The funny thing is a lot of you guys are criticising him even though you didn't really get what he was trying to say.

He is not talking about user generated content but what he calls "ANTI-content". Whenever the game doesn't entertain you by itself but relies on you to create fun he talks about "anti-content."

Wii Music had a lot of "anti-content" because people wanted to play instruments in a realistic manner. According to Malstrom (I haven't played the game myself) the game rather focused on creating your own songs / videos / whatever, though. That means you had to create the content by yourself which the consumer usually doesn't like.

Little Big Planet is probably NOT such an example: The game's only purpose is to give you tools to create levels. The game is fun because you can create the levels not because you can play them (of course playing a level can also be fun but that's not the game's focus) and thus it offers a lot of content. If the focus was "PLAY great levels!" instead of "CREATE great levels" this would be an example of anti-content.

About LBP, some people think the level creation makes the game fun, others enjoy the included campaign/minigames and some people just like hopping online with their friends and playing other people's creations or even all of the above. I personally haven't touched the level creator yet I still come back to LBP over and over, and I'm at 50+ hours total playtime. I'm not sure who appointed you to the fun police, but who cares what the main focus of game is (even though it's not solely level creation as you try to make it seem) when it's up to the user to decide what they enjoy doing the most. The slogan for the game is Play, Create, Share.

Based on the part I bolded, I take it you haven't actually played the game for more than 15 minutes.

The funny thing is a lot of you guys are criticising him even though you didn't really get what he was trying to say.

He is not talking about user generated content but what he calls "ANTI-content". Whenever the game doesn't entertain you by itself but relies on you to create fun he talks about "anti-content."

Wii Music had a lot of "anti-content" because people wanted to play instruments in a realistic manner. According to Malstrom (I haven't played the game myself) the game rather focused on creating your own songs / videos / whatever, though. That means you had to create the content by yourself which the consumer usually doesn't like.

Little Big Planet is probably NOT such an example: The game's only purpose is to give you tools to create levels. The game is fun because you can create the levels not because you can play them (of course playing a level can also be fun but that's not the game's focus) and thus it offers a lot of content. If the focus was "PLAY great levels!" instead of "CREATE great levels" this would be an example of anti-content.

I disagree with him on Flip Book Studio, though. The entire context of the game is to let you create things, not to watch them and thus it offers a lot of content.

In case you're still confused remember: Value depends on the amount of content related to the "purpose" or "job" of a game! If your game's job is to let you create levels than a big level editor is great, if your game's job is to lt you PLAY levels then a big level editor with nothing else just sucks.

Edit: Take "Do-it-yourself" cocktails for instance. You buy a do-it-yourself cocktail set to MIX cocktails. The value of the set comes from offering you the opportunity to mix those cocktails. If you want to DRINK a cocktail at a bar you'd be pretty angry if the barkeeper gave you some fruit juices and ice and told you "do it yourself!" but in the first context that's exactly what you want.

That means user generated content can work but only if the user sees value in actually creating the content instead of consuming it. Most people buy games to consume content and if they realise the game is only fun when they create content they feel cheated and the game loses its value. If creating content is what you are looking for you will probably feel cheated if the creation-part is bad (the whole purpose of a "create your own cocktails"-set would be gone if there were just 3 complete cocktails inside).

So what Malstrom criticises is that in his eyes Nintendo tells people "creating is fun!" and then says "well, people didn't understand it" while in reality people did understand but just didn't want to create. They rather wanted to consume. Now his fear is that Nintendo could become "arrogant", could release more "anti-content" games and continue to tell people they are just too dumb to understand (which was always a big complaint for him regarding Sony and Microsoft) and consequently lose customers. Of course that's debatable but I'm sure a lot of people didn't even read what he wrote.

No I don't own the game. I haven't even played it yet, neither am I the fun-police. I don't know why you're upset to be honest I was saying Little Big Planet is not an anti-content game but offers real value. What I was trying to point out was that a user doesn't feel cheated with Little Big Planet because the creation process itself is fun and the game offers a lot of content and thus value (and apparently it is even fun without creating things which adds even more value to it).

I was saying Little Big Planet is not an "anti-content" game in my eyes. I don't know what Malstrom thinks of it, though. But using his logic from this and some of his earlier blog entries Little Big Planet "does its job" (which is quite important to him) and thus offers a lot of value, while Wii music doesn't.

I don't want to tell people why they like the game and I'm sure the "play" part is just as much fun as the "create" one. I was just using the game as an example where user generated content works so I was actually praising it.

That is a rather misguided notion of what LBP is about.  The game is not simply a level editor, and people don't gain enjoyment from the title simply by creating levels.  I have probably invested over 200 hours into LBP since its release, making it my most played game since Mario Kart 64, and I haven't published a single level.  I haven't even finished all the tutorials in the Create mode.

The editing tools are not the entire game.   You can easily invest ten or more hours into the levels provided for the story mode by Media Molecule, which can double or triple with replays with friends.  Then there's the online levels.  The editing tools are provided so that people that have a knack for level design, and enjoy creating levels, can publish levels for all to play.  Then guys like me can play them for hours on end with friends.

The game's slogan is "Play. Create. Share."  Not just "Create."  Playing is most certainly a major focus of the game, and the drop-in/drop-out multiplayer mixed with a plethora of user made levels is what gives the game its longevity.

Your concept of the game would be like saying only people that upload videos on YouTube get any enjoyment out of YouTube.

However, I suppose using your defition of "anti-content", the editor would be a form of anti-content for me, but the game has so much OTHER content that I don't even need to think about the editor (though I'll probably enjoy the heck out of it once they patch in the online co-op Create mode).

Edit: Ah, I just saw your response to Ameratsu.  I see what you're trying to say now.

Btw, I highly recommend getting NSMBWii when it comes out.  Then you'll understand the awesomeness of a multiplayer 2D platformer.  In LBP, I'm a mischevious little bastard that does nothing but think of nefarious ways to kill my friends so I can collect all the points and prize bubbles lol.

Does anybody know if NSMBWii will award people places at the end of each level based on coins?  I know it's childish, but I can't help but try to get first place on every LBP level.  I'd love to have that element in NSMBWii.

 You echo my thoughts. Wii Music had user-generated content. Mario Paint back in the day was the same. Wario Ware DIY is coming soon. I'm sure there are a few others that I can't think of right now throughout the decades that also relied on it. But they are few and far between. Again, I'll have to read the article to see if he's said something new, but I suspect he's putting the blame almost exclusively on Wii Music, as it DID kill the system's momentum (according to no less an authority than Iwata).