[video]https://youtu.be/t5vIAJqu8gM[/video]
He brings up a good point that I agree with about games having more accessible modes.
skip to 1:19 if you want to go stright to the rant
[quote]mario kart's for everybody you stuck up little shit[/quote]
holy shit i was never really a huge fan of jimquisition, but that is probably the best way to put my thoughts of people who get buttmad about other people enjoying a video game that is clearly designed with a casual market in mind
I would have made a clear distinction of good game design and hand holding vs. bad game design and hand holding.
I don't know if anyone has made the comparison of Mario Kart 8 deluxe vs whatever the fuck that Kinect kart racer was. The Kinect kart racer is just bad game design because of its controls, but it's effectively the same concept as what Nintendo did with Mario Kart, which has tight controls and an option to make it easier for those who don't adapt well to video games.
People need to stop being elitist fucks with their games.
[QUOTE=Captain Chalky;52202354]While I agree with Jim here, it's really not so simple. Smart Steering might not be competitively viable, but unconditional handicaps are not good in (online) multiplayer games. It's literally cheating.
Single-player games are fine with systems like this. It's your experience and it's up to you to decide how you are going to enjoy it. But once you bring other players into the mix (especially strangers online), those people should also have a say on the matter.[/QUOTE]
It really is though. Thats like complaining that somebody brought an automatic transmission car to a drag race. The performance capabilities are just not there. You literally cannot use several *important* optimization mechanics while using smart steering. If you cannot take shortcuts, you cannot win versus somebody who can. This is also an option that is available to *everybody*. If it was only available to half of the players, the 'its literaly cheating' argument may hold some weight. But this is like aim assist in a console FPS. Its there because it needs to be for some of the player base, and if you dont want it, you can turn it off to raise the skill ceiling.
what schwarzenegger movie is that self driving robot at 4:28 from?
so they are basically lowering the skill floor, but people think they are lowering the skill ceiling
so to say
[QUOTE=Captain Chalky;52202431]I just said that Smart Steering is ok since it's garbage against real players. I'm talking about giving players [B]actual advantage[/B], without asking the others players whether they are alright with it.[/QUOTE]
Doesn't really seem relevant to this thread then as this isn't occurring in Mario kart, nor is Jim really advocating for mechanics that do give actual advantages. As I alluded to before, this is the racing genres analogue to aim assist in console FPS. It's there for people who need it, it doesn't give a meaningful advantage compared topeople who don't, and more importantly, [B]it is available to everybody.[/B] The point of Jim's entire rant is that people are complaining about handicaps with overwhelmingly negative aspects [B]to the user of the handicap[/B] when it doesn't affect them. Nintendo hasn't ever to my knowledge implemented a handicap in a similar manner that fails to meet these requirements, and yet people continue to bitch and moan that its making the games too easy, when they are not only not required, but also [B]encouraged not to use[/B] these handicaps.
I didn't realize there are people this uptight and elitist about [I]Nintendo games[/I].
[QUOTE=Durrsly;52202476]I didn't realize there are people this uptight and elitist about [I]Nintendo games[/I].[/QUOTE]
just look at smash bros melee
[QUOTE=Durrsly;52202476]I didn't realize there are people this uptight and elitist about [I]Nintendo games[/I].[/QUOTE]
There are people who severely get bent out of shape the more Nintendo games have tried to open themselves up to larger audiences. They're always made with families and friends in mind, but as Smash Bros de-complicated itself after Melee, people got more sour because the lowering of the skill ceiling caused them to flip out (alongside shit like Tripping in Brawl, which was just purely retarded). It also doesn't help that the later New Super Mario Bros. / 3D Land and World games and Donkey Kong Country Returns getting the assist guide thing was found to be insulting to skilled players, interpreting it as if Nintendo was saying "hey, you seem to really suck at the game right now, would you like to get a free pass?"
The auto-assist for Mario Kart 8 Deluxe by comparison isn't that big a deal, seeing as the game's actually more complex than before now that you can get two items and have an extra drift level if you can maintain it long enough. But then there's also the entire argument about items in general, given that Nintendo's gone overboard with trying to make equalizers in these kinds of games to the point that being in the lead is asking to be almost unavoidably nuked to all hell before the finish line because of stupid balancing.
I'm unsure quite what to think about it.
Like, ok, I think getting mad over these features is being a bit childish. But the decision as to whether or not those features [I]should[/I] be included is a different matter.
It's worth nothing that this is hardly a new thing; The Simpsons Hit & Run is a universally beloved game I remember from my own childhood which had a skip mission feature if you failed too many times. And, plenty of games in the past are ones you literally cannot lose in, like Grim Fandango.
But from a designers perspective, do players [I]need[/I] this? Are they even perhaps better off without? To give an anecdotal example, it took me [I]months[/I] to beat the original Mario Bros. And yet, getting to that end screen was made all the more rich for it. And some players may never experience that emotion when you put a tray of all too palatable save states in front of them.
It's funny to think we've gone from a game that had no qualms making you start back at square one (or at least the beginning of the world) to a game that gives you an invincibility flower if you die. And yet, I don't think children have really changed that much. They're still as capable at the challenges of the original Mayro as they were 30 years ago. It's just that game designers seem to expect less and less of the player as time goes on despite the players not actually changing. And yet at the same time our own perspectives have shifted whether we're aware of it or not. Like, do you consider the ability to save your game whenever you want in a game cheating? Because that's exactly what save states are, and yet when put in the context of those old games they're commonly considered as complete cheating that 'may as well beat the game for you'.
I definitely think there's more sides to this and more debate to be had than 'you're a smug cunt if you don't want these features in games'.
[QUOTE=Mister Sandman;52202742]:snip:[/QUOTE]
some people just have a lot less patience/ time
if a player plays and finishes your game, you can consider that a success
as opposed to them dropping it entirely
[QUOTE=Mister Sandman;52202742]But from a designers perspective, do players [I]need[/I] this? Are they even perhaps better off without? [B]To give an anecdotal example, it took me [I]months[/I] to beat the original Mario Bros. And yet, getting to that end screen was made all the more rich for it.[/B] And some players may never experience that emotion when you put a tray of all too palatable save states in front of them.
[/QUOTE]
I disagree with this statement, especially with how expensive video games were in their infancy versus the actual amount of playing time. Developers had to add in artificial difficulty just so that their players could justify them spending the money on a game for hours of entertainment.
These days, video games are so story driven that I don't mind an alternative, easier pathway to completing it. As long as such alternative method of play isn't locked in because "you suck", I couldn't care less. In the case of Mario Kart, it's easily disabled (albeit it's apart of a non-descriptive menu button) and doesn't impact regular gameplay massively when other people use it. I 100% agree with what Jim is praising.
Another example of mechanics being dumbed down recently is in Dota 2. There has been so many quality of life changes to the interface and mechanics, but people are getting pissed off because it's now a more accessible game instead of using the ancient Warcraft III mechanics. I've never understood how it negatively affects you, especially if it brings new faces and opponents to the game.
[QUOTE=Captain Chalky;52202354]While I agree with Jim here, it's really not so simple. Smart Steering might not be competitively viable, but unconditional handicaps are not good in (online) multiplayer games. It's literally cheating.
Single-player games are fine with systems like this. It's your experience and it's up to you to decide how you are going to enjoy it. But once you bring other players into the mix (especially strangers online), those people should also have a say on the matter.[/QUOTE]
I disagree. I don't think there's anything wrong with prioritizing accessibility over competition on a case-by-case basis. And in Mario Kart's case it definitely should be the priority. Split-screen online multiplayer that anyone of any skill level can jump in and enjoy is a fantastic and unique experience that would be a lot less interesting and unique with a typical competitive setup.
And the game still rewards experience and skill. The smart steering won't allow players to take course shortcuts that more experienced players can use to their advantage.
If you're the kind of person that gets upset over steering assist in a mario kart game then you need to get over yourself.
I never got the people who were upset about balance in Mario Kart and Smash.
These games are meant for [I]children[/I] to play and win. Competitiveness is one of the LAST things on Nintendos mind.
[QUOTE=Funktastic Dog;52203174]I never got the people who were upset about balance in Mario Kart and Smash.
These games are meant for [I]children[/I] to play and win. Competitiveness is one of the LAST things on Nintendos mind.[/QUOTE]
Now you're taking it the [I]other[/I] wrong way
[QUOTE=Funktastic Dog;52203174]I never got the people who were upset about balance in Mario Kart and Smash.
These games are meant for [I]children[/I] to play and win. Competitiveness is one of the LAST things on Nintendos mind.[/QUOTE]
I don't see how you're saying that when they released [URL="https://www.ssbwiki.com/List_of_updates_(SSB4-Wii_U)"]tons of balance patches.[/URL] Look at all of the "tweaked character balance" entries. If they didn't want competitiveness I don't think they would care about balance.
Video Games is one of the weirdest mediums in that it actually locks you out of content you paid for just because you were not good enough. I have no issues with accessibility options as long as they don't interfere with those who don't want to to have their hands held.
As Jim said (and keeps repeating), a casual Dark Souls diff option would be a blessing, not just for me but also for everyone else.
It doesn't matter that people keep saying "hurr durr you should beat it yourself so that you can learn the true zen mastery". Sure, you might remove a certain part of the experience, but not all of it.
[QUOTE=kariko;52203912]I don't see how you're saying that when they released [URL="https://www.ssbwiki.com/List_of_updates_(SSB4-Wii_U)"]tons of balance patches.[/URL] Look at all of the "tweaked character balance" entries. If they didn't want competitiveness I don't think they would care about balance.[/QUOTE]
Balance is really not just a thing for competitive play, it's important in almost any kind of game, even single player games need good balancing
Complaining about smart steering is silly.
Though that invincibility leaf stuff (someone jim focused more insults about that than steering, when that's a much lesser issue) I can see being pretty dumb.
I don't know how difficult the mario games are nowadays. Could be piss easy idk, but I think instead it would be better if they just used a difficulty selection screen like all games have so that players can choose not to potentially be insulted by the game saying "hey looks like you're bad at video games, need help?"
That's really the only angle I can see for hating that powerup.
[QUOTE=elowin;52204299]Balance is really not just a thing for competitive play, it's important in almost any kind of game, even single player games need good balancing[/QUOTE]
Eh that's fair. It's not great proof of competitiveness, but I think what he said is still wrong. I highly doubt competitive Smash Bros players are the last things on Nintendo's mind.
I guess making easier mechanics can be a good or bad thing DEPENDING on what game it is. Like for Mario Kart smart steering works,because it's more accessible to older people but yet it still has it's disadvantages that make it so that if people get tired of smart steering they can just turn it off and try out the other cool stuff like taking shortcuts. And an easy mode for Dark Souls would work considering the fact the game aims for a more hardcore gamer base that sweat their balls off 24/7 (I mean for crying out loud Bandai Namco responded to a person having troubles saying "git gud"). But then there are examples where simplyifing doesn't work,like the dialog in Fallout 4. I mean really? What does making the dialong options all yes benefit to the player?
[QUOTE=weyu6572;52204623]I guess making easier mechanics can be a good or bad thing DEPENDING on what game it is. Like for Mario Kart smart steering works,because it's more accessible to older people but yet it still has it's disadvantages that make it so that if people get tired of smart steering they can just turn it off and try out the other cool stuff like taking shortcuts. And an easy mode for Dark Souls would work considering the fact the game aims for a more hardcore gamer base that sweat their balls off 24/7 (I mean for crying out loud Bandai Namco responded to a person having troubles saying "git gud"). But then there are examples where simplyifing doesn't work,like the dialog in Fallout 4. I mean really? What does making the dialong options all yes benefit to the player?[/QUOTE]
I mean, there's sorta already an easy mode for Dark Souls (and other Souls games) built into the game itself. A tanky character is going to have a much easier time throughout the game as opposed to a glass cannon.
[QUOTE=NoNameForEvil;52204377]how could you possibly modulate the difficulty of a mario game. there's no health system or anything\[/QUOTE]
By doing it the Mega Man way and adding or removing platforms/changing layouts, more one-ups in stages, more/less enemies, etc.
As in genuine difficulty adjustment. Also the 3D Mario games derived from Super Mario 64 style rather than 3D Land/World [i]do[/i] have a health system, and not a particularly stingy one either.
[QUOTE=Funktastic Dog;52203174]I never got the people who were upset about balance in Mario Kart and Smash.
These games are meant for [I]children[/I] to play and win. Competitiveness is one of the LAST things on Nintendos mind.[/QUOTE]
Stuff like the Nintendo world cup and Nintendo hosted invitationals for smash, splatoon, and kart tell us otherwise.
If competition was the last thing on their minds, they wouldn't have ranked and tourney features in their games. :v:
That said, I don't think there's anything wrong smart-steering, and especially not the golden-leaf, as the golden-leaf has been in mario games for a while now.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
