videos and modes just take up space of extra content we would enjoy. Sure I like this better than an easier game, even though I thought TP was good in the difficulty department, but it's still not the amazing achievement people are going on about.
Emasher Posted January 10, 2009 Posted January 10, 2009 The puzzles can be harder. That's about it. They can't inplement this crazy patent thing into making boss battles more complex, making enemies harder etc. Just harder puzzles. It feels to me like it reduces the scope of puzzles, making them more singular single rooms, as opposed to say the Water Temple from OoT. After all, they can't do this patent thingy for something on that scale, right? :/. And arn't these developers who complained not able to use it, as Nintendo hold the patent on it :P. I'm sure it'll make more accessible games but I think it only further shows where Nintendo are going, where the next Zelda is going and where my monies is going. Its still possible they implement reduced difficulty modes also. Actually, in a game that used something like this, that would probably be quite likely. Sure they can make the game harder, but all this info on extra videos and modes just take up space of extra content we would enjoy. Sure I like this better than an easier game, even though I thought TP was good in the difficulty department, but it's still not the amazing achievement people are going on about. There has only ever been one Wii game that used a dual layered DVD. That means all Wii games besides Brawl are under 4.7 GB. Dual layered DVDs can have up to 8.5 GB, nearly double the space. I don't think its going to be a major problem.
Teppo Holmqvist Posted January 10, 2009 Posted January 10, 2009 Sure they can make the game harder, but all this info on extra videos and modes just take up space of extra content we would enjoy. Patent specifically says that digests are made using game's engine, meaning that there isn't actual video stored on the disc. Just button presses. We are talking about less than 100 kilobytes per movie. In fact, patent does even say that it is possible that people can record their own approach movies, and send them to their friends. This just wouldn't be realistically possible with real moviefiles. They can't inplement this crazy patent thing into making boss battles more complex, making enemies harder etc. The reason why bosses have been easy is only becase Nintendo has intentionally decided to make games easier to make them more accessible. With this, they can from the start design game more harder. They don't need to anymore worry that Joe Gamer can't shoot Gohma's fifteen eyes, because he can watch lesson on it or skip it all together.
mcj metroid Posted January 10, 2009 Posted January 10, 2009 It's something I'll never use, dumbs down Zelda even more and will encourage the developers to make the next Zelda game even more simple. It just shows that Nintendo are going to try and make even their supposedly more hardcore of franchises as accessible to everyone as they possibly can. Apologies if I don't get excited about that prospect. on the contrary it would encourage devs to make a game as hard as they want without worrying about alienating non-skilled players. this would be perfect in a game like zack and wiki also. also you don't HAVE to use it.. that's the point it isn't forced.. meanwhile it would provide a better gameplay experience for you.. a more challengin game than the last. Sure they can make the game harder, but all this info on extra videos and modes just take up space of extra content we would enjoy. Sure I like this better than an easier game, even though I thought TP was good in the difficulty department, but it's still not the amazing achievement people are going on about. you see I assume this will be used when solving difficult puzzles more so than making the actual gameplay harder.. as i said perfect for games like zack and wiki or even metroid.. we should have faith in nintendo and especially miyamoto.. they have never and will never fuck up a legend of zelda game..
jammy2211 Posted January 10, 2009 Posted January 10, 2009 on the contrary it would encourage devs to make a game as hard as they want without worrying about alienating non-skilled players. this would be perfect in a game like zack and wiki also. also you don't HAVE to use it.. that's the point it isn't forced.. meanwhile it would provide a better gameplay experience for you.. a more challengin game than the last. Actually it'll encourage devs to do the opposite, cause er, Nintendo own the patent. Lolz. This is stupid, the fact all the Nintendo fanboys are griping onto this as some sort of ultimate savior of their games just shows your insecurities. There are so many hypocricies about it, I just find it hard to believe the thought process going through some of your minds. It works with puzzles, yay. It pretty much makes a fragment of Zelda games more accessible, that's about it. For the rest of the Zelda games, and for most of Nintendo's other big games, if they want to 'appeal' to supposed new players, they'll have to make them parts accessible too. I don't even know if I like the idea of more puzzles in games... otherwise I'd just like, play puzzle games, no?
Emasher Posted January 10, 2009 Posted January 10, 2009 Actually it'll encourage devs to do the opposite, cause er, Nintendo own the patent. Lolz. This is stupid, the fact all the Nintendo fanboys are griping onto this as some sort of ultimate savior of their games just shows your insecurities. There are so many hypocricies about it, I just find it hard to believe the thought process going through some of your minds. It works with puzzles, yay. It pretty much makes a fragment of Zelda games more accessible, that's about it. For the rest of the Zelda games, and for most of Nintendo's other big games, if they want to 'appeal' to supposed new players, they'll have to make them parts accessible too. I don't even know if I like the idea of more puzzles in games... otherwise I'd just like, play puzzle games, no? There's no reason something like this couldn't be applied to other types of games as well. The system also allows you to skip parts you get stuck on so it can really work with almost an type of game. Its not just a hint system for puzzles.
mcj metroid Posted January 10, 2009 Posted January 10, 2009 Actually it'll encourage devs to do the opposite, cause er, Nintendo own the patent. Lolz. This is stupid, the fact all the Nintendo fanboys are griping onto this as some sort of ultimate savior of their games just shows your insecurities. There are so many hypocricies about it, I just find it hard to believe the thought process going through some of your minds. It works with puzzles, yay. It pretty much makes a fragment of Zelda games more accessible, that's about it. For the rest of the Zelda games, and for most of Nintendo's other big games, if they want to 'appeal' to supposed new players, they'll have to make them parts accessible too. I don't even know if I like the idea of more puzzles in games... otherwise I'd just like, play puzzle games, no? what saviour? nintendo's games are always of the best quality there doesn't need to be a saviour.. Also calling people nintendo fanboys because they don't agree with your opinion doesn't work either.. It is you that is being negative and out of place. There is no reason to doubt nintendo will find a way to make this work.. when has there EVER being a doubt on miyamotos abilities? Why start now ? puzzle game to me is something like bust a move or tetris.. puzzles IN a game is like resident evil(bar for the most part 4) or metroid. Those are very puzzle based games with other elements.
jammy2211 Posted January 10, 2009 Posted January 10, 2009 There's no reason something like this couldn't be applied to other types of games as well. The system also allows you to skip parts you get stuck on so it can really work with almost an type of game. Its not just a hint system for puzzles. Is no one going to comment about how Nintendo now own the patent, so it's all completely irellevent except for the first party offerings :P. But yeah, it just sounds stupid to me. I can't believe people have allowed this to turn into such bigger news then it is. For me it just shows where Nintendo's new focus is, and those thinking it'll create better games for 'us' then when Nintendo were creating games just for 'us' are delusional. To give you an example, imagine applying this to Mario Galaxy. Say they can't do the Luigi Purple coins, how does this help? If it 'shows' them what to do, it doesn't help, cause it's alot more skill based. If it skips the level, then er, what was the point anyway? That's not fun, just going to push people away? It seems pretty much focused around puzzles from where I try and apply what I read in my head. what saviour? nintendo's games are always of the best quality there doesn't need to be a saviour.. Also calling people nintendo fanboys because they don't agree with your opinion doesn't work either.. Nintendo's latest output for me isn't the high quality I grew up on, maybe it's just me though, I don't know. The only Nintendo game I can still play and not think "Wow this was better when I played xxx" is the true Mario Platformers. They're gaming bliss, but they come once every 5 blue moons. And what they're saying reeks of fanboy, again just what I picked up. It is you that is being negative and out of place. There is no reason to doubt nintendo will find a way to make this work.. when has there EVER being a doubt on miyamotos abilities? Why start now ? I don't like to put anyone on a pedestal and give him my undying support. Hopefully Nintendo will prove me wrong and somehow they'll make this amazing game that everyone can enjoy, but in all honesty, I can't see how they can make a game this accessible to everyone, and make me enjoy more then something just for my tastes. puzzle game to me is something like bust a move or tetris.. puzzles IN a game is like resident evil(bar for the most part 4) or metroid. Those are very puzzle based games with other elements. Okay er, thanks for that.
Nolan Posted January 10, 2009 Posted January 10, 2009 we should have faith in nintendo and especially miyamoto.. they have never and will never fuck up a legend of zelda game.. That's debatable, I know some people that absolutely hate MM/WW/TP. Not necessarily all of them, but at least one of them for whatever reasons. Personally, I'm with you they're all great.
Shino Posted January 10, 2009 Posted January 10, 2009 This Ben Mattes fella agrees with me then: When I saw your other post I thought, "this guy just copy pasted the other dude's view on this from kotaku".
mcj metroid Posted January 10, 2009 Posted January 10, 2009 Is no one going to comment about how Nintendo now own the patent, so it's all completely irellevent except for the first party offerings :P. But yeah, it just sounds stupid to me. I can't believe people have allowed this to turn into such bigger news then it is. For me it just shows where Nintendo's new focus is, and those thinking it'll create better games for 'us' then when Nintendo were creating games just for 'us' are delusional. To give you an example, imagine applying this to Mario Galaxy. Say they can't do the Luigi Purple coins, how does this help? If it 'shows' them what to do, it doesn't help, cause it's alot more skill based. If it skips the level, then er, what was the point anyway? That's not fun, just going to push people away? It seems pretty much focused around puzzles from where I try and apply what I read in my head. they own the patent yes but nobody knows nintendo's intensions with it yet.. it's just an idea and until we hear more we don't know. it's very hard to comment on this until we hear what nintendos plans actually are.. but miyamoto talked about bridging the gap between casual and hardcore... how is it a bad thing that casuals and hardcore can enjoy the same experience... it may just help the casual and do nothing for us but even then is it a bad thing? we don't HAVE to use it it's there and i'm sure it isn't hard to implant so whose it hurting? again with mario galaxy we are just guessing... but you're constantly thinking in terms of gameplay.... I really think this is geared towards "what do I do here" situations..as opposed to " this is too difficult ". Nobody knows how nintendo is going to approach that problem yet. but this will work well for zelda.. lets face it the difficulty in zelda IS the puzzles.. the gameplay was never hard,the bosses were never hard. even for the bosses.. you know those situations where you have no idea how to go about killing the boss.. that;s where this comes in but once you know it's usually easy.. who knows.. i could be wrong because I don't know exactly what it does... but if it goes along the route i think... then I feel it would be a good idea.
jammy2211 Posted January 10, 2009 Posted January 10, 2009 they own the patent yes but nobody knows nintendo's intensions with it yet.. it's just an idea and until we hear more we don't know. it's very hard to comment on this until we hear what nintendos plans actually are.. but miyamoto talked about bridging the gap between casual and hardcore... how is it a bad thing that casuals and hardcore can enjoy the same experience... it may just help the casual and do nothing for us but even then is it a bad thing? we don't HAVE to use it it's there and i'm sure it isn't hard to implant so whose it hurting? again with mario galaxy we are just guessing... but you're constantly thinking in terms of gameplay.... I really think this is geared towards "what do I do here" situations..as opposed to " this is too difficult ". Nobody knows how nintendo is going to approach that problem yet. but this will work well for zelda.. lets face it the difficulty in zelda IS the puzzles.. the gameplay was never hard,the bosses were never hard. even for the bosses.. you know those situations where you have no idea how to go about killing the boss.. that;s where this comes in but once you know it's usually easy.. who knows.. i could be wrong because I don't know exactly what it does... but if it goes along the route i think... then I feel it would be a good idea. I think your post pretty much sums up how I feel for the most part, people really can't tell what this patent is and heralding it as the savior for Nintendo's focus is just silly. We don't know how it's going to be used, what it'll do, where it'll be applied and if it even has anything to do with the next Zelda. The only thing I think it does tell us is that the games Nintendo used to just make for us, they want to make as accessible to everyone as possible. Whether that's a bad thing, whether it'll effect my enjoyment, we don't know. It does far from inspire my confidence though, albeit my confidence has already been ruined by the simplicity of all of Nintendo's latest output. So er yeah, dinner time xxx.
Gizmo Posted January 10, 2009 Posted January 10, 2009 The developers could either: A) Not be lazy and do a walkthrough for every single choice, like if it was a Visual Novel B)Do what I said previously The fans would love it more with A, but I bet they would love the game almost as much just by using B), and maybe they would even stop the game in some parts (Digest) and do choices by themselves to see what's different. No problem in that. Laziness isn't the issue when it comes to the Fallotu 3 example. And what the hell did you "say previously"? No, they would make just one video saying things as: [if you have enough Skill, Lockpick, if you have enough Science, Hack, if you don't have neither, go to the table and get the password to use at the computer, or go to the lockeroom at the left, find the key and put in the door.] Can't see the problem, it isn't that hard. So instead they'll do one showing all possible outcomes, removing what you said and exaserbating the problem? Or do you mean select individually based on each possible combination? Do you have any idea how many variables there are? I'm thinking here of something like Fallout 3 or Mass Effect, and since I've only completed ME of them I'll use it as an example. There are variables based on your gender, determining dialog choices; based on how high your dialog skills are; based on how high your good/bad meter is; based on previous decisions you have made (kill or not kill person x, rescue person y or z, etc); based on what weapons, items etc you have. How do you plan on creating a video for every single one of these possible branches? Can you comprehend how big a job that is? But there will always be linear games. They have their place. Its not like all of a sudden all games are going to become non-linear. Right, definately. How does this 1. encourage expansion towards non-linearity in games that would benefit? 2. encourage casuals to play these non linear games? 3. help the hardcore player at all? There has only ever been one Wii game that used a dual layered DVD. That means all Wii games besides Brawl are under 4.7 GB. Dual layered DVDs can have up to 8.5 GB, nearly double the space. I don't think its going to be a major problem. Because there have been so many games of the scope of Fallout 3, MGS4, GTAIV on Wii? Is no one going to comment about how Nintendo now own the patent, so it's all completely irellevent except for the first party offerings :P. I don't find it a stretch for them to license the technology to third parties for free if it is of a benefit to their own console. When I saw your other post I thought, "this guy just copy pasted the other dude's view on this from kotaku". I posted before the Kotaku article :p
jammy2211 Posted January 10, 2009 Posted January 10, 2009 I don't find it a stretch for them to license the technology to third parties for free if it is of a benefit to their own console. Licensing a gameplay mechanic? Not gonna happen, third parties have far too much pride if anything. Plus if this really does so something amazing and helps Nintendo sell lots and lots, they're not gonna share it, right?
Gizmo Posted January 10, 2009 Posted January 10, 2009 Licensing a patent. In the same way they allow third parties to develop games that use the WiiMote, but only if it's on the Wii. Sure, Nintendo might sell more of their own games (in terms of % of install base) if only they could use it, but they will sell more consoles if they give it to third parties, and inherently increase the market size for their own software.
jammy2211 Posted January 10, 2009 Posted January 10, 2009 Licensing a patent. In the same way they allow third parties to develop games that use the WiiMote, but only if it's on the Wii. Sure, Nintendo might sell more of their own games (in terms of % of install base) if only they could use it, but they will sell more consoles if they give it to third parties, and inherently increase the market size for their own software. It's nothing like that. Mainly because it's not a patent they're paying to use the Wii tech, it's just console developement royalties, which they pay on 360 and PS3 too :/. And Nintendo's Software makes them alot more money then their hardware, there's no real reason Nintendo want third parties to get a piece on their market. The more Nintendo can have just to themselves the better, especially when it involves appealing to the expanded market type folk. It does seem kind of ironic to me that people bitch and moan and companies like NIntendo and Sony being sued for the most pathetic of patents, and then Nintendo make something like this. I just don't think this should be something patentable either, but oh well.
Gizmo Posted January 10, 2009 Posted January 10, 2009 A patent doesn't have to be enforced to stop someone if they don't mind it happening. Nintendo can quite happily allow EA to make a game using the system if they want to. They aren't letting third parties in on their market, they are using third parties to sell more hardware to have more people to see software too. Basic math: If 10 people own a system and 100 of them buy a Nintendo game, Nintendo have sold 10 games. If 20 people own a system, and 50% buy a Nintendo game, they made the same amount of software while selling more hardware and having a larger potential market for future pieces of software.
jammy2211 Posted January 10, 2009 Posted January 10, 2009 A patent doesn't have to be enforced to stop someone if they don't mind it happening. Nintendo can quite happily allow EA to make a game using the system if they want to. They aren't letting third parties in on their market, they are using third parties to sell more hardware to have more people to see software too. Basic math: If 10 people own a system and 100 of them buy a Nintendo game, Nintendo have sold 10 games. If 20 people own a system, and 50% buy a Nintendo game, they made the same amount of software while selling more hardware and having a larger potential market for future pieces of software. So why would Nintendo patent it? :/. It can only be cause they don't want people to use it, right? and yeah, third parties are going in on their market, and third parties are not selling systems. I don't get why Nintendo would have any interesting in helping third parties, they're selling the systems and cashing in on the market quite fine by themselves. Your numbers are just hypothetical with no real reason or backing behind them. The more games third parties make, the less Nintendo's first party stuff sells. I don't believe anything third parties have done thus far is really helping sell Wii's.
david.dakota Posted January 10, 2009 Posted January 10, 2009 Laziness isn't the issue Fair enough. Can you comprehend how big a job that is? But wait... Gotcha! What exactly is your definition of lazy? Mine is being capable of doing something, but choosing not too because its too much effort or too big a job.
Gizmo Posted January 11, 2009 Posted January 11, 2009 So why would Nintendo patent it? :/. It can only be cause they don't want people to use it, right? To stop Sony and Microsoft using it? Do you realise how dumb you made yourself sound with this statement? and yeah, third parties are going in on their market, and third parties are not selling systems. I don't get why Nintendo would have any interesting in helping third parties, they're selling the systems and cashing in on the market quite fine by themselves. Your numbers are just hypothetical with no real reason or backing behind them. The more games third parties make, the less Nintendo's first party stuff sells. I don't believe anything third parties have done thus far is really helping sell Wii's. If Nintendo didn't want third party games to sell they wouldn't license them to release anything. They wouldn't sell them the SDKs in the first place. Why would they let them do some things, and not others? Sure, the games themselves are competition with Nintendo's, but they still need a quality third party backing in order to keep ahead of the competition in the shape of the PS3 and Xbox360. But wait... Gotcha! What exactly is your definition of lazy? Mine is being capable of doing something, but choosing not too because its too much effort or too big a job. I get what you mean but it just doesn't make sense to go through such an arduous process for such little gain. This isn't a one day job, to deal with every different combination. Think of stat divisions, and how many possible combinations of that there are. The game needs to have a programmed response to every single division of stat points and every single point in the game, based on 10 other boolean decisions the player has already made.
Recommended Posts